Dismiss Notice
Save $5 when you subscribe to 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine by selecting auto-renew.

Subscribe now →
Dismiss Notice
Join Our Email List →

And we'll send you the latest updates and offers from BeerAdvocate, because knowing is half the battle.
Dismiss Notice

Pre-order your Respect Beer "Hipster" Hoodie today!

Plus: Free shipping (US only) on orders of $25 or more until 12/18/15. Just select "Free Shipping" at checkout.

Shop now →

Sexual Chocolate - Foothills Brewing Company - Downtown Brewpub

Not Rated.
Sexual ChocolateSexual Chocolate

Educational use only; do not reuse.

441 Reviews
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 441
Hads: 1,214
Avg: 4.09
pDev: 11.25%
Wants: 1,288
Gots: 315 | FT: 25
Brewed by:
Foothills Brewing Company - Downtown Brewpub visit their website
North Carolina, United States

Style | ABV
Russian Imperial Stout |  9.75% ABV

Availability: Winter

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: SaCkErZ9 on 02-15-2007

No notes at this time.
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
Reviews: 441 | Hads: 1,214
Photo of zhanson88
3.41/5  rDev -16.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

2010 vintage poured into some Lost Abbey stemware.

Appearance: Pours out dark brown that looks almost opaque when in the glass. I do detect some garnet hues around the edges, which is unexpected. About 1" of khaki colored head forms, which has nice retention and lacing. Seems a bit light in color and in body, but the head retention makes up for that somewhat.

Smell: Well this is a big smoke and roast bomb. Extremely big smoke component in this. Not really getting much else on the nose to be honest. Possibly a bit of sweetness. Milk chocolate?

Taste: Big smoke and roast component, once again on the palate. There is some sweetness that shows in the form of liquorice notes. Tastes better than it smells, but still too smoke dominated.

Mouthfeel: Body is definitely short of full; more in the medium body range. Moderate to low carbonation, which is the only reason this beer drinks smoothly at all. Overall, this is an interesting take on a RIS. Too smoke heavy and one dimensional. Definitely not my favorite from this style.

 1,036 characters

Photo of PDXHops
3.4/5  rDev -16.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

2011 vintage growler poured into a Duvel tulip in February. The pour isn't as much fun without the swank bottle logo, but it's a good-looking dark brew with a finger or so of frothy tan head that leaves a fair amount of lacing.

The nose is markedly more roasted and burnt than the 2010 vintage. Some dark chocolate provides a bit of sweetness, but it's mainly dark malts, fresh ground coffee beans. It smells kinda dry and earthy, and it proves to be just that. Just barely enough chocolate to justify the beer's moniker. Suggestive nickname aside, it's basically a straightforward, big and roasty stout, and a fine one at that. As it dries out at the swallow, some earthy and bitter elements assert themselves.

Overall impression: Solid, not great imperial stout that's worth a try.

 785 characters

Photo of jjanega08
3.4/5  rDev -16.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3.5

A= The pour is pitch black with an almost nonexistant head on it. The head is just some spots on top of the beer with a small ring around the glass. There is a small amount of lacing however.

S= The smell is chocolaty and coffee all the way. Not as roasty as a RIS usually is. The smell is somewhat muted but stil very reminicent of a RIS.

T= The taste is a little chocolatey and a little coffee like. Not the most intense taste I've ever had in an RIS. Really mellow. I think the taste is somewhat watery. Somewhat of a dissapointment.

M= While I think the taste is watery the mouth if very nice and thick. Heavy and coating.

D= Thanks to Thomashardy for this one in a trade. This was one of those beers I never thought I would get to try. Unfortunatly it is sort of a let down. A good RIS but not the best I've ever had by far.

