1. Extreme Beer Fest. March 20 & 21, 2015 in Boston, Mass. Join us!
  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!

Pete's Wicked Red Rush - Pete's Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Pete's Wicked Red RushPete's Wicked Red Rush

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
73
okay

48 Ratings
THE BROS
70
okay

(view ratings)
Ratings: 48
Reviews: 42
rAvg: 3.02
pDev: 15.23%
Wants: 0
Gots: 0 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Pete's Brewing Company visit their website
Texas, United States

Style | ABV
American Amber / Red Ale |  5.30% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 08-24-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Ratings: 48 | Reviews: 42 | Display Reviews Only:
Reviews by WesWes:
Photo of WesWes
2.93/5  rDev -3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

The beer pours a dark golden color, not red. The head is bone white, but is lost in seconds; very little lacing. The nose is weak. There are a few malty notes in here, but for the most part this is just a pale ale. I don't understand this "red" craze anyway. Besides Killians and a few others I could give a damn about this style. It could ride away into the sunset like the "dry" beers of the 90's. The taste again is light and plain, maybe some crystal malts to add a darker golden color and a slight malt character. The mouthfeel is ok;a medium body. The drinkability is decent as well. But there are few beers that I deem undrinkable. Pete's beers are highly over-rated. When I first started drinking beer, I thought these guys were "micro"-brewers. This beer sucks; I'm sorry. If it weren't for my addiction to review beers I would never have purchased these brews.

WesWes, Jul 16, 2003
More User Reviews:
Photo of oberon
2.98/5  rDev -1.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours a lighter shade of amber with a light head,seems a litle thin by the looks.A real bad smell to it musty and a little meaty?The taste has some malty sweet qualities with some ever so slight toasty notes so not to bad in that category.Seems thin on the tongue and does get a little watery tasting after a few,not to impressed with this brew for sure.

oberon, Aug 09, 2003
Photo of Todd
3.05/5  rDev +1%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Pours a great looking reddish-amber beer with a nice foamy head. The aroma is spicy/musty with some grain, odd. Now the taste is also odd. Although it has a somewhat smooth malty sweet character ... it's more like a flavoured soda, or cocktail, than a beer. In fact, with its syrupy, spritzy and background splash of citrus character it reminds me of those Shirley Temple Cocktail drinks I used to order as a kid. You know, your folks allowed you to order it to feel like an adult around the table when everyone else ordered their "real" drinks. Even has those trademark flavours with a touch of Grenadine syrup and Maraschino cherry flavour.

Not my favourite beer from the "new" line-up of Pete's, but it seems status quo for every brewery to produce a pussy beer these days. I guess this is theirs ... easy drinking and light, but I'll pass on this beer now that I'm one of the adults around the table.

Todd, Dec 25, 2001
Photo of Jason
2.9/5  rDev -4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Presentation: 12 oz brown long neck bottle, "Wicked" is raised twice in the glass both front and back of the bottle. New marketing though still no freaking freshness date!

Appearance: Sterile clean, crystal clean clarity with a thin sticky lace. Amber in hue, no red tones in the colour.

Smell: Restrained esters and fruity aromas. Semi-stripped malt smell with an American macro beer nose ...

Taste: Moderate body, smooth and spicy. Thin waves of alcohol and ester seem to drive the fore front of this brew. Malt sweetness is employed to the taste bus to produce a quick shot of caramel and toasted grain. Hop bitterness is meek and does not want to start trouble, with light flavour of citrus and flowers it leaves not much to else. Odd cloying sweetness, cause this is not a sweet beer, seems drawn and manufactured. Then a light dryness hits with a toasted grain after taste.

Notes: A two dimensional beer, lacks in complexity which is what they were probably going for in the first place and only thinking about dumbing down the flavour as a small cost to maximize drinkability. Still not bad, better than other American "Red" beers but more or less a middle of the road easy drinking red ale.

