erway (1004) - Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA - OCT 2, 2002
1.3 AROMA 3/10 APPEARANCE 2/5 TASTE 1/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 5/20
I found this to be absolutely revolting. I did something I never do,... I poured it down the drain! poor body, bad aromas and a disgusting after-taste.
Aubrey (3356) - Bellingham, Washington, USA - SEP 8, 2002
2.3 AROMA 4/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 5/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 9/20
Dark amber with a slight haze; healthy head. Up front, smooth and creamy... quickly turns to a burst of tactile sweetness that spreads in the mouth. This turns into a carbonated bitterness. Watery mouthfeel and texture. Sticky maple-ness in the finish. Synthetic aftertaste is somewhat cloying.
Ringo (963) - Loveland, Colorado, USA - AUG 29, 2002
3.2 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Decent enough brown ale, with a little Aunt Jemima (or maybe Mrs. Butterworth?) poured in for good measure.
Panzuriel (1225) - Westerville, Ohio, USA - AUG 25, 2002
3 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 6/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 12/20
Nice brown ale. A little too sweet for my tastes. Nice malt, good aroma, nice texture. Middle of the road beer, plus points for the style.
MaxPower (961) - St. Louis, Missouri, USA - AUG 10, 2002
2.5 AROMA 5/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 2/5 OVERALL 11/20
Musty nutty aroma, sour carmel malt,too sweet.
Slick (1969) - Thief River Falls, Minnesota, USA - JUL 2, 2002
3.8 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 8/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 16/20
Over all not a bad brew iíve had better but this one gave a good first impression worth trying again the only problem that i had was the store i bought it from was selling it 1 year after the date on the bottle thats a distributor problem not brewery over all a nice beer
BretMayden (1) - Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA - JUL 1, 2002 does not count
3.7 AROMA 7/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 16/20
Tried this after a friend brought back some 12 oz. bottles from a visit to the brewery. He complained that if he didnít keep them refrigerated, they went ísour.í But the one I tried had a nice roasty, maple aroma. Weak head. I noticed the maple flavor right away, followed by a faint coffee-like note. Malty, just slightly sweet, but very smooth & drinkable. It does leave a strange -metallic? - aftertaste. However, good thing I only had one bottle
AceOfHearts (1374) - Mountain View, California, USA - MAY 18, 2002
2.8 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 4/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 11/20
Iím watching the debate on the forums right now on Boyne River Brown vs. Rogue Hazlenut Brown. Iíve only had the latter and thought it was totally awesome. Since I havenít had Boyne River yet, Iíll compare Rogue Hazlenut vs. this stuff. No comparison, this stuff SUCKS when put next to the Rogue! Iíd say halfway between Newcastle and Rogue. Okay, where to begin...the smell is somewhere between coffee/toffee/maple. Taste has some plastic elements in it. Nothing special really.
achtungpv (190) - Austin, Texas, USA - APR 24, 2002
3.6 AROMA 8/10 APPEARANCE 4/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 14/20
Very syrupy and a funky aftertaste...but you get used to it after a few swigs.
krisbierjaeger (844) - dolores, Colorado, USA - MAR 21, 2002
3.4 AROMA 6/10 APPEARANCE 3/5 TASTE 7/10 PALATE 3/5 OVERALL 15/20
another headless tommy. this one is nice otherwise, tho the maple claim is overstated. itís maple sugar time here in ohio, but this isnít the beer to celebrate it. i sniffed and snuffed like a bloodhound, but found only a bit of coffee and a pretzel- toastiness in there. maybe i got a dud bottle: itís like pouring a fat bowl or raisin bran and getting only one raisin. maple aside, itís reasonably malty, medium bodied, good sweetness and uh, pretty okay. give it a squirt of aunt jemima if you want maple.