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!

Redhook Long Hammer IPA - Redhook Ale Brewery

Not Rated.
Redhook Long Hammer IPARedhook Long Hammer IPA

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
75
okay

2,797 Ratings
THE BROS
67
poor

(view ratings)
Ratings: 2,797
Reviews: 1,112
rAvg: 3.27
pDev: 17.13%
Wants: 17
Gots: 224 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Redhook Ale Brewery visit their website
United States

Style | ABV
American IPA |  6.20% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
The generous addition of hops both during and at the end of the fermentation process (dry-hopping) gives our India Pale Ale its characteristic bitterness and piney citrus aroma and flavor. The medium body, crisp finish, and moderate alcohol and IBU levels makes this one of America’s most drinkable and best-selling IPAs.

44 IBU

(Beer added by: Musky on 01-10-2007)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Redhook Long Hammer IPA Alström Bros
Ratings: 2,797 | Reviews: 1,112 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of dudecandle
3.2/5  rDev -2.1%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

On tap into 16oz pint:

A: Hazy orange-yellow with a faint trace of head on top. Wouldn't have enough head to lace if it tried.

S: Hop aroma is the strongest note, and in IPA terms, it's barely there. Perhaps a sweet malt profile with subtle citrus, but I may be generous in suggesting so.

T: Similar to the smell: a weak hope dominates. Slightly bready.

M/D: Least aggressive IPA I've ever had. This being said, it makes for easy drinking, and not wholly unpleasant at it.
I had been pleasantly surprised to see any IPA on tap at a real craphole of a bar, so for these very specific circumstances, it sufficed.

dudecandle, Jun 03, 2009
Photo of tr4nc3d
2.05/5  rDev -37.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Served from a 12fl oz bottle into my FFF pint glass

Pours a very pale yellow with just a tad orange added into it, you can say a very light copper color. Two finger white head that fades quickly leaving lacing behind.

Does not have a very dominant hop smell, although I do get something funky going on. Smells like wet hay, horse blanket, grass, wheat, very musky smell going on.

Only a very slight hop bitterness upfront can be detected with a stale dry finish. Very watery.

Mouthfeel is thin and medium carbonated with a very watery taste.

Although it did not cost a lot, Im still upset I wasted money on this since its very watery. I would definitely skip on this one if I were you.

tr4nc3d, Jun 03, 2009
Photo of addmorehops
2.55/5  rDev -22%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I've had this in bottle as well as on tap in the RH brewpub in SEA. I'm always dissapointed when I see this included in the ranks of serious AIPAs.

Mom always said, if you have nothing to say...

It's a great version of an IPA to drink with filling foods/meals or perhaps when the humidity is unbearable.

Hop lovers steer clear.

addmorehops, May 30, 2009
Photo of tzchandler
2.2/5  rDev -32.7%
look: 2 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

I'm at Safeway on a Friday night getting some groceries and I think to myself this place should have at least one good IPA or hoppy beer worth trying. I saw the regular Sierra ales and the popular IPA (in black letters) beer which were too familiar to try again to I ventured out and got this beer. It states that it has lots of hops.

It pours pretty light and the smell of hops it very light. I would tell you you have to be looking for it to recognize there it any hops at all. Disappointing.

This beer strikes me as a cross between bud light and a wonderful stale IPA. Not good.

What was in the brewers mind making this? If your going to emphasize hops, make it count. Don't muck around. I would bet dollars to donuts that the brewery grinded it's hops to an almost powder form to get the most out of the hops. Hops drive the price up in beer especially over the last year with the short fall of harvests. Why do I think this? When you pour this beer look at the beer carefully you'll notice all the particles suspended. That's not good. Looks like finely chopped hops to me.

When you see this beer, just say no. There are so many other beers out there that are so much more worthy.

