GarethYoung (1110), Glasgow, Scotland
| 2 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 2/5 | 3/10 | 2/5 | 9/20 | Feb 24, 2006 [bottle from peckhams] stale, slightly toasted malty character with some sweet honey notes. body is on the watery side, sweetness in the finish is nasty. Honey + lager = rubbish. zach8270 (2108), Henrietta, New York, USA
| 2.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 5/10 | 2/5 | 6/10 | 2/5 | 11/20 | Feb 20, 2006 (draft) I can’t remember where I had it on draft, but it was at some piano bar in Niagara Falls, Ontario. Clear brownish color with a fizzy white head. Sweet aroma, although very light, was mainly honey with some malts. The taste is kind of metallic with some sweetness from the honey and malts. Not much in the hop department. Very thin and watery. Not as bad as it could’ve been, but the honey taste was almost forced into the beer. bgburdman9 (823), Columbus, Ohio, USA
| 1.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 3/5 | 3/10 | 2/5 | 5/20 | Feb 17, 2006 My dad picked these up at Krogers and he sait it was 10 bucks for a 12 pack. I immediately thought that it was probably a holiday pack that they were , just trying to get rid of, but still it was pretty darn cheap. After my dad tried it and said it was pretty descent (my dad is not a beer enthusiast and his usual beer of choice is bud light), but I decided to give it a chance. It actually looked descent after the pour and had a descent head. After the first taste, i immediately got a metallic taste in my mouth that really tasted nothing like honey. later on i caught a little of the honey taste but overall this beer was a piece of crap and I would never get it again. Nekronos (2265), Xalapa, Mexico
| 3.5 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 7/10 | 4/5 | 7/10 | 4/5 | 13/20 | Jan 31, 2006 Not that bad, the aroma is a little annoying like Holsten or Superior, but the tastee is good, and the idea of it having Honney, it’s a good pschychological fact in the taste. Quevillon (1530), Sainte-Thérèse, Quebec, Canada
| 0.7 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 2/10 | 2/5 | 1/10 | 1/5 | 1/20 | Jan 26, 2006 Updated: Jun 10, 2006Une re-cote, bu une 10 oz. Couleur blonde plate, peu de collet. Arome typique de macro, pas de miel. Goût végétal affreux au point d’en dégueule. Caca! Palidor19 (1773), Brandon, Florida, USA
| 3.1 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 7/10 | 3/5 | 14/20 | Jan 25, 2006 I kinda like this one, its got a good amount of malt with that a fruit palate and texture. There is a bitterness that doesnt seem to go with this type of lager. Still very good though Tmoney99 (4747), Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| 2.4 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 4/10 | 3/5 | 4/10 | 3/5 | 10/20 | Jan 14, 2006 Bottle. Poured a clear dark amber with a large creamy off-white head that was alsting with spare lacing. Light sweet aroma. Light to medium body with a sticky texture. Moderate sweet flavor with a light biiter finish of average duration. Kinger (21), Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
| 1.6 | Aroma | Appearance | Flavor | Palate | Overall | | 3/10 | 2/5 | 3/10 | 2/5 | 6/20 | Dec 31, 2005 Tap, jug. Not alot of taste, just a hint of honey, not a strong or good beer.
|