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!

Southampton Biere De Mars - Southampton Publick House

Not Rated.
Southampton Biere De MarsSouthampton Biere De Mars

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
very good

339 Ratings
very good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 339
Reviews: 208
rAvg: 3.77
pDev: 12.73%
Wants: 24
Gots: 8 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Southampton Publick House visit their website
New York, United States

Style | ABV
Bière de Garde |  6.50% ABV

Availability: Spring

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: Bierman9 on 03-25-2004)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Southampton Biere De Mars Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 339 | Reviews: 208 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of TheBigBoy


1.75/5  rDev -53.6%

05-03-2012 16:42:15 | More by TheBigBoy
Photo of Gonzoillini


2/5  rDev -46.9%

04-26-2012 02:06:23 | More by Gonzoillini
Photo of JohnGalt1


2.1/5  rDev -44.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

12oz Inflatablechair brought over tonight... Thanks Sammy!! Cool and a new to me brew.

Pours a light orange with a short lasting white head... little lacing or retention.

The nose is off-putting .... immediately makes me think of malt extract... a bit perfumy that could be hops or spices, but the thick maltiness is overpowering.... Sam says "oxidized" his palate/nose is miles ahead of mine.

Flavor is no better... tastes like an unfermented homebrew experiment... I can detect/identify nothing that comes across as hops or spice... just tons of malt (extract) ..

Palate seems thick and a light carbonation that does nothing to scrub the flavors off the tongue...

The first time in a looong time that Sam and I haven't finished even half a bottle.


I don't think this was a bad or old bottle... I just believe it wasn't done well. If I am wrong, somebody please approach me and I will happily trade for a different bottle. Cheers, Toby.

Serving type: bottle

03-24-2012 07:20:04 | More by JohnGalt1


2.25/5  rDev -40.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

12oz to pint glass. Sampled 4/7/11.

A: Small 1/2 finger foamy head, off-white in color and below average retention. The body is light golden orange and has brilliant clarity with a steady pace of bubbles running up the sides of the glass. Lacing is spare.

S & T: Malt dominant brew. No hops are detectable on the nose. Toast, must, wood, old sock. Mildly spicy. Touch of sweetness with a smooth boozy alcoholic note presented in cherry form.

M: Full body, thick and chewy. Lively carbonation. Good mouthfeel with points being deducted from the alcoholic texture and the finish, which should have been drier.

O: I thought this would be a style that Southampton would nail but this beer has an odd, very unpleasant aroma and flavor. Would like to try it on tap or (even better) the 750mL version some day for comparison.

Serving type: bottle

10-29-2011 12:02:49 | More by FeDUBBELFIST
Photo of steve8robin


2.48/5  rDev -34.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Got this in a BIF. 12oz bottle. Let's see..

A: Golden honey color with some nice orange tint. Small 1 inch white head that fades at a decent pace. Good.

S: Sweet sugary malts with some nice strawberry blended in. Some hints of caramel and toffee. Not much else. Decent.

T: Kind of a strange tart bite to this one. Almost like a metallic bite. Kind of a dirty watery type taste. Hard to get past. Eh, not good.

M: Leaves a strange bite of aluminum in your mouth. Ok.

D: Hard to get past the strange metallic taste to this brew. Ok.

All in all, this brew was not good. The flavors it did have blended in a very unpleasant way. Don't bother hunting or trying if you have access.

Serving type: bottle

09-12-2010 03:12:43 | More by steve8robin
Photo of Herky21


2.5/5  rDev -33.7%

04-02-2014 00:03:39 | More by Herky21
Photo of beersvh23


2.5/5  rDev -33.7%

11-28-2012 03:49:25 | More by beersvh23
Photo of muletrane


2.5/5  rDev -33.7%

05-11-2013 22:31:23 | More by muletrane
Photo of DarthTremens


2.75/5  rDev -27.1%

03-29-2012 14:39:25 | More by DarthTremens
Photo of st9647v3

New Jersey

2.75/5  rDev -27.1%

06-27-2013 23:49:49 | More by st9647v3
Photo of mpalestino


2.75/5  rDev -27.1%

08-12-2013 20:37:02 | More by mpalestino
Photo of mwbrady12

North Carolina

2.75/5  rDev -27.1%

07-29-2013 01:38:12 | More by mwbrady12
Photo of artoolemomo


2.75/5  rDev -27.1%

05-19-2013 23:44:49 | More by artoolemomo
Photo of Profchaos20


2.75/5  rDev -27.1%

05-05-2012 01:12:12 | More by Profchaos20
Photo of billybob


2.78/5  rDev -26.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

12 oz. bottle with no freshness date. light copper color half inch head faded very quickly to just beer almost no lace. smells sweet and musty like old brewed tea. sweet malty taste hint of caramel, alcohol, oily feel to it after taste of old tea, poor carbonation overall very disappointed i have had southampton's double white which is excellent but i will not buy this beer again.