Long Hammer missed it's mark.

tzchandler, May 25, 2009
Photo of jdrio
3.95/5  rDev +20.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

This may not be an exceptional beer, but it's such a good beer that I don't think it receives enough credit. It's not particularly hoppy, but is has a tingly bitterness and enough mouthfeel to be a reliable standby that compliments most food and makes a wonderful summer ale. It's a fine stepping-stone into the IPA world, better out of the tap but solid out of the bottle.

jdrio, May 22, 2009
Photo of ThickestHead
3.68/5  rDev +12.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

I have had this brew quite a few times now, always after it was on sale at the liquor store ... deep down I like to think that this IPA would be dramatically tastier if it was in a keg and recently tapped or just fresher in general out of the bottle after having been sent right from the brewery; however, that said, I have yet to be let down by this always delicious beer. From what I can tell, it may true that this is a muted version of an IPA but it has been a proven performer well worth it's price in my book.

ThickestHead, May 20, 2009
Photo of Offa
3.35/5  rDev +2.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

This is a fairly good, tasty beer, approachable yet characterful enough to b easy to drink if rather basic. It's quite sweet and hop character lacks complexity, but hop flavour definitely dominates.

Pale amber, slightly cloudy, it has a small off-white head slowly shrinking and leaving a little bit of lace.

The aroma is juicy with grapefruit, pine, caramelly toast, and white grape juice.

The taste is very light grapefruity-piney hops with faint peppery-leafiness along with almost syrupy raisiny grain and hint of crackers. It is mostly sweet with light spicey zestiness until the finish, when a light bitterness appears and lingers along with a faint taste of pine and a faint off-taste of old vegetables. It has rather a slick, oily feel.

It is nothing exciting or complex and it is really quite sweet, but it is overall a decent beer with some fairly good flavour and I enjoy it but it is hardly great beer.

Offa, May 13, 2009
Photo of dbmcrorie
3.83/5  rDev +17.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Presentation:
On tap at Eli's on the Hill (Branford, CT) poured into a frosted American pint glass.

Visual:
Dark golden-amber with a soft white head. Despite the fact that the glass was chilled (I wish it wasn't), the head remained for a while and was able to leave a little lace around the edge. The body seemed pretty clear, but I couldn't tell if the haziness was from the beer or the condensation on the glass.

Aroma:
Surprisingly hoppy. I've had this in the bottle before and it seriously let me down. But on tap, a wider range of herbs and flowers came to the nose. A sweeter floral bouquet was quite pleasant with faint notes of citrus.

Taste:
Again, much better on tap than in the bottle. Citrus, herbs (soft grass and pine), fruits (especially apricot), as well as hoppy oils are extremely present. A good balance between the malty profile and the softer hop astringency and bitterness. Very smooth and creamy texture, medium-bodied, and finishes with a hoppy resin bite at the end. It leaves a sweet cotton-candy-like aftertaste.

Overall:
Much more impressed now that I've had it on tap as opposed to in the bottle (which tasted like rubbish). The hops are much more pleasant and noticeable. It is, surprisingly, much sweeter and less bitter than the traditional IPA (which makes this more of a golden ale or APA than an IPA). However, I still enjoyed the broad bouquet that allows this to be both a pairing beer as well as a session beer.

Though most IPA's are best paired with greasy/spicy food (as the hops cut through the grease and flavor), I would say this would be better paired with less grease, and more with foods that focus more herbs and spices (such as blackened fish) or cream based items (soups, soft cheeses, etc). But, due to it's fruity profile, may even be paired well with fruit. Give it a try!

Cheers!

dbmcrorie, May 12, 2009
Photo of Wheelinb
3.33/5  rDev +1.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Picked this up at a local grocery store to try while grilling out. It poured a light amber, a lighter color than I have seen from most IPAs. I got a decent hop smell. It poured with a nice head and left solid lacing on the glass. My first taste I got a strong hop flavor but after that it seemed to fizzle out as I drank it. It seemed to get more watery. Not a bad beer and it was a good choice to have with food, but it almost seems like a lighter version of an IPA.

Wheelinb, May 07, 2009
Photo of DaveFL1976
3.98/5  rDev +21.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

I will start out by saying that This Beer Is Underrated.

Sure, the head isn't fantastic and the smell won't blow your socks off, but the taste is there, mouthfeel is good and drinkability is a quaffer. When I drink this brew, it just reminds me of a slightly stronger aroma hopped version of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale... which certainly isn't a bad thing. I think the only thing that's holding this beer's ratings back (aside from beer snobbery) is that it represents itself as an IPA instead of an APA. Put this in the APA catagory and there won't be many that outrank it.