 834 characters

Photo of donniecuffs
3.37/5  rDev -17.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Poured a deep mahogany brown/black, with a thin'ish tan head, little visible carbonation, and decent lacing. Smelled of cocoa powder (Bosco'ish), dark chocolate, and very subtle coffee. Very one dimensional. The taste also was one-dimensionally chocolate, chocolate, and more chocolate, with very little in the way of coffee, anise, woodiness, etc. The finish was sweet as well. The most surprising thing was the body, which was thinner than expected, though very smooth. My gut reaction was that this beer would benefit greatly from a little more flavor and texture balance. I know that this is a popular brew, and a lot of people might think that I'm smoking crack as they read this, but maybe I had my hopes too high, as I was genuinely disappointed. I'd be willing to give it another shot though.

 800 characters

Photo of siege06nd
3.33/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

From bottle to Great Lakes 25th Anniversary bruges hybrid...

A. Pours a deep, dark brown with a dark khaki head. The head is tight and consistent with fairly good lacing. Retention is pretty poor, as the bubbles bake off to a thin ring rather quickly. A vigorous swirl, however, brings the head roaring back.

S. Dark baking chocolate, coffee grounds, some oxidation, dried fruit, a bit of molasses. The nose is very subdued and while there are hints of a varied number of flavors, it's not the most complex or inviting bouquet.

T. A little bit of cocoa, just a tough of dark fruit, and then a strong, dry, roasted, and ashy finish. A little bit of a metallic and slightly tannic taste on the mid. Very bitter and dry.

M. Bitter, dry, ashy. The finish is very very dry to the point that it limits the enjoyment of the rest of the flavors. A thin, one-note profile.

O. This is very "okay". The name implies a thick, decadent, luscious stout, but this is anything but. It's thin, dry, bitter, and unrefined. And at nearly $20 a bottle, this is an incredibly poor value. I'm not sure where this beer received its great reputation...I found it instantly forgettable.

 1,166 characters

Photo of errantnight
3.3/5  rDev -19.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Tasted in a Spiegelau tulip during a RIS tasting (with plain crackers and water for palate cleansing between tastings).

Pours a deep, deep dark brown, with mahogany highlights. Head is thin, with little retention or lacing.

Aroma is black olives, a meaty, rich umami note, saline and cherry and dark fruit.

On the palate, milk chocolate comes to the fore, although the saline notes remain, and a bitterness comes through, thin edges and bitter. Some soy sauce and acidity lingers. Complex, interesting, but not terribly GOOD. Body is medium full and exceedingly smooth, but it's lacking a robust mid-palate.

A disappointment, if not a terribly BAD beer.

 658 characters

Photo of chicagobeerriot
3.3/5  rDev -19.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

2011 vintage

Pours black with a downy, khaki head.

With a name like "Sexual Chocolate," I was expecting more sweetness on the nose. Boy was I wrong: there's a lot of burnt toast and espresso along with some light smoke and only a bit of baker's chocolate. There's some leather here too. I usually hate seeing that descriptor in a review (who the hell has tasted leather?) but I don't know how else to describe it. In sum, there's a lot going on in the smell department but it's hard to tell where this beer is going.

Mouthfeel is on the lighter side but with a pleasant velvet texture.

The taste is also surprisingly devoid of chocolate (and sex for that matter, although my expectations were much lower in that regard). Bitter roast espresso has the featured position. Some light smoke and maybe a bit of baker's chocolate provide some added depth. There's a lot to digest by mid-sip, but the beer begins to fall apart at the finish line with some astringency and alcohol heat. This is a perfectly fine stout, but it needs more sweetness to provide complexity and balance.

 1,077 characters

Photo of yourefragile
3.28/5  rDev -19.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

At Churchkey in DC, a 10 oz snifter for $9 of the 2009 vintage. First time I've ever seen anything from Foothills in DC/Nova/MD area.