Jason, Nov 20, 2001
Photo of niknar
2.7/5  rDev -10.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

A moderate amber color with hints of red...though not particularly well expressed. Almost no smell at all...(do I have a cold?). Slightly fruity at best. Taste is extremely thin and watery. Not altogether bad if you can get enough in your mouth to taste it... but definitely weakly expressed. Mouth feel is non-existent, confirming the watery consistency. I suppose it is drinkable beer in comparison to the widely marketed American "rice" beers, but not anything above and beyond that. Overall, I'm not particularly impressed.

niknar, Jan 02, 2004
Photo of acurtis
2.5/5  rDev -17.2%

acurtis, Jan 15, 2012
Photo of bditty187
3.43/5  rDev +13.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I fail to see the “flaw” in this beer.

Amber hue with a small fluffy head, little retention. The nose is simple, yet inviting, with the malt as the only distinguishable feature. The flavors are, again, simple with malt and some faint spice… a tad buttery-sweet. This is a drinkable beer, nothing I’d seek out but I wouldn’t be averse to drinking it again.

bditty187, Dec 10, 2002
Photo of EagleTalon
3.55/5  rDev +17.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Malty! Tastes and smells of fresh malt right out of the mash tun. Has just enough hops to balance it out to make it a very drinkable brew. This is not a beer I will come back to often, but when I need a nice dose of malt flavor, or I have guests who want that malty taste, this is a good choice.

EagleTalon, Jul 05, 2002
Photo of fattyre
3.4/5  rDev +12.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

This beer pours a clear medium brownish red color with a moderate tan head that quickly decreases to become small and clingy. The mouthfeel is just a hair above thin- disapointing. The smell is sharp herbal with a sweet malt undertone. The taste is roasted malt with a light hoppy alcohol finish. almost like a marzen except for a lingering hoppiness.
Not completely sure if I am reviewing the same beer. Mine is labled "Wicked Red".

fattyre, Apr 17, 2003
Photo of buzzy
2.75/5  rDev -8.9%

buzzy, Mar 13, 2014
Photo of Murph
3.35/5  rDev +10.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a crystal clear dark golden/light amber color with a good head that has no retention. Decent, raw toasted malt aromas are in the smell but not much else. Toasty malt sweetness witha a bit of hops toward the middle. This brew is watery and bland and not really very drinkable. Still this is definitely a step up from the regular Wicked Ale.

Murph, Jul 21, 2002
Photo of Brent
2.35/5  rDev -22.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Not bad, but pretty bland. A little tart up-front, and the malt acts like it might do something, but never gets there. The finish has an odd bittersweetness. On par with macro brew Killian's Red.

Brent, Oct 12, 2001
Photo of StevieW
3.53/5  rDev +16.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Copper to red in color, fluffy beige head. Very noticable sweet malt smell, which is what I expected. Maybe a little thin on hops,malty sweetness dominates the beer. It's not as flavorful as a Rogue or Moylans etc, but it's very drinkable. Could have been more balanced. Light body, but not bad, easy to drink. Overall I thought it was a good beer with dinner.

StevieW, Jul 04, 2002
Photo of Gusler
3/5  rDev -0.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

As it pours from the bottle a translucent deep amber color, the head is large and bubbly, the color an off white, with the lace a satisfactory covering upon the glass. Nose is crisp and malt sweet, start has a nice malt profile with a thin to medium top. Finish is biting in its acidity, the hops pleasantly spicy, a drinkable beer and one that I buy every year when the sampler pack comes out.

Gusler, Oct 20, 2003
Photo of Shafaegalo
3/5  rDev -0.7%

Shafaegalo, Jan 13, 2014
Photo of frank4sail
2.17/5  rDev -28.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Copper in color with a beige sheen. Sweet malt nose. No rush at all in the taste... just a flat malt taste with no balance at all.... stay away from this overpriced....stuff go out and get a yuengling instead...

frank4sail, May 02, 2002
Photo of Pegasus
3.03/5  rDev +0.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Reddish-brown color with a quite decent off-white head and good lace. Aroma consists of sweet malts and fruit notes. Taste begins with sweet toasted malt flavors, followed by mild hoppiness and a slight but lingering sweet flavor of caramel. Smooth and very easy to drink; not a great brew, but certainly pleasant and inoffensive.