DaveFL1976, May 05, 2009
Photo of CBennett
2.35/5  rDev -28.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Wow, bought this on a "blind" buy never had it and didnt look it up for reviews. Its just not a real strong IPA. barely hoppy enough to be a IPA.

Appearance: the color was on/right

Smell: the smell was slightly reminiscent of a IPA but not real strong almost as if you were smelling a Light IPA :).

Taste: was bland as well, no real hop character that seems to normally be the "backbone" of a IPA. Not the worst thing ever but not a very good IPA.

Mouthfeel:Wattery just not a lot there.

Drinkability: Its drinakble but this one wont make the list of my go to IPA's. maybe I was just a bit spoiled by IPA's like Stone,Southern Tier Brewery, and things like Hop Devil from Victory,Smuttynose,Rogue,etc...I guess thats just what I expect to be comparing other IPA's to. This was just not anywhere near that league..

CBennett, May 04, 2009
Photo of pandashaver
2.95/5  rDev -9.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 4.5

A - Nice Reddish orange transparent body, though it looks a bit too light for an IPA. Head was not at all impressive, subpar for the style. Lacing was half-way decent, but nothing great.

S - Mild floral hop aromas, characteristic but not very strong. You can definitely tell it's an IPA from the nose.

T - Very ordinary and nothing special, underwhelming. Definitely on the sweet side of IPAs but still left a bitter lasting aftertaste.

M - The biggest disappointment of this beer - very watery thin mouthfeel that makes it seem like a macrobrew with the IPA flavor added in. At least the bitter hop aftertaste lasts on the palate like it should.

D - High, only because it's really thin body and light IPA flavor. Way overpriced at $5 a draft at the Elbo Room (Albany, NY) by the way.

pandashaver, Apr 25, 2009
Photo of beer2day
3.1/5  rDev -5.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours yellow gold with light carbonation and a frothy two-finger head. Little retention. Decent lacing.

Nose is mainly citrus with a faint spiciness present. Lemon zest with a touch of cinnamon.

Hits flowery and very thin, almost watery in the mouth. Slight bitters and certainly below average IPA finish - more of a decent pale ale taste to this one.

I'd drink it again, but it would have to be on special and the only IPA available.

beer2day, Apr 24, 2009
Photo of JayNH
2.03/5  rDev -37.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A- Pours a clear straw color with a small foamy head.

S- Sugary sweet??? Almost Belgian-like... This is an IPA???? I'm confused...

T- Some earthy citric hops, almost no maltiness, just a sugary sweetness.

M- Watery, almost no body to it.

D- I don't want to finish this one.... I don't know what this beer is but it sure ain't an IPA.

JayNH, Apr 14, 2009
Photo of aristeros
3.05/5  rDev -6.7%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Pours lager-yellow into the glass, about a finger of white head that goes away more quickly than it probably should have, no lacing. Significant carbonation visible.

Smells of grapefruit, general citrus, and hops. Hops should be first, not last.

There's that citrus, malts, and hops a close third. The grapefruit actually -overpowers- the hops. Not as big a punch as an IPA probably should have. A solid IPA like, say, Stone is like a left hook, and this is like an action movie punch that was pulled a bit.

Lots of carbonation in the mouthfeel, crisp like it should be. Drinkability is good in that it won't interfere with my food and I can have several easily if I wanted to. Sort of like a Sierra Nevada "IPA inspired" ale.

Grabbed a six-pack of this because I was torn between New Belgium 1334, Paulaner, and Trying Something New at a place that didn't have much of a selection.

Looking at some of the other comments--"gateway beer" for friends you're trying to convert to a more bitter ale with body--I think there's a valid point there, and could see myself using Long Hammer like that, but a guy designed this beer, and not to convert his friends. I imagine a scenario in which the brewmaster was told to cut back on the hops to increase the appeal.