This experience with the beer wasn't all that impressive. The beer is served in a snifter that is about 4/5 near black, opaque liquid with a large, dense foamy tan head that hangs around the duration of the beer and leaves thick sheets of lacing. Aroma is mild blend of expected roast malt, cocoa, milk chocolate, slightly powdery. Carbonation is very low throughout and body is generally silky and smooth, but marginally thin for the style and slightly watery in the finish. Flavor is one dimensional, natural milk chocolate and cocoa powder with a mild sweet malt body. Little to no hop, fruit, char or alcohol presence resulting in an overall lack of balance. I'm waiting to try a bottle of the 2010 release and have greatly diminished expectations for that, but I'm still holding out hope that will be a little more complex, interesting and nuanced. However if this keg was representative of what everyone else has sampled for this beer, then for me this is easily one of the most undeservedly over hyped and sought after beers I've tried.

edit: Reading other reviews from the same night it's like we had two different beers. I wonder if I had a dirty glass or...I don't know, something seems off. Wouldn't be first time that's happened to me there.

 1,389 characters

Photo of bigfnjoe
3.26/5  rDev -20.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Poured from a bomber into a pint glass. February 2010 vintage

A- pours black with a one finger tan head. Retention of the head is solid. Looks nice

S- light chocolate. Not much going on. Maybe past its prime?

T- yeah, definitely past its prime. Getting a little bit of chocolate, and not much else. Slight bitterness. Very blah

M- body is viscous, very solid

O- nearly three years is too much to hold on to this beer. Wasn't a huge fan of it with that much age on it...oh well.

 482 characters

Photo of TheDudeRules
3.23/5  rDev -21%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Poured into a 7oz glass snifter.

Smell dominates of fig and dark fruit. Slight hint of bakers chocolate as it warms. A finger and a half worth of mocha head. Lacing is evident.

Taste is of smoke and peat. Teriyaki and meat coincide. This beer is chewy for all the wrong reasons. The smoke and meat dominate my mouth and flavor profile. It was hard to finish my small pour.

Honestly this was a one time experience. I wouldn't drink it again if it was free. Meat filled boring garbage.

 486 characters

Photo of tr4nc3d
3.23/5  rDev -21%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Huge thanks to khiasmus for this one

22oz bomber poured into my snifter

The appearance is opaque black with a two inch mocha colored head. Average head retention with a very thin layer sitting on top of the beer and sides of the glass. Lacing was notable when you slosh the beer around.

Aroma consist of dark chocolate, black strap molasses, espresso, cocoa nibs, vanilla, tobacco, black leather, and dark fruits.

Upfront slightly sweet taste of cocoa and milk chocolate with vanilla and molasses following. Espresso and dark fruits show midway with a slightly roasted dry bitter coffee finish.

Mouthfeel is medium bodied and a tad thin for being a stout. Finish is actually a bit watered down and the flavors seem not to follow throughout the taste.

Overall as excited as I was to try this beer, I will say I was let down. Sadly I'm afraid to say there is way better stouts that are easily more available to get.

 920 characters

Photo of hamilton23
3.19/5  rDev -22%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: Black as night with a fair amount of tan head.

S: Smoke, coffee, some roasted malts, more smoke.

T: Did I mention smoke? Wow, this is smokier than some Smoked Porters I have had. It had way too much imitation smoke flavor for my liking. Where is the chocolate?

M: Slightly oily and slick.

O: This thing should not have the word "Chocolate" in the title it should be Sexual Smoke. There was very little sweetness.

 419 characters

Photo of Rifugium
3.17/5  rDev -22.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

Feb. '14 vintage, with major thanks to Eli.
Poured into a Sexual Chocolate teku. Room temperature. Abyssmal black color, with two fingers of rocky mocha head that settled to a ringlet, leaving some soapy lacing on the glass. Dark roasty malts in the nose, distant raw cocoa, some herbal hop bitterness. Taste was surprisingly bitter, roasted dark malts and espresso, toasted grains, char, raw cocoa was present but quite muted, herbal and citrusy hops. This was really a let-down. Basically a plain stout, and pretty homebrewy, which is mostly the impression I've gotten from all of Foothills' beers thus far. Really neither sexual nor chocolate. Body was medium, mouthfeel thin, bitter and somewhat harsh, well, far from smooth anyway. The higher ABV was on the subdued side at least. I was glad to have gotten to try this, but it was a major disappointment.

 859 characters

Photo of glazeman
3.16/5  rDev -22.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

2011 bottle split with airohead2001.

