Frank (2817) - Chicago, Illinois, USA - MAR 15, 2004
2.5 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 3/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 10/20
Pale amber, big rocky head and a long-lasting head that leaves big chunks of lace. Aroma is of toast and biscuit as per the description. It also has an almost Belgian-like yeast character. A bit thin bodied. Mild carbonation. A bit lacking in flavor an touch watery with an odd earthy twinge in the finish. Drinkable, no more.
pobenohne (504) - Northern Liberties, Pennsylvania, USA - MAR 14, 2004
3 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 11/20
Bottle in Boulder City, NV. Like the belgian style bottle. Very drinkable amber, but not memorable (good nor bad).
Uriel (146) - San Jose, California, USA - MAR 13, 2004
3.5 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
Often has slightly peaty tones, but still a refreshing and tasty beer. Definitely decent in the bottle, but better on tap.
MullMan (1099) - New Jersey, USA - MAR 8, 2004
2.8 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
UPDATED: MAR 28, 2004 gold/amber color, whitish thin head. light hop note, mild flavor. poured from a pitcher, keg tapped. kind of ironic how thre's a setup for the perfect analogy: fat tire:baloon tire cruiser :: trappist ales:belgian cyclocross!
UNCCTF (477) - Charlotte, North Carolina, USA - MAR 7, 2004
3.1 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
A typical run-of-the-mill amber ale. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, but nothing really stuck out to me here. More malty than I'd like, but not bad.
SETANTA (582) - Bangor, Pennsylvania, USA - MAR 5, 2004
2.7 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Nothing very special, but definitely not a bad beer. Not too hoppy or malty, but still has a good bit of flavor to it. Readily available around here, so it's always a good choice.
SledgeJr (3577) - Omaha, Nebraska, USA - FEB 29, 2004
3.2 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
In the early 1990's, I thought that this was a great ale, but the flavor seems to have changed after it started being mass-produced for a huge audience. I used to think it tasted like an actual Belgian-style ale with even a subtile spice undertone. Today, it tastes like a pretty solid amber ale with acceptable hop and malt character, but no longer the "WOW" beer it once was. I think that Abbey Ale almost recaptures the spirit of the old Fat Tire these days.
donyboy (7) - Houston, Texas, USA - FEB 26, 2004 does not count
3.6 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
As an "average" lager, this one does beat out the Big boys (Coors,etc.) as it actually HAS flavor (some malt). It was my first decent beer outside Corona, Dos Equis, Coors, etc. Not New Belgium's best but rather geared to the lowest common denominator.
awaller05 (305) - Sharon, Wisconsin, USA - FEB 26, 2004
3.1 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 13/20
Thought this one was something special seeing as I East of the Missisippi, and don't see it around here. Opened it and was not too impressed by the aroma. Head was okay but dissipated fast. I had no problem drinking but wasn't wowwed or anything. Later did a little research and found that this one is the big seller of the New Belgium line and was mass produced by thier scale.
aracauna (3052) - Georgia, USA - FEB 23, 2004
3.4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
I can see why this is such a big seller. It's got enough malt to have a little flavor, but the caramel is light and not too sweet so it's a definite quaffer. Not very complex and not interesting, but not bad.