It's an IPA lite, but cranking up the hops on this one and giving it a little more time and you could potentially have something really interesting.

aristeros, Apr 13, 2009
Photo of thespaceman
3.03/5  rDev -7.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Poured from a 12oz bottle into a pint glass. Shows a nice amber in color, with a thick head and decent lacing and retention. Smell is of citrus like elements, a bit grassy and reserved, with a bit of malt spice. Up front, this beer has balancing issues. Too much malt like breadiness takes the hop profile and shoves it aside, I would have liked more zing from the hops but I was dissapointed. Mouthfeel is carbonated and slick, again, bitterness is low due to more malt being present. Overall, I would consider this more of a Pale then an IPA, IPA's should be balanced but still have a decadent like hop profile, and this one falls way short of that. I like Red Hook but hopefully they tweak this to show more of the hops and less of the weak malt flavoring that completely throws this brew out of sync.

thespaceman, Apr 12, 2009
Photo of willyumlong
2.33/5  rDev -28.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

bought this at a little bar cuz we missed the train and had an hour to kill before the next one
eh is that coors light or...
lemony?
not horrible but a little too fruity mostly lemon flavors, does taste clean but just not what i perfer. pretty much like a bud light thats got some lemons thrown in it.
not a whole lot of feel here, does anyone have a sprite?
not gonna drink this again, enjoyed trying it but wasn't worth $4.50 a glass or $1.50 for that matter, oh well now i know

willyumlong, Apr 09, 2009
Photo of torsoul
2.28/5  rDev -30.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I have to be honest, when I took the first sip of Long Hammer I thought someone was going to pop out of the closet and tell me it was a joke. This is not an IPA. This is borderline Golden Ale at best. Now, don't get me wrong, I've had worse beers, but never one that so blatantly labeled itself something it clearly wasn't!

The color is very dark, but not bad. The flavor and smell are nearly nonexistent. The mouthfeel is fine but ruined by the lack of flavor.

This is fine if you want something better than some big name American brews, but don't be fooled. Pass this up if you're looking for an actual IPA.

torsoul, Apr 08, 2009
Photo of nicnut45
4.08/5  rDev +24.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

I was surprised by the bad reviews for this beer. Kind of upset that the bros ripped on this one. Then when they give advise on reviewing a beer they ask you to use positive critism.

Appearance: Pours a hazy golden straw color. Not much head, thin white settles to a few patches.

Aroma: Floral, piney, malty. Good hop aroma, balanced out with sweet smelling hops. Syrupy sweet malt smell. Goes good together.

Taste: Good balance of malt and hops. Sweet at first then a nice bitter somewhat dry finish.

Mouthfeel: Thick syrupy. Lightly carbonated.

Drinkablility: I could drink many of these. A good hop presence for an IPA that isn't too dominating. Nice tasty hops without being too extravagant.

nicnut45, Apr 04, 2009
Photo of scottbrew4u
3.68/5  rDev +12.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: Golden with light orange honey color and clear with larger rising carbonation. Off-white head sits high. Great lacing as this goes down.
S: Floral hops with fresh grassy scent. Light clover honey smell and some lightly roasted malt aromas. A wheat smell comes through with a light fruitiness from the yeast.
T: Citrus and floral hop flavors with fresh apricot and honey flavors. Other flavors of fresh wheat and toasted grains are highlighted.
M: Medium body and crisp with a bit of alcohol warmth coming through near the end.
D: Easy on the eyes and easy on the palate this beer is quite nice for the style. It's one of my favorites from Redhook. I am not a huge hophead so a hardcore hop fan would be dissapointed with this IPA.

scottbrew4u, Apr 04, 2009
Photo of Yeastcakes
3.6/5  rDev +10.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4.5

Serving notes - cellar temp, 0.5L german glass.
A - spicy and floral hops, present but not overbearing.
A - Nice finger and a half of head upon pour but disappears rather quickly for an IPA. Clear, pale yellow in color.
M - light to medium body, some sticky-slickness from the hops, light to medium carbonation.
T - Nice forward spicy and floral hops from the aroma. Nice clean aftertaste without a lot of the bitter hop residue. Malt not in flavor but present enough to balance out the beer.
D - One of the cleaner IPAs. This would be a good beer to introduce someone who is turned off by more assertive IPAs to the style.

