1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale - Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Sierra Nevada Pale AleSierra Nevada Pale Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
90
outstanding

8,720 Ratings
THE BROS
92
outstanding

(view ratings)
Ratings: 8,720
Reviews: 2,691
rAvg: 4.04
pDev: 11.63%
Wants: 129
Gots: 911 | FT: 2
Brewed by:
Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
American Pale Ale (APA) |  5.60% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
Generous quantities of premium Cascade hops give the Pale Ale its fragrant bouquet and spicy flavor.

37 IBU

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 07-05-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale Alström Bros
Ratings: 8,720 | Reviews: 2,691 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of Das_Reh
2.24/5  rDev -44.6%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Poured from a bottle into a glass.

This is supposedly THE original APA, and one of America's first craft brews. I was eager to try it after seeing the high reviews on BA.

Appearance - A nice, deep coppery color with a decent cream colored head. Lively carbonation, almost no lacing, which was disappointing. I noticed "floaties" in the beer as I poured, which settled to the bottom of the glass like bits of backwash... very unappetizing.

Smell - practically nonexistent... some citrusy hops and not much else.

Taste - Good grief... why are the ratings so high? It's a 1-note acrid bitterness with virtually no maltiness. The citrus/pine hop flavors are barely present, and a sticky, tart bitterness overwhelms the palette... I know Pale's and IPA's are MEANT to be hoppy and bitter, but there's no balance here. It's just NOT good.

Mouthfeel - Mouthfeel is medium, and frankly unmemorable.

Overall - A bitter, overhyped concoction of hops, hops and more hops. No balance, no complexity. This was my second one and I will not drink another. I'll stick to Two-Hearted.

NOTE: In retrospect I am under the impression that I may have been drinking bottles that were out of date. Will give this beer a proper re-review in the future.

Das_Reh, Nov 17, 2013
Photo of Razr86
2.25/5  rDev -44.3%

Razr86, Sep 11, 2012
Photo of HxC90
2.25/5  rDev -44.3%

HxC90, Mar 19, 2012
Photo of Klun
2.25/5  rDev -44.3%

Klun, Mar 20, 2013
Photo of mcss
2.25/5  rDev -44.3%

mcss, Nov 03, 2012
Photo of ZinFanDave
2.25/5  rDev -44.3%

ZinFanDave, May 19, 2012
Photo of CraftDanny
2.26/5  rDev -44.1%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.25

I've seen this bottle coming in many pubs in London so I decided to try it. Looks great, shinny orange, nice bubbles. The taste is very strong, really bitter but fresh, fruity, there is ginger everywhere, smells acid, mouthtaste stays for few seconds. It took me long to finish the glass, not very used to this kind of flavor but was ok.

CraftDanny, Jul 12, 2014
Photo of Crosling
2.28/5  rDev -43.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 1.5

Amber color with a large covering cream. Stinky, doughy and sweaty yeast aroma, which hints of medicine and vitamins, unsuccessfully attempts to disguise itself with a lightly aromatic, herbaceous and floral hop scent. Light caramel in the nose as well, but pretty much just stinky yeast and dulled hops. I still find the yeast character to be obtrusive upon tasting, though not as bad as the aroma. The malt flavor is very light and grainy and to me, doesn’t blend well at all with the mildly aggresive hop flavor and bitterness. The hops which shift from herbaceous, to floral to piney (on the finish) are moderately pleasing, but overall, this is just a poorly balanced beer, plus the yeast stinks or something.

Crosling, Mar 29, 2006
Photo of BlackAngus
2.3/5  rDev -43.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A - Light copper color, crystal clear. Nice fluffy head that lasted a while.

S - Citrus and floral aroma, but there's a subtler note of something unpleasant. I smells, I swear, like sweat. Not sure why. And not just this bottle. Every time I've had this beer, I've smelled this musky sweaty funk just below the hops. No malt aroma whatsoever.

T - Meh. Yeah, there are hops here, but nothing else. Maybe some very light sweetness.

M - Light body, extremely clean.

D - I can drink it, but there are many, many better beers out there. The best thing I can say about this beer is that it's the best thing Wal-Mart carries in the beer aisle.

BlackAngus, Jan 09, 2007
Photo of Kooz
2.3/5  rDev -43.1%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Lots of high ratings for this beer. Makes me wonder if I got a bad batch. I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as everyone else seemed to.

Taste was just too hoppy. I get it, people like Pale Ales to be hoppy, but this was so overly hoppy that I had trouble getting past it. This goes for both the smell and the taste.

Appearance was nice. It was a light, nut brown. And the mouthfeel was okay, but a bit too bubbly. Over-carbonation is never a plus. But I wouldn't say the mouthfeel was bad.

As for drinkability, I wouldn't have more than one.

