1. The BeerAdvocate Store is back! Pre-order your stuff now. Items begin shipping Dec 15. Christmas deadline = Dec 18 @ 5pm EST.
  2. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  3. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Carnegie Porter 5,5% - Carlsberg Sverige AB

Not Rated.
Carnegie Porter 5,5%Carnegie Porter 5,5%

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
92
outstanding

501 Ratings
THE BROS
100
world-class

(view ratings)
Ratings: 501
Reviews: 332
rAvg: 4.11
pDev: 10.95%
Wants: 52
Gots: 22 | FT: 2
Brewed by:
Carlsberg Sverige AB visit their website
Sweden

Style | ABV
Baltic Porter |  5.50% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
First introduced in 1836.

Strong beers were banned in Sweden 1923-1956.

The 5.5 % original recipe was re-introduced in 1985 as a beer fermented with both top and bottom yeast.

In 1993, the yeast was changed to a single bottom-fermenting strain.

In 2009, the label design and name was changed from "Carnegie Stark-Porter" to "Carnegie Porter".

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 02-04-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | Likes | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Carnegie Porter 5,5% Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 501 | Reviews: 332 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of Joeyuwp
1.75/5  rDev -57.4%

Photo of battlekow
2.4/5  rDev -41.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Carnegie Stark Porter pours a flat garnet-tinged dark brown. Nose is way, way too "baltic" for me, by which I mean prunes are the only thing I detect, which makes the Stark Porter smell like some kind of evil Jamba Juice concoction. Taste has some echoes of the prunes, but not nearly as intense. Light toasted finish. Maybe it's just relative to the nose, but really doesn't taste like much, maybe like diluted grape or prune juice. Mouthfeel features absolutely no carbonation whatsoever, adding to the juice illusion, but is relatively thick. Overall, the Carnegie Stark Porter is a little gross in some areas and not really there in the rest.

I think "Årgång 1997" means that this is from 1997--that can't have helped.

Photo of goRideYourBike
2.42/5  rDev -41.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

1997 vintage
2008 drinkage
8.82 fl. oz. bottle
purchased at Max's Taphouse, Baltimore

into a small chalice.

a= BLACK and still. black as long overdue motor oil. black as my dad's fountain pen ink. it's black. I can see myself and kitchen background in the reflection. no head. one row of tiny bubbles on perimeter. no lace. considering the opaque blackness, it coats the glass like water when swirled.
s= struggling to find a smell. thin. soy? minimal.
t= quick and just barely trace coffee and chocolate. quickly turns nutty. *boiled peanuts* thats it, warm roadside boiled peanuts takes over and never leaves. harsh soy/salt.
m= watery thin quick finish. little to no coating.
d= note: 2006 D. Carnegie & Co. stark porter was tahhhAaassstee and my reason for purchasing this 1997 bottle. Perhaps it is too old. Perhaps my taste buds are too young. Hate to say it, and with no disrespect to the Swedish brewers, this made it to Chesapeake Bay.

Photo of MoreThanWine
2.68/5  rDev -34.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured a 1 tan head. To me this whole thing comes across as coffee just in slightly varying degrees - the appearance is black coffee, the bouquet is a weak iced coffee, and the flavor is a slightly sweet and mild coffee dessert - like maybe a cold coffee pie slice. Hey I still enjoyed it, there just wasn't a lot of complexity in my sample, and it cost me $8 for a 9 oz bottle so I was expecting more. Perhaps my sample sat on the shelf in Massachusetts too long and if I'd had a fresher sample in Sweden I'd be singing the praises?

Photo of obywan59
2.75/5  rDev -33.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

From a 16 oz. bottle vintage 2004. Poured into my Guiness Porter pint glass. #5 of my Christmas mixed 6-pack. Best by May 2014.

Almost pitch black in the glass with a solid 4 finger mounding tannish head and a dollop of sweet foam trying to run down the side. Light lacing.

A somewhat metallic aroma, or perhaps one of acidic coffee and moldy books. After it warms a bit a more pleasant aroma of malt appears, like sweet coffee and moldy books.

Tastes a bit flat. Roast malt and moldy books. Some bitter dark chocolate.

Decent medium-thick mouthfeel. No real bite of carbonation. Some faint warming alcohol.

Even with the aroma and flavor of moldy books predominating, this was rather easy to drink. Perhaps this bottle was stored improperly. It didn't taste skunked, but there certainly seemed to be some degradation here.

Photo of Raziel313
2.75/5  rDev -33.1%

Photo of osuskin
2.75/5  rDev -33.1%

Photo of t0rin0
2.75/5  rDev -33.1%

Photo of marc77
2.85/5  rDev -30.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

1998: The head formation is poor, and a only a thin rim of bubbles coats the inside of the glass. Like many porters, a deep garnet hue is noticeable when held up to light. The slightly sweetish, dark caramel malt and mocha - like chocolate malt is quite pleasant, but could be more assertive. Fairly thinly bodied for a porter, and there is nothing outstanding in the malt profile. A fairly one dimensional black patent and chocolate malt bitterness dominates the flavor, thus making this beer a bit unexciting. Hop bitterness has faded and is lost amongst the roasted grain bitterness. The finish is quite dry and too clean. Perhaps this beer has aged poorly, since the complex malt and hop character that comprises a good porter was sorely lacking in this brew. Nothing ventured nothing gained, I guess.

Photo of Ropowers3
3/5  rDev -27%

Photo of Pumilio
3/5  rDev -27%

Photo of akttr
3/5  rDev -27%

Photo of stulowitz
3.03/5  rDev -26.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A - Dark ruby with light tan, thick head.

