DerBiermeister (527), Birmingham, Alabama, USA
| 3.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 3/5 | 15/20 | Feb 19, 2005 This was an appealing brew that was a bit better as it warmed up. It was rich and complex, yes, tasting of barley and hops with a crisp, yes, dry, but a bit-too-bitter finish. punkeedo (473), San Antonio, Texas, USA
| 2.9 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 12/20 | Feb 17, 2005 I probably wouldn’t buy this beer again. It wasn’t bad--bitter hoppiness with a dark malt finish. Just wasn’t all that appealing to me. Not much of an aftertaste, really--just kinda boring. johno (84), Galveston, Texas, USA
| 2.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 2/5 | 11/20 | Feb 4, 2005 Updated: Dec 15, 2008Still, coppery red. Pleasant holiday-reminiscent aroma with caramel, spice, cinnamon. Sweet on the attack, bit light-bodied, little too watery in the mouth. Cinnamon all over the sweet finish. Interesting but not enough on the palate. drismyhero (815), Tacoma, Washington, USA
| 3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 2/5 | 6/10 | 3/5 | 13/20 | Jan 19, 2005 Light Auburn in color with minimal head and some sediment...surprisingly. Medium malt profile here, nothing to get excited about, but the spicy hops here work very well, blending with the malt seamlessly. The finish is smooth, but a touch bitter toward the end as the yeast works its way into your sipping. Not a real hot beer, but tasty with a little something to perk up the taste buds a bit. Slick (1962), Thief River Falls, Minnesota, USA
| 3.3 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 2/5 | 14/20 | Jan 18, 2005 Nice amber/red color,small white head that faded quickly leaving little behind.malty somewhat citrusy aroma with a slight sweet side coming through as well.Nice malty taste up front then a slight swing to some citrus mildly sweet in the beginning then it changes in the middle to a mildly bitter hop taste.something else i just noticed is that theres plenty of yeast particules suspended through out the brew.Over all not a bad brew at all,in fact i could get used to this one easily. Foxbush (468), Richmond, Virginia, USA
| 3.1 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 3/5 | 6/10 | 4/5 | 13/20 | Jan 15, 2005 The head was a white froth. The head was about an inch thick. The color was amber with some cloudiness. The beer had an excellent balance of citrus hops and malt. Slight bitterness at the finish. This is my first from this brewery. SDalkoholic (1198), Chula Vista, California, USA
| 2.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 2/5 | 6/10 | 2/5 | 8/20 | Jan 12, 2005 Since the eye of the hawk was a bad bottle i knew this was going to be a expired bottle also. So i only poured about 4 ounces so none of the crap was floating in my glass. Wish i could have had just a bit more to actually say something about the beer besides it tasted flat and seemed like it would be good beer if it was fresh. DarkElf (2681), La Jolla, California, USA
| 2.8 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 6/10 | 3/5 | 5/10 | 3/5 | 11/20 | Jan 11, 2005 (12 oz bottle: Hi-Time Wine Cellars in Costa Mesa, CA) Somewhat flavorful, but less so than most in the style, and light bodied for the style as well. Mild hops bitterness is in balance with the sweet maltiness, though it seems a bit sugary. Not much to the nose, slightly malty and hoppy, but there’s also a degree of sourness infiltrating the nose. Pale amber in color. Off-white head is pretty small on the pour and fades to a small rim. No lacing on the glass. Average at best.
|