npdempse (934) - St. Petersburg, Florida, USA - MAR 9, 2002
4.1 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
Dark brown, nearly black body with a decent, quickly fading head. Nice, slightly chocolatey nose. Body is kind of like semi-sweet chocolate, with some toasted malt notes and a light bitterness that balances the sweetness very nicely.
jcalbi (380) - Medford, New Jersey, USA - FEB 25, 2002
4.3 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
A first rate example of a porter. Nice rich aroma, and a slightly bitter/burnt chocolate flavor. Reasonably smmoth and dry finish.
Dragonblaze99 (354) - Greater London, ENGLAND - FEB 23, 2002
3.9 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
Sweet, roasty, nice dark chocolate taste. Good thick chewiness, and a pleasant lingering aftertaste.
joet (2263) - Santa Rosa, California, USA - FEB 18, 2002
3.7 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
I got a thin head that quickly falls into a dark, not fully opaque liquid. Smells like a tootsie pop, some cookie and molasses aromas. Taste is sweet, may be estered with some bubblegum. Lightly effervescent and slightly acidic. This is very good. I’m not much of a porter person and probably won’t revisit this but it’s definitely worth a visit for lovers of big black brews.
Ernest (6489) - Boulder, Colorado, USA - FEB 2, 2002
2.6 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
UPDATED: APR 9, 2013 Bottle. Head is initially average sized, frothy, light brown, mostly diminishing. Body is dark brown to black. Aroma is moderately malty (roasted grain/nuts, husks), with light notes of tree bark and cardboard. Flavor is moderately sweet, lightly acidic, lightly bitter. Finish is lightly sweet, lightly acidic, moderately bitter, slightly husky. Medium body, watery texture, lively carbonation. Dull and uninspiring.
pilsnerrogge (2566) - Finspång, SWEDEN - JAN 30, 2002
3.9 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
Full-bodied, roasted taste that stays in your mouth for a long time. It’s beyond me that such a crap brewery like Pripps manage to come up with such a great brew like this.
heykevin (1280) - Decorah, Iowa, USA - JAN 18, 2002
3.5 AROMA 10/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Tasted the 2000 version 1/17/02. Sweet finish with slight medicinal qualities. Not particularly roasty, which is not necessarily a bad thing, just unexpected. Decent, though.
POPS (6) - Malmoe, SWEDEN - JAN 16, 2002 does not count
4.5 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
A very good beer that’s gets better by time just like omhper said. I understand the disappointment that a friend of a friend had when he discovered that he put the 89 in the stew instead of the 98. Have tried 5 year old and I recommends that you try to put the beer in the cellar for some years before drinking it!
omhper (20345) - Tyresö, SWEDEN - JAN 3, 2002
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
UPDATED: JAN 18, 2003 This beer is IMO too sweet and unbalanced when consumed young. It has to be aged for at least three years (which used to be done for you by the brewery until 1989) to develope it"s full character.
Sampling of the 1989 version in January 2003:
Near black, very little head. Plum and raisin aroma. Clean, dry malt character, chocolate flavour. Vinuous, or rather sherry like. Very mature - probably peaks at this point. All the thick, sticky sugar is now gone. 9/4/8/4/15
Sampling of the 1993 version in January 2003:
Some raisin aroma, but less vinuous. Still slightly sweet with notes of licorice and madeira.
duff (5484) - Copenhagen, DENMARK - DEC 30, 2001
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Pretty good, but a bit sweet, and a tad bit syrupy, but still nice burnt coffee and sweet chocolate on the palate.