Yeastcakes, Apr 01, 2009
Photo of maximum12
3.1/5  rDev -5.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Well, this shouldn't take long.

Not a bad beer, drinkable, but about as mediocre a brew as I have ever tried. The only thing that rose above average was the smell, which was pretty good. Otherwise, middle-of-the-road all 'round. A beer to look for in wastelands of good taste.

maximum12, Mar 31, 2009
Photo of RedDiamond
4.1/5  rDev +25.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

They say that Long Hammer dates back to 1984 and is actually the original Ballard Bitter that's been revisited and repackaged. I won't refute that, but it seems like a stretch to add a touch of dry hopping and reinvent a bitter as an IPA. Those of us who recall the old Ballard Bitter (Ya, Sure, Ya Betcha) have a tough time reconciling that the two are even remotely related. They would outwardly appear to have no more in common than a Prius and a DeSoto.

Redhook frequently offers Long Hammer on cask at their Forecaster's Pub. The cask pour emits a luscious floral hop aroma on a bright copper body with modest haze and airy suds. The flavor is dominated by classic pine-citrus notes courtesy of Cascade and Willamette hops. It also hints at mandarin orange and is not overly bitter. The conditioned body is serene and inviting.

I've also drunk bottled Long Hammer and found it to be among the more palatable of the inexpensive, widely distributed IPAs. The abundance of low reviews here is puzzling, as this is a perfectly fine ale. In addition, it's available everywhere, often at favorable prices.

RedDiamond, Mar 30, 2009
Photo of HeroJH
3.9/5  rDev +19.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

I'm not sure why the scores are that low on this... I think this is a very well crafted beer. It says IPA, and no, it's not the punch you in the face 100 IBU style Imperial or Double, it's the normal style. Maybe more of a pale ale really? Reminds me of Sierra Nevada Pale ale. But anyway, I think this is a great "Gateway beer" and very accessible to a lot of people. It's well balanced and very easy to drink. I enjoy picking it up, and having it on a hot day.

A - Gold clear. Normal head, reduces to a light foam here and there, and around the edge.

S - A touch of caramel, grain and bitter hops if you really want it.

T - I like it... nice amount of bitter. Approachable to someone that hasn't had that much. Balanced, well done... Nothing complex, but that balance (for a bitter) is nice

M - very refreshing, light, crisp, clean. None of that weird tangy bitterness at the end, that I dislike.

D - well, just as I said in mouthfeel... it's just nice, and I think the balance and the easy mouthfeel on this make it highly drinkable! Great for when friends that don't know the 'world of beer' that come over.

Anyway, I'm a little dismayed that it's in the C's, but really, most of us are quite honest, and on this site, C+ is 'ok'. 'B' is Good, and A is outstanding. I heard some people recently lumping red hook in with the coors/bud thing. Well anything Anheuser-Busch. Anheuser-Busch owns 25% of redhook... probably more as an investment, diversification and a 'toe in' to what they probably knew was going to be a big area. And they don't have any say. Redhook is one of the pioneers in the craft brew movement, and they should be respected for that. They've been a successful pioneer because they're still accessible. They're like a Sam Adams in that sense. Red Hook was the first beer I had where I went, 'wow, I like this, why doesn't all beer taste this good'. So perhaps I'm a little biased ;-)

HeroJH, Mar 28, 2009
Photo of Jwale73
3.3/5  rDev +0.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

12oz. bottled served in a willibecker. Bottled on 02/09/09 stamped on the label. Poured a golden orange with excellent clarity and a one inch frothy, bright white cap. Head eventually recedes into a thin slick with tiny ringlets and a band around the edges of the glass. Copious tiny bubbles evident in solution. Nose reveals piny hops and some citrus qualities. Taste is consistent with nose, but is much more subdued than suggested by the aromas and finish is a little too clean for the style - not much hops presence lingers, but a bit of wheat comes out at the back. Mouthfeel is light-bodied and mildly effervescent. Somewhat bland for the style, fairly easy drinking, but a little too under-hopped.

Jwale73, Mar 25, 2009
Redhook Long Hammer IPA from Redhook Ale Brewery
75 out of 100 based on 2,797 ratings.