Slick (1969) - Thief River Falls, Minnesota, USA - NOV 2, 2002
4.2 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
i dont know ithink its a damn good b&t but im sometimes i cant get better stuff so im a bit limited on this one. its the only one in town rite now but its pretty good kinda like granny clampet
austinpowers (2826) - New York, New York, USA - NOV 1, 2002
2.6 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 14/20
This nice jug/bottle could be dropped in the mud of a bayou swamp but the beer would be unharmed because of the protective crockware. Not sure thatís a good thing though, now that Iíve tasted the beer. Very thin and lagerish...with hints of sourness. Yuenglingís does the B&T better.
Gusler (2653) - Tucson, Arizona, USA - OCT 18, 2002
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 10/20
Re-Rate 10/18/02: The beer pours a clear incandesant dark ruby color, the head is modest, beige, the lace wraithish. Nose is malt, light hits of caramel. Front is malt, a tad sweet, the top thin, the finish is shilpit, minimal carbonation, nebishly hopped. Drinkable, and the bottle is íCuteí, and I always find a íLadyí that wants the empties, a pleasure in its own right. Does not rank on my current 1000 beer master list.
labattblueleaf (225) - Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA - OCT 6, 2002
3.2 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 12/20
Cool bottle. Sweet taste. Almost like a chocolate carmel flavor. Much thinner and lighter than I expected. I didnít find it to be bitter as the description states. Less black than tan.
presario (4903) - Stampede City, Alberta, CANADA - SEP 23, 2002
3.1 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 12/20
UPDATED: JUL 3, 2006 Good foamy head. Dark amber colour. Decent aroma. Thinner than I expected. Sweeter too, almost like a cooler. Great bottle but now that I have an MT Iíll continue my search for the perfect beer elsewhere. The more I drank of the bottle the more the sweetness got in the way. Had a similar flavoured home brew (Pale Ale) the next day that was much better (dry without the sweetness).
mrkimchee (1414) - Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - SEP 9, 2002
2.1 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
more tan than black. lots of carbo, othewise, not a whole lot of anything in this beer. at least the bottle looks cool.
scottyg (79) - Gainesville, Florida, USA - AUG 27, 2002
2.5 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Not as bad as I thought it was going to be. But still nothing amazing. Definitely a cool jug if that sells you beer.
uglybastard (101) - Riverside, California, USA - AUG 27, 2002
3.3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
Big giant head that fades way down (I think the head size has to do with the glass iím using. Several beers poured into the same glass have produced "monster" heads). The brewís hue is reddish-brown. Smell some caramel and a bit of floral hoppyness as well. Creamy, caramelly taste. Sweetness fades away in the end to leave a bit of coffee flavor. But the fading sweetness and the coffee donít mix quite right for some reason. Still, itís not a bad brew.
howie (549) - DeForest, Wisconsin, USA - AUG 20, 2002
1.9 AROMA 2/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 8/20
UPDATED: JUL 5, 2005 Cool jug! Boring beer. Bottle says íblack and taní, but it doesnít taste like any black and tan Iíve ever had. Like an ordinary "pale lager" with artificial caramel color and flavor added. Insipid.
DavidP (1748) - Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA - AUG 19, 2002
2.8 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 13/20
UPDATED: DEC 7, 2003 I expected something a little more flavorful, but it was enjoyable nonetheless.