A: The beer pours a dark, dark brown with a 1 finger cappuccino colored head that has moderate retention and a bit of lacing.

S: Well, it doesn’t smell bad, but there’s not much there at all. I get a little bit of earthiness/nuttiness, and If I search really, really deep I think I can convince myself there’s some milk chocolate.

T: The start is sweet, lactic, burnt and kind of gross. The middle has a bit of coffee/chocolate, although the chocolate is not prominent at all. The finish is actually like that of a pretty good imperial stout with a nice balance of hops and roasted malt. It’s too bad the up front flavor kind of throws off the overall experience.

M: A bit thin for my likely of this style, with appropriate carbonation. The aftertaste is better than the overall taste.

O: Overall, I wasn’t very impressed with this beer. The chocolate was not nearly as smooth or well-done as I had hoped. Across the bored it was fairly bland and uninteresting. Hopefully the barrel-aged version is better…I hope to crack that one sometime soon.

 1,099 characters

Photo of mdaschaf
3.14/5  rDev -23.2%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

2011 Vintage

A: Pours a deep black with a very nice brown/khaki colored head. Great head retention and lacing that forms all around glass. Really nice looking beer.

S: Something a bit different about the aroma that I can't quite put my finger on. It is slightly astringent, with a good bit of roasted/charred dark malt and a bit of chocolate.

T: Wow, extremely roasty. The roasted malt really dominates the flavor profile, really don't get as much chocolate as I was expecting/hoping. There is a little bit of milk chocolate in the mid-palate which comes across slightly creamy.

M: Medium bodied, on the creamier side, no sign of alcohol at all.

O: Really not very chocolaty. Not a bad stout, but seems rather basic. A bit of a let down based on the hype around it.

 774 characters

Photo of FosterJM
3.13/5  rDev -23.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

728th Review on BA
Bottle to snifter
2010 Vintage


Thanks to Gurudel for this one.

App- It was a nice mix of browns, reds for a stout but just too light. A nice one finger slightly lighter khaki colored head was there but receded quickly.

Smell- What the hell happened here? This is sexual chocolate? Its a mix of smoke, bacon and wood. I think something went very wrong.

Taste- At least on the taste of the beer its not so bad. Its still a pretty good stout but dont see what all the fuss is on this one. Nice run of the mill stout flavors and has a subdued malt presence. Not a hoppy stout either. Has a good roast note but just a tinge of that woody bacon flavor.

Mouth- A medium bodied stout with a paired carbonation level. A little velvety on the residual flavors. This was best part of this beer.

Drink- It was unremarkable for as much hype as this beer gets. I hope this was just a bad bottle or the vintage isnt as good as other. I probably wont trade for any other years after this one.

 1,020 characters

Photo of rvdoorn
3.13/5  rDev -23.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Bottle from crackedkettle, 2008 vintage.
Look: the beer pours dark black color with a medium brown head
Smell: Roasted malts, coffee, caramel, sweet molasses, hops and very very light chocolate.
Taste: The taste follows the nose. Malts, old coffee, caramel and very light chocolate but also some red fruits. The beer has a sharp bittersweet aftertaste.
Mouthfeel: Thin and watery body, medium carbonation
Overall: Highly overrated. Old coffee with almost no chocolate. Thin and unbalanced. Tons of better beers in this style

 524 characters

Photo of oline73
3.11/5  rDev -24%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

2010 bottle opened at the tasting this past weekend. Poured into a snifter.

Appearance: Pours almost black with a reddish ring around the edge when the light hits it. There is a layer of tan head that fades quickly.

Smell: Sweet and very smokey with some alcohol heat. Smells like this is going to be a bitter stout.

Taste: This beer is too bitter. Really roasty with some smoke and hop bitterness as well. There is some dark fruit, but the bitterness seems to hide any chocolate that could be found. Not very smooth.

Mouthfeel: The body is on the thin side for the style with tingly carbonation and a dry finish.

Overall: This beer is a lot more bitter than it needs to be. I really would have liked this beer to be smoother and have a stronger chocolate presence.