Serving type: bottle

03-25-2011 16:30:29 | More by billybob
Photo of Givemebeer


2.78/5  rDev -26.3%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.75

A: Golden with a surprisingly thin head and not much lacing

S: Light fruits and light grainy scents

T: Spicy and vague light fruit. Semi-dry finish

M: Light bodied

O: I really expected more out of this one. Could definitely say its refreshing, but thats about it. Scent and taste are weak and I would have liked a bit of a drier crisper finish. Definitely needs more to it if its going to be 6.5%

Serving type: bottle

02-02-2014 02:31:43 | More by Givemebeer
Photo of jeffthecheff


2.8/5  rDev -25.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours amber gold in color with a thinner than expected head. The head eventually dies down to the point where it can't be swirled back up. Good clarity.

The aroma has some toasted malt, some caramel, some maple, and some spice. Not a ton of yeast character. A little bit of mustiness comes through, but came across as un-fresh and stale instead of earthy. The flavor follows with some toasty malt up front, a slight buttery flavor, and a bit of low quality caramel on the finish. Nothing to get excited about.

The mouthfeel is medium bodied, slick, and with medium carbonation. This beer isn't great, but I'll take another right now. I'm not in a picky mood tonight.

Serving type: bottle

04-09-2010 22:10:50 | More by jeffthecheff
Photo of woosterbill


2.85/5  rDev -24.4%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

On-tap at Prime 16 into an Unibroue tulip.

A: Perfectly clear light amber body with an inch of creamy white foam. Pretty good retention and lacing. Lovely.

S: Huh. Sharp lager-like sulfurous yeast, dry pilsner malt and some spicy phenols on the back end. Not what I was expecting, and not all that great.

T: Sweet fruits up front, then dry pilsner-like breadiness followed by a biting bit of chalky minerality on the finish. Complex, but slightly unpleasant, actually.

M: Active medium body; the carbonation starts sharp and finishes smooth. Nice.

D: Weird mix of malt sweetness and yeast dryness. I'm not really a fan.

Notes: While I'm normally a big fan of what Southampton does, this one left me cold. I have to admit I'm not terribly familiar with the Bière de Garde style, but this was by far the least enjoyable of the several examples I've had - although I have a sneaking suspicion that it might be the most closely representative one. I'll keep an open mind until I've had more opportunities to sample authentic European versions.


Serving type: on-tap

03-01-2011 02:48:05 | More by woosterbill
Photo of avalon07

South Carolina

2.9/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

A: Poured from a bottle to a pint glass. Had a bright orange color and a cloudy consistency. There was absolutely no head or lacing to speak of.

S: Aroma was very muted, but had traces of fruit, malt, and some phenols.

T: Tasted of malt, orange, some mild spices, but little else. This beer is just thin and watery without much character. Not at all what you expect from the style.

M: A well-carbonated beer with a sharp, vibrant finish. Medium-bodied.

O: This beer does have a couple of decent qualities, but it fails in the flavor category.

Serving type: bottle

11-16-2011 13:17:44 | More by avalon07
Photo of mactrail


2.9/5  rDev -23.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

More like a golden bock beer, rather strong and even a little sweet. Very slight foam on the amber brew. A decent carbonation on the tongue. Beery and slightly perfumey aroma.

Fairly thick mouthfeel. Malty with a touch of butterscotch. I could not detect any of the Belgian flavors. I don't know how you would categorize this as a Biere de Garde or anything remotely in the style. Perfectly drinkable, but hard to rate it fairly. A scratchy finish with some winey bitterness.

From the 12 oz bottle, oddly enough available at the supermarket in DC.

Serving type: bottle

06-09-2012 02:20:39 | More by mactrail
Photo of cavale

3/5  rDev -20.4%

04-23-2012 21:25:26 | More by cavale
Photo of VikeMan


3/5  rDev -20.4%

12-04-2011 23:17:42 | More by VikeMan
Photo of chrispoint


3/5  rDev -20.4%

02-19-2012 20:41:25 | More by chrispoint
Photo of CBPAS

New York

3/5  rDev -20.4%

03-04-2012 23:37:14 | More by CBPAS
Photo of akttr


3/5  rDev -20.4%

06-06-2013 03:18:22 | More by akttr
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Southampton Biere De Mars from Southampton Publick House
85 out of 100 based on 339 ratings.