Kooz, Oct 30, 2009
Photo of ivanwatling
2.38/5  rDev -41.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Appearance: Wonderful rich, deep amber. No head whatsoever which is a negative for me.

Smell: Delicate floral notes with undertones of citrus fruit.

Taste: First taste is fruity, a bit like a soft drink. Biterness then takes over and becomes almost too much.

Mouthfeel: Dry, sharp bitter aftertaste like lemon rind. Carbonation feels like very small bubbles, akin to pop.

Drinkability: Too bitter for me, not balanced. Will not try again, might not even finish the whole bottle.

ivanwatling, Dec 26, 2010
Photo of VietPong
2.38/5  rDev -41.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

I found this beer to be super bitter. I do like beers with a slight bitterness, but this definitely seemed overpowering. It wasn't as crisp as i expected and the aftertaste was bitter in combination with the beer. I traded it for something new and couldn't finish the first one

VietPong, Aug 16, 2010
Photo of acemaverick
2.38/5  rDev -41.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

A: Nice label. Color of beer is dark yellow and looks ok to me.
S: Smells alright, nothing special. A bit tangy.
T: Very bitter. Hoppy as f*ck! Strong bitter aftertaste. This beer is not enjoyable to drink.
M: Sharp, lots of carbonation.
O: Overall I did not enjoy this beer. It is way over hyped. I would not buy this beer on purpose.

acemaverick, Jun 17, 2014
Photo of Sixpack595
2.4/5  rDev -40.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Tastes like an overhopped macro. If your only complaint about Bud is the lack of hops, try this beer. If you like a full bodied beer with a strong malty backbone skip it. Very floral aroma, strong hop flavor, but not much else to it. American Pale Ales like this seem to much like a 1 trick pony. Try to back up that hop with some malt.

Sixpack595, Sep 01, 2003
Photo of dunit697
2.45/5  rDev -39.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I saw on Beer advocate that this was an A- so I was pretty excited, after tasting it I really couldn't see why. I also judge beers quite a bit on the balance of alcohol. I want it to be there but not so obvious, this beer did not mask its alcohol very mask it alcohol very well making it less enjoyable for me personally, especially considering it was only 5.6%. I think there is plenty of better stuff out there, but its not a bad beer.

dunit697, Dec 13, 2011
Photo of bcgoldtoe
2.48/5  rDev -38.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

As one of the highest rated pale ales, I looked forward to a great balanced beer. I was, however, disappointed to see that the complexity I seeked was sorely lacking.

A= Solid, beautiful golden color with hints of amber

S= Better than a macrobrew but this was the first hint something wasn't right

T= Way overhopped. Needs more malt and fewer hops. Bitterness does fade into slight sweetness but does it have to take so long?

M= Excellent, one of the better balanced mouthfeels. Not too thick, not too thin

D= It's ok, once you get past the overpowering hops.

If you're not a fan of strong hops, avoid this beer. I do agree with the comment about this being Budweiser with hops. If you want a great microbrew pale ale without huge amounts of hops, I recommend Dogfish Head amber ale or Fat Tire.

bcgoldtoe, Aug 20, 2007
Photo of jbweld
2.49/5  rDev -38.4%
look: 3.75 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 2

WTF pale ale!?!

I am writing this review because I am concerned about Sierra Nevada. I am a huge supporter of craft beer especially Sierra Nevada, but today I noticed something... Earlier today I enjoyed a pale ale in the can and it tasted great just as I would expect. Hoppy, balanced, a typical SN pale ale. Later in the day I had a pale ale in the bottle (bottling code 319311014) which was totally different. It was malt forward and sweet. The hop character was subdued. It almost tasted like fat tire or Sam Adams. What's going on Sierra Nevada? I have heard that Sierra Nevada was adjusting some of its recipes... I hope this is not the future of the beer I love.

jbweld, Dec 07, 2013
Photo of tallfellapgh
2.5/5  rDev -38.1%

tallfellapgh, Dec 07, 2012
Photo of epicus
2.5/5  rDev -38.1%

epicus, Nov 28, 2012
Photo of beerformyhorses34
2.5/5  rDev -38.1%

beerformyhorses34, May 20, 2014
Photo of LJWalker
2.5/5  rDev -38.1%

LJWalker, Feb 06, 2012
Photo of BGsWo22
2.5/5  rDev -38.1%

BGsWo22, Jan 30, 2013
Photo of jmccullough108
2.5/5  rDev -38.1%

jmccullough108, Jan 04, 2013
Photo of hurley41
2.5/5  rDev -38.1%

hurley41, Apr 19, 2014
Photo of evbro
2.5/5  rDev -38.1%

evbro, Mar 08, 2014
Sierra Nevada Pale Ale from Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.
90 out of 100 based on 8,720 ratings.