 770 characters

Photo of ShanePB
3.08/5  rDev -24.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

My girlfriend and I opened this bottle after our Valentine's Day dinner. Poured into a tulip glass.

A: Deep dark black with a very dark brown upper edge. Fluffy, rocky and full tan head. Nice retention cap and big sticky lacing along the glass wall. Great looking beer.

S: Astringent oak, char, slight smoke, dark chocolate and even some faint coffee beans towards the back. It smells nice but all the aromas don't blend very well together. The initial pungent oak-bitter aroma sticks throughout.

T: Well, I hate to say it but this is all hype. Again the initial bitterness of its aggressive hopping (85 IBUs) is still present over a year later in the bottle. Oak, dark malt and more roast come through. There's a nice diversity of flavor but it's not as smooth and easy drinking like others in the style. This is very chaotic in its structure, not very balanced.

M: Slick, smooth and creamy. Nicely carbonated, it feels good in the mouth. Quite dry on the finish though, perhaps from the bitterness?

This wasn't bad by any means although it's nothing world class or even at the top of the Russian Imperial Stout style. And where the hell was the chocolate? There were good amounts of different flavors but they were too choppy, and unbalanced. I have the barrel-aged version which I hear great things about, let's hope that one is a bit better.

 1,350 characters

Photo of AleWatcher
3.06/5  rDev -25.2%
look: 2 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 3

Reviewed from notes.
Shared by DSC-- check my review of the barrel aged SC for more details!

08-11 vintages all tried side by side.
The 08 was the handsdown best, and the 10 was the worst. The 11 was slightly better than the 10.

The 08 was thick, velvety, and luxurious... Just a nice beer, and exactly what I'd hope for this beer to be.... Sadly, my pour of that 08 was too small to review... This review is of the 2010 bottle.

Thin. Very thin. Watery, thin, and light feeling. The beer is dark, but it looks brownish and red with garnet and amber hues. A wispy cloud of bubbles is all that's left after the head vanished abruptly. It looks really thin--- and thus, I am not surprised when I find it feels very thin too.

Big boozy bite at the back end. A very roasty malt quality borders on being smokey while covering up a lot of any chocolate malt that one would expect to find. Some toffee and coffee, molasses... Meh. It is what it is.

Feels thin and undercarbonated. Feels slick and oily.

Overall-- not really working for me at all. If this were available on shelves, I might pick one up to see if 2 or 3 years will help this one reach the platform on which the 2008 stood.

 1,186 characters

Photo of kzoobrew
3.06/5  rDev -25.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Reviewed from notes. 09-11 vertical courtesy of dosbeerigos. Review will describe each vintage, score is an overall rating.

All three years had a very similar appearance. The body was deep brown bordering on black. Each fell short of being opaque, noticeable light breaks the surface. One to two finger malted milk colored head sat atop each. Retention was decent, moderate lacing left behind.

The aroma is where we can first start separating the vintages. 09 was heavy on the chocolate in the nose. Dark sugars and roast fill in just behind, this was the best smelling vintage. The 10 was very smoke forward, nearly to the point I felt it should be labeled a smoked stout. The roast is more prominent and the chocolate subdued in comparison to the 09. The 11 fell somewhere in between the previous two years. The smoke was less prominent but the roast was assertive. The chocolaty sweetness emerged a bit more than the 10. The 09 deserves a good rating, the 10 and 11 were average at best.

The flavor follows the trends identified in the nose for the most part. 09 was once again heavy on the chocolate. Supporting roast and caramel flavors compliment. The 10 still manages to be dominated by smoke. The bitter chocolate and smoke flavor clash, simply not that enjoyable. The 11 once again finds a middle ground. The chocolate flavor is offset my a decent amount of roast. The contrasting flavors work rather well. Based on taste the 09 is a 4, 10 probably a 2.5 and the 11 a 3.

The mouthfeel was rather similar among all three vintages. Medium bodied beer, falling just short of full. The carbonation is on the lower side, this is probably a good thing for this thinner body. Each lacked a viscosity I would like to see in an Imperial Stout.