Pegasus, Aug 13, 2002
Photo of marc77
2.8/5  rDev -7.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Amber in color and quite clear. The head, although thin, leaves a respectable lace. The hop nose is quite pungent, floral and a touch citrusy. As the hop oils dissapate, generic caramel malt sweetness hits the nose. Biscuit malt comes through as the beer warms. Lightly bodied for an amber. Sweet all around in flavor, both from the crystal malt and residual sweetness unbalanced by the low hop bitterness. The malt sweetness and dearth of hop bitterness make this beer a bit sugary. Red Rush isn't a bad beer, but lacks overall balance and is certainly not at all memorable.

marc77, May 15, 2002
Photo of GreatPondBrewer
3.03/5  rDev +0.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I am not a big fan of "reds" in general although I am especially partial to Casco Bay's. Nor am I a big fan of Pete's. I still cannot tell what kind of brewery they are really. Are they a "macro" that is trying to pass themselves off with having lots of sophisticated sounding beers or are they really trying for complexity and missing the mark? Anyway the Red Rush was kinda a flatline beer. Just didn't do anything for me. The color was ligh red, with a white head that did not stick around very long. There were some caramel smells. The taste was malted and biscuity with a bit of a buttery mouthfeel, but there was nothing doing it for me. Not even a cheap beer that I would look for again.

GreatPondBrewer, May 04, 2003
Photo of connecticutpoet
3.6/5  rDev +19.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

This was a reddish-amber brew with an average head. Nothing spectacular.

The aroma was of sharp medium-bodied malts, a bit of roastiness at the back of the nose (but very light).

The taste was of medium-bodied malt with some sharp hop flavors.

It wasn't staggeringly good, but it wasn't horrid either... a little better than average, I'd definitely pick this over a macro aat a party.

connecticutpoet, Nov 18, 2004
Photo of LarryV
2.63/5  rDev -12.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I tried a six of this beer, and I was really disappointed with it. There's just nothing exciting about it to make me want to drink more of it. Bland boring flavor, seemed rather flat to me. I remember when Pete's first came out, it's how I got introduced to the fact that there were some tastier beers out there than what I was accustomed to drinking. To me, Pete's is a mere shadow of its original self these days. It's been watered down and modified to appeal to the mass-produced American beer drinkers by toning down all the things I originally found attractive. I also thought this beer had a funky metallic undertone to it. It's more about packaging and marketing than it is about the beer these days.

LarryV, Mar 14, 2002
Photo of Hopheadjeffery
2/5  rDev -33.8%

Hopheadjeffery, Dec 22, 2012
Photo of skar
3.23/5  rDev +7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Assuming this is the same beer that was labeled as Pete's Wicked Red about 5-8 years ago, this is a trip back memory lane to one of the first beers I enjoyed, just as I was discovering beer (not even good beer, but beer in general).

12 oz bottle, part of a mixed 6-pack

The beer has a orange, amber color to it and is fairly bright. The head is slightly below average and has a normal appearance. The nose has a moderate caramel aroma, with some malt extract notes, and a faint hint of Scotch.

The flavor starts with a decent malt base. It has a moderate sweetness, and finishes with a mild hoppyness. A simple, easy to drink beer to be sure, but not a bad one.

I recommend this beer as a transition beer to serve to open-minded Macro drinkers. The flavors are subtle and should not scare people off.

Although my tastes have absolutely changed during the last 5-8 years, I can still be in the mood for a beer like this.

skar, Sep 11, 2003
Photo of cdwil
2.5/5  rDev -17.2%

cdwil, Dec 25, 2011
Photo of ROGUE16
3/5  rDev -0.7%

ROGUE16, Dec 01, 2011
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Pete's Wicked Red Rush from Pete's Brewing Company
73 out of 100 based on 48 ratings.