 NYHarvey (2154), New York, New York, USA
| 1.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 2/5 | 4/10 | 2/5 | 7/20 |
Jul 7, 2005 sweet malty aroma. Very transparent light red color. Small head. Sweet watery flavor that tastes a little like cold seltzer with honey in it. Not a fan.
dwyerpg (2545), Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
| 1.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 2/5 | 3/10 | 2/5 | 6/20 |
Jun 24, 2005 Why is it that so many breweries feel they need to brew a lager? It’s just not necessary. The flavor is at best okay, but its mostly just light and uninteresting.
flyindog (14), USA
| 2.3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 4/5 | 5/10 | 2/5 | 9/20 |
Apr 22, 2005 Deep red color. Stradles the line between hoppy and malty, and can’t decide between one or the other. An un-noteworthy beer if there ever was one.
Terminus (1955), Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 |
Apr 11, 2005 12 oz bottle-sampled in Pueblo Co in my motel room during the april 10 blizzard-pours a light orange hue with a small white head-vigerous carbonation. skunky lager aroma with some hop notes (tettanang?). broken down malt flavors that were somewhat sour and grainy with some cardboard as well. not very good.
Kasteelfreak (341), Fallbrook, California, USA
| 3.2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 4/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 |
Apr 10, 2005 I wasn’t expecting much. I just wanted a cheap, easy to drink, simple beer, without any off flavors. I pretty much have that here. Aroma isn’t very good; probably the worst part of it. It’s hard for me to describe it, but it has a malty, stale macro aroma. The white head was fluffy and creamy at first, but disapated quickly leavy minimal lace. The beer itself was a slightly hazy copper orange. Flavor is a little peppery with a touch of malt sweetness that is in good balance. Just a hint of staleness. Pretty decent
Tonsk45 (17), El Cajon, California, USA
| 2.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 3/5 | 10/20 |
Apr 2, 2005 insubstantial head, not much flavor at all really,there was some finish but once again insubstantial. not the best from Mendecino
FoolishMortal (966), San Diego, California, USA
| 2.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 4/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 |
Mar 25, 2005 Translucent bronze-gold color. Lacy white head. Grainy aroma tinged with sulfide. Medium body for a lager, flavor of the grain comes through with a hint of residual sweetness held in check by the sulfide components. Dryness of the finish not fully actualized due to the aforementioned sweetness coming through in the end. Rather drinkable, but neither explemplary in the style, nor up to the bar set by most of Mendocino’s other beers. The word unremarkable comes to mind.
SDalkoholic (1196), Chula Vista, California, USA
| 2.3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 2/5 | 5/10 | 2/5 | 9/20 |
Mar 5, 2005 Thin head that breaks up into a ring. Golden bronze color. Weak aroma of malt and grass. Flavor isnt to pleasant and tastes like grass and small amount of grain wheat. When am i gonna drink a good beer from Mendocino?
|
Statistics
Find This Beer (Want/Have)