GreatSatanUSA (107) - Austin, Texas, USA - DEC 30, 2003
1.5 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 4/20
If a "pale malt" is supposed to taste like this, it's a genre of beer I can do without. Totally bland, thin beer. It's kind of like they took a pale ale, then surgically removed the hops and the flavor. Stay away.
KAggie97 (3529) - Ugly, Hot, and Humid Spring, Texas, USA - APR 7, 2008
0.6 AROMA 1/10 APPEARANCE 1/5 TASTE 2/10 PALATE 1/5 OVERALL 1/20
Bottle. When this was in Austin, it was okay. Then Satan came down and sent it to the Netherworld of Great Grains. This crap tastes like stagnant rainwater collected at the Balcones Fault restroom entrance. Sour, thin, and stinky.
fly (1419) - austin, Tejas, Alabama, USA - MAR 19, 2004
1.9 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 6/20
Lord let me just keep my mouth shut. Brewery was once in Austin. Have no earthly idea what is up with it now. Sigh. What once showed promise is ...??? I really don't have words.
Nuffield (3711) - Roseville, Minnesota, USA - FEB 25, 2003
1.7 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 4/20
"Oh for heaven's sake" was my first reaction to this beer as it passed between my lips. Why did they have to brew this stuff, sucking the joy out of the hobby of beer drinking? This has a syrupy feel to it at the start, although the palate is not supported enough to balance it. The flavor is dull and water-like--noticeable by its absence--with only hints of malt, hints of bitterness, hints of misery, and hints of despair. Miserable beer--a drain pour.
GiddyBoy (117) - USA - JAN 12, 2003
2.5 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
This had a nice dark color. Beyond that it was not worth the trouble. It had a decently sweet aftertaste, but otherwise had no flavor at all.
jazz88 (2562) - San Francisco, California, USA - DEC 26, 2002
2.7 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Bottle. Copper color with basically no head. Light malts with a touch of passion fruit malt flavor. Wet.
Andrew196 (1091) - Katy, Texas, USA - DEC 12, 2002
2.8 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
I always try to support any microbrewery in the state of Texas just because it gives me hope that we could actually develop a market for good beer down here. This beer really scared me when there crap floating in my beer. I am still a rather young beer drinker so I am not sure what to make of this. On with the beer...It was very crisp and watery with a very slight alcohol/hops aroma which was actually decent. The beer it self just got worse and worse as I drank it though.
AceOfHearts (1375) - Mountain View, California, USA - DEC 10, 2002
1.7 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 5/20
Had the same mulchy-tobacco profile of their Red, but lighter. This was a good thing. Not a great pale.
austinpowers (2826) - New York, New York, USA - NOV 1, 2002
2.3 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 11/20
I’m tasting ten pale ales today, back-to-back and the first thing I notice about this brew is: it’s NOT a pale ale! There’s no bitterness, but rather a fair amount of sourness and extremely subtle use of Kent Goldings. Don’t go here looking for a bitter beer. Very SIMPLE beer with a slight metallic taste. I want these guys to keep brewing, though, so that someday Texas will not be laughed at when people think of the beer down here.
aracauna (3128) - Georgia, USA - APR 25, 2002
2.1 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
No head. Flat. Very yeasty flavor. A little odd. Can’t decide if I like it or hate it.