If you give me an 09, I would happily drink that often. Unfortunately I cannot say the same about the 10 or 11. Overall this beer is decent but there are many readily available beers which can match or surpass the quality. Worth trying but not worth going out of your way for.

 2,028 characters

Photo of abecall98
3.03/5  rDev -25.9%
look: 5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4

Thanks to Bucketboy for this beer.

A - Pours a semi dark black, with a bright tan head. The beer looks oily, and the head lasts and sticks inside the glass. Perfection.

S - With a nice lasting head, there was quite some nose in this sucker. However, not the best. I expected more chocolate. I get a lot of roast and sweet malt, but where is my Dark Chocolate? If you are going to advertise a Chocolate, and talk about it on the bottle, represent. Sweet malt dominates the nose, and it isn't the most pleasing aroma.

T - Ah, there is the cocoa. Right as the first wave of flavor dashes in, the cocoa hits you, but it quickly diminishes. Where did it go? Where is the chocolate buttery goodness? It's gone. Quick to make up for the flavor loss is roasted malt, with a slight coffee kick. No dark fruit sweetness like the label describes, just roasted and smoky, almost burnt tasting, malt. Oh well, I will continue to enjoy my initial flavor wave with every sip. The ending flavor of the beer is just not good. Don't smoke the Chocolate Beers please, bad combo.

M - very well done. If any improvements could be made, perhaps a tad more carbonation for an added boost of explosion. The beer coats the mouth, the body is very noticeable, and this is not a weak thin stout, and that deserves praise.

D - At 10%, this beer is one I could drink all night. If not for the taste being rather lack luster, this beer would score a 5 on drinkability.

O - The beer is a huge letdown. I expected more cocoa and buttery sweetness, like other delicious chocolate stouts. What we have is another roast bomb. I hope the BA versions could top this, and mellow out that harsh roasted flavor, as I have 2 of them. Biggest disappointment of 2011 so far. Shame too. Glad I got to try it though.

 1,778 characters

Photo of tjthresh
3/5  rDev -26.7%
look: 5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

The pour is black with a billowing light brown head with some very nice lace. Aroma? What aroma? I get next to nothing here. Seems to me hops are leading the way in the nose. I bit apple-ish. There's roast and chocolate, but over all the nose is much to weak to earn a high score. The flavor, to me, isn't really anything to brag about either. There's some roast and some chocolate, but there supposed to be. I do pick up a tad of molasses. Really, the flavor is pretty pedestrian. The mouthfeel on the other hand is quite good. Big body. Above average carbonation. Dry finish. Full palate all the way through. OH-VER-RAY-TED!

 626 characters

Photo of pollox87
2.99/5  rDev -26.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

2010 22 oz

A - Poured black with little head, dark beer with little lacing.

S - Smelled a bit smokey roasted, but a bit of a chemical smell to it.

T - It tasted like smoke and roast, none of the richness that I want in a RIS. There was no smoothness and it was a bit too astringent.

M - way too thin for the style.

O - There are many off the shelve beers that I would rather have, I didn't want to penalize the rating because of how hard this was to get, The beer should stand on it's own rare or common, and this one was just not good.

 542 characters

Photo of Kaydogg
2.98/5  rDev -27.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

2011 - about a 5-6 oz pour

A - black/brown with a one finger light tan head that fades to a rim of bubbles..looks pretty well carbed.

S- Really not much on smell..was really trying to pull something out..roasted malts

T- What what what...sexual smoke. - harsh coffee roasts through out with a very smokey aftertaste. I honestly cannont taste any chocolate.

Mouthfeel is way to thin, watery and light. Reminded me of Beer Geek Bacon, or a smoked porter

Overall, very disappointing.. surprised reviews are all over the place..this is not a stout let alone a stout with chocolate in it.... thin, and boring. Hype train..choo choo

Serving type: bottle

 655 characters

Sexual Chocolate from Foothills Brewing Company - Downtown Brewpub
91 out of 100 based on 441 ratings.