Sm - Roasty, subdued, acidic, bread and toffee.

T - Has a sharp roastyness to it. Is pretty sweet. Hints of caugh syrup or cherries deep under.

M - Pretty light body, well carbonated.

D - Good but not balanced. Way too sweet.

Photo of Gmann
3.18/5  rDev -22.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a dark brown color with a frothy khaki colored head that settled into a solid ring.

The aroma is of a lightly bready malt, milky and grainy. Some sterile roast notes and an overall tin like scent.

The malt is mostly grainy with a slight roast edge. Subtle metallic notes with an interesting lemon note. Some light caramel and toffee sweetness. Overall, a bit thin for a baltic porter.

The feel is light, though not watery, with some prickly carbonation. Grainy sweet on the palate with not much of a bitter offset. Drinks easy I guess.

Not super impressed with this beer. Basically a notch or two above a dark Euro lager. Definitely not a baltic porter in my eyes.

Photo of OWSLEY069
3.2/5  rDev -22.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours black with a nice tan head. Aromas that are a small caramel sweetness. In the taste, a dry malt, with hints of chocolate and a nice coffee presence. A smooth, dry sticky mouthfeel and a dry malty aftertaste. Nice smoothness and flavor, a very enjoyable porter.

Photo of ricke
3.25/5  rDev -20.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

2009 vintage.

A: Dark brown with a tanned head that settles into some lacings.

S: Smooth malts, rye bread, caramel and notes of vinous fruits. A hint of coffee. The taste is somewhat mild and restrained, but rather good.

T: The taste is mostly sweet with bready malts to the fore. Notes of vinous fruits, wood and a hint of coffee. Faint note of chocolate. The finish is rather short with a minimal bitterness, mineral notes, wood and malty sweetness.

M: Medium body. The carbonation is of the sort you most often find in mass produced fizzy lagers.

D: This is a good beer, but no more. I like the vinous and fruity character it showcases. But it's kind of restrained, both in terms of aromas and flavors, and it lacks complexity, and in my opinion, its reputation as one of the best porters in the world is greatly exaggerated. Perhaps it once was, but the way the brewery has treated this classic beer during the last decade is embarrassing.

Photo of BGsWo22
3.25/5  rDev -20.9%

Photo of BierBliss
3.25/5  rDev -20.9%

Photo of BigOldOaf
3.25/5  rDev -20.9%

Photo of CuriousMonk
3.25/5  rDev -20.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Very dark brown, average and mostly diminishing light brown head. Moderate, malty and sweetish aroma, fruitiness - dark fruits, some coffee and roasted malt. Body is medium, malty and sweetish flavor, some fruitiness and coffee,light roasted malt. Finish is average, malty and sweetish, coffee and some roasted malt, light fruitiness and hoppyness. Overall, this porter was a bit too flattish for me, but had a nice vinous fruitiness to it.

Photo of Zbeetleman
3.25/5  rDev -20.9%

Photo of leedorham
3.25/5  rDev -20.9%

Photo of GCBrewingCo
3.25/5  rDev -20.9%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

The beer poured into the glass translucent clear and yet pitch black with a frothy yet low tan head which coated the glass from top to bottom.

The aroma was strong chocolate with dark caramel and a licorice note thrown in for good measure. The aroma had some distinct roastiness.

The flavor was chocolate, but dry dark chocolate. Caramel was present, but it wasn't a sweet and malty contribution. The flavor was roasty and the bittering from the roasty grains was harsh. That bitter harshness was not well done at all.

The finish was dry with lasting bitter expresso and chocolate flavors that lasted just a bit too long into the aftertaste. The body was medium and well achieved. The bittering from the roasted grains really detracted from the enjoyment of this beer. The flavors and finish were harsh and not the stuff of world class beer.

16.9 ounce bottle. Best before April 2010 (April 2010...5 years and I certainly did not purchase this yesterday! Perhaps if I had it would have been better, or perhaps I should have waited till 2010!)

Photo of kojevergas
3.3/5  rDev -19.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Bottle into Westlveteren goblet in Stockholm, Sweden. Reviewed live.

A: One finger head of nice cream lacing, good thickness, and fair to bad retention. Colour is a solid black.

Sm: Raspberry fruit ester hops, cream, caramelized malt, and I assume barley. Me nose is broken; sorry lads.

T: Fruit estery body alongside nice cream, slight chocolate, and restrained caramelized malt. Complex enough. Built and balanced well, just not bold or inspired.

Mf: Smooth and wet, with adequate but not overdone coarseness and thickness. There is some strange dryness on the finish that isn't really welcome considering the dying ester flavour that accompanies it.

Dr: Average range ABV, very drinkable, and of a high price. The quality is nothing special.

Photo of crossovert
3.33/5  rDev -19%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

500ml bottle, says Argang 2004, i doubt that is it's production year. The back has the date of 12 OKT 14 on it. Apparently it is from before 2009.

It pours a dark brown with hints of brownish red on the far edges. The head is sandy and tan and recedes with some lacing.

This one smells very fruity and alcoholic. It reminds me of a Belgian dark ale rather than a Baltic porter form the smell. There is a hint of chocolate that remains the only hint to the style.

The flavor is more porter-like but it seems a bit thin. There are strong hints of coffee and chocolate along with some dark fruits. Very, very chocolatey.

Overall it is a bit thin and watery for the style, not really worth the pickup imo.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Carnegie Porter 5,5% from Carlsberg Sverige AB
92 out of 100 based on 501 ratings.