stubby (334) - Santee, California, USA - FEB 11, 2004
3.2 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 13/20
Typically overbitter Sierra Nevada. When I'm in the mood for overhopped beers it's either them or Stone. Nice body with lots of round sweetness hiding behind a sharply bitter/oily hopiness. Drink warm.
atpayne (615) - Zionsville, Indiana, USA - FEB 11, 2004
3.5 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
Nice beer. Dark amber red color. It's clear enough to see som suspended yeast in the beer. A strong citrus hop aroma that provides the biting hop presense in the flavor. It finishes bitter but warm with a hint of alcohol.
fuyajo (229) - Portland, Oregon, USA - FEB 11, 2004
4.3 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
Very thick, smooth brew with a beautiful red-orange color. Flavor is pleasent. Inital taste is thick and sweet. A hoppy finish with a strong citrus (grapefruit in particular) flavor. My first barley wine-style ale. Very good!
ZepolK (102) - South Side Montebello, California, USA - FEB 10, 2004
4.7 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 10/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 19/20
sampled 2/9/04. Thanks Hi-Time Wine Cellars in Costa Mesa.
*** 2001 ***
Beautifual floral aroma with mild hints of apricots and citrus. Flavor was complex and full. Initally the favor is malt that changes to mild apricot and citrus with a very suprising hop bite. Extreamly full and rich mouth feel that is very pleasing. This needs a higher rating everyone! Outstanding!
*** 2002 ***
Aroma was simular to the 2001 but much less complex and more mild. Flavor was very good but somewhat unbalanced.
BrianO (138) - Ambler, Pennsylvania, USA - FEB 9, 2004
4.5 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 9/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 17/20
UPDATED: FEB 10, 2004 Bold in all aspects. Aroma is strong and sweet yet balanced with american hops. Flavor is robust with malt yet the bitterness quickly follows to yet again balance the bold attack. Alcohol is just enough to make it difficult to take big swigs of this fine brew. Extended aging?? I'd rahter not, this beer is so fresh right now, I think that it would lose some of its umph if drank next year. Smelling it is like opening up a hop bag and taking a wiff. It doesn't need to mellow, it needs to be drank. I was shocked at how good this was. 2004, by the way. I don't know how this beer isn't rated higher.
bu11zeye (11942) - Frisco (Dallas), Texas, USA - FEB 9, 2004
4.4 AROMA 9/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 5/5 OVERALL 17/20
UPDATED: APR 12, 2005 (Bottle, 2001) Pours a deep copper color with slight haziness and a thick frothy head. More bountiful aroma , creamier mouth feel, and richer flavor compared to 2004 vintage (side-by-side). Definitely worth aging!
(Bottle, 2004) Pours a deep mahogany color with a thick white head. Has a hoppy aroma with a light scent of malt. Has a good rich and hoppy flavor.
Sham (1845) - Seattle, Washington, USA - FEB 8, 2004
4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 16/20
Dark mahogany pour. Huge rocky head and nice lacing. Aroma has qauite a bit of hoppiness to it. Malts come through as well. Some fruits are present. Strong hop flavors with a nice malt backing. Fruit is more apparent here. Mostly citrus. Big malt body with a tangy palate that finishes strongly bitter. Very interesting. I'd like to see how it ages.
SiddFinch (155) - Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania, USA - FEB 7, 2004
3.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 14/20
2003: Opened it straight from the fridge. I was shocked at how harsh this was. Very bitter and the alcohol not hidden at all. Let it sit for about twenty minutes and it began to settle down. A little hoppier/bitter than most barleywines but overall, very good. It has that signature Sierra Nevada flavor to it that would have allowed me to guess what it was even without a label. I have a few more that I'll store away for a year. I think then, it will have a great deal of potential.
Kasteelfreak (341) - Fallbrook, California, USA - FEB 5, 2004
4 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 17/20
UPDATED: MAY 15, 2005 Tastes a bit like Double Bastard. It’s definately hoppier than most barley wines, but I don’t think it should be called an Imperial IPA due to the heavy malt sweetness. The color is a beautiful ruby-amber-red. It pours nicely with a white head that lingers for a while. The aroma has a good caramel character to it, but is a little weak. Notes of alcohol are in the aroma as well. Taste is caramely sweet with just a little tartness to it. Not much apricot to it. finishes kind of dry with a lasting hoppy coat left on the back of the tongue. Mouthfeel is crisp and lacks creaminess. It’s young, but still very good.
HighGravity (926) - Baltimore, Maryland, USA - FEB 4, 2004
4 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 5/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 4/5 OVERALL 18/20
(Bottled on DEC/13/03) Bigfoot 2004 is bottled in 2003. I feel that the term barley wine is a misnomer for this beer, because this beer truly is an Imperial India Pale Ale. I poured ever so gently and the beer looks marvelous in my glass. The nose is not overly expressive, but does let your senses know that your palate is about to be attacked by hops. The palate is full and very hoppy, with abundant nuances of earth and tropical fruit. The finish is my favorite part off the beer because it never dies; the hoppy flavors just never stop. The only thing lacking in this beers is aroma hopping. I really fancy the beers relative dryness for its weight.