Yuengling Dark Brewed Porter - Yuengling Brewery

Not Rated.
Yuengling Dark Brewed PorterYuengling Dark Brewed Porter

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
77
okay

981 Ratings
THE BROS
79
okay

(view ratings)
Ratings: 981
Reviews: 391
rAvg: 3.36
pDev: 16.37%
Wants: 28
Gots: 100 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Yuengling Brewery visit their website
Pennsylvania, United States

Style | ABV
American Porter |  4.70% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 12-03-2001

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (11) | Events
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Yuengling Dark Brewed Porter Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 981 | Reviews: 391
Photo of nlmartin
1.12/5  rDev -66.7%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

Served from a bottle into a pub glass.

Appearance: The beer poured a good looking blackness with a cola colored head. No lacing in evidence. This is the high point of the beer.

Smell: Slight malty background with a funky grain smell noted.

Taste: Little bit of hoppyness and a bitter aftertaste. No chocolate, coffee or other goodies that porters should have. This taste like bilge water at best.

Mouthfeel/ Drinkability: The beer looked good and raised my hopes for a good beer drink. Unfortunately the beer smells funky in a bad way and taste remarkably like bilge water. The beer is thin and fizzy. This beer sucks! Maybe some of the other beers in the yuengling line are ok. I may try another later.

Photo of crossovert
1.22/5  rDev -63.7%
look: 3 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

twist-off

Pours brown with a tan head.

It smells like a big fart. There is also a hint of cocoa and metal.

The first thing I notice is this beer is incredibly watery, not even by style guidelines. It reminds me of guiness more than anything far from an American porter. Hint of metal, mineral water and coffee are the main flavors. There is an adjunciness to it.

This beer is really, really bad.

Photo of mjc410
1.39/5  rDev -58.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1 | taste: 1 | feel: 4 | overall: 1

I saw this on tap during a brief trip to my effective watering hole in my hometown. It was poured into a Nonic, and developed a nice looking very light tan head that fell very quickly. Almost opaque black.

I can't smell anything but a little earthy hops, and perhaps that smell that I've always associated with macro lagers...am I prejudiced?

The taste is virtually non-existent. Really, just like the smell. I thought perhaps I needed to clear my pallette after the DFH Indian Brown I just had, but a glass of water didn't improve the situation.

The mouthfeel is done well, pretty thick, with low carbonation. Makes a smooth bland beer.

There's no reason to ever drink this. I'm surprised they brewed such a dark beer without any roasted flavors!

Edit: I saw a review of Yuengling Lager that mentioned Porterine (the agent used for darkening some low-quality beers), which is a corn syrup-derived compound. That's how they get the color without the flavor. This make's me want to lower my score even more...

Photo of Drevis
1.41/5  rDev -58%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

Let me start out by saying this is my first review and I didn't ever plan on reviewing but had after trying this beer. The looked is okay it has good color but was lacking in the head department and looked way to carbonated to me. The smell is a little hard for me to explain so I'm just going to say that I found it unpleasant and way to reminiscent of something like bud light. Here is my biggest problem, the taste. Now porters and shouts are by far my favorite types of beer, they are like liquid dessert to me. This beer has not one quality of the many porters I have had in my days. The taste to me is a sour and minerally. The feeling I found to be over carbonated, water, and dry (not actually sure if that belongs here). Anyways overall from first drink to the last I didn't enjoy this beer.

Photo of oelergud
1.8/5  rDev -46.4%
look: 4 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

Very deep ruby body with low carbonation. Good looking brown tiny to small bubbled head that falls quickly and leaves little lace.
Pretty offensive smell, industrial and chemical.
The taste is slightly better but not by much.
Nasty crap, down the drain!

-Oelergud

Photo of tiltedglass
1.98/5  rDev -41.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

There's nothing wrong with a common darker brew, but I think this barely counts as a porter. It has no depth of character and no sour mash hangover, which are the two main qualities of a true porter to me. No sense even talking hops or body here. Why not pan this completely? Because if you think of it as a dark beer, a dark lager that is, you have a quite solid, drinkable brew. And affordable.

But stack this against a good mass market porter like the superb Smuttynose Porter or even the widely available very good Sierra Nevada Porter and this tastes wimpy and dull. The overtones are pleasant but really subtle. The body is (for a supposed "porter") watery and the bubble spikey, smelling of forced carbonation. Even the standard and fairly cheap darkish beer in Upstate New York, Saranac Black and Tan, is superior for taste and complexity.

Photo of Naes
2.04/5  rDev -39.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This one is very deceivingly dark and has hues of amber showing through when held up to the light. The head is tan and fleeting.

The smell is surprisingly hopy and bitter.

As for the taste, very watery for a porter. Although it does have a semi bitter after taste.

Mouth feel: watery, but it does have a good balance of carbonation.

Drinkability: Smooth and easy to down, but not one that I would have another of. It leaves me craving for a Robust.

This beer would be great as an introduction to those who think that all porters are made of mud. It just may help convert some minds that think that all dark beers are gross.

Overall, a fair porter, but not for me.

Photo of Sixpoint
2.11/5  rDev -37.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Ouch. I just did not like this beer at all. It did not stand out for me in any of the categories.

First of all, the beer had a weird smell. I was expecting a full-bodied sharpness from the black and crystal malts, and maybe some flavor hops. Instead, I got some weird estery smell, and it was not pleasant at all.

The taste was unbalanced; there was only a thin-bodied whisper of crispness and the hops tasted stale.

I was expecting a decent amount of body and mouthfeel to balance the sharpness of the black malt, but the beer was paper thing.

It's too bad such a classic American brewery has not made a classic beer in a deserving fashion.

Photo of RoyalT
2.13/5  rDev -36.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Appearance – Very dark brown in color with a little carbonation and a smallish head.

Smell – The nicely roasted malt aroma is offset by some rather cheap smelling grain.

Taste – I really enjoyed the roasted malt flavors, but there was a slight sour tange that made this one disappointing.

Mouthfeel – The cheap carbonation and thin body earned this one low marks.

Drinkability – I was barely able to finish this rather lame attempt at the style.

Photo of burkyburk
2.17/5  rDev -35.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

I drank this because it was the only beer available.

The smell was decent, dark fruits and a little chocolate.

The taste was less than average. Very bland. Nothing stuck out to me. I initially smelled dark fruits but the taste wasn't there.

The mouthfeel was fine, but like previously mentioned, nothing popped out at me and grabbed my palate. Very drinkable.

Photo of JohnnyDuvel
2.18/5  rDev -35.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

I kind of like their lager (and certainly think that it's better than the "big three"). I was surprised to see this in one local store, as I had read about it but never saw it. The first time I tried this, I thought it was horrible. I didn't review it, thinking maybe it was just the wrong night or something. I gave it another shot tonight, and the taste of this beer is sickening to me. It starts out o.k., with a nice appearance and aroma. The tatse is hard to describe, but I'm a big porter fan, and I've never tasted anything like this. I poured it down the drain after two sips. This may be the worst tasting beer I've ever had.

Photo of Guinness4me
2.19/5  rDev -34.8%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Since hubby knows I'm not a Yuengling fan, he gave me this beer in a blind test. I knew it was a porter, but that's about it. I'm still not a Yuengling fan.

This porter poured as it should, a dark, coffee brown with a tan head that foamed nicely when swirled. It left almost an oily lace on the glass.

Take your car keys and hold them tightly in your hand until they're sweaty...now take a big whiff. Ack. The boquet of this beer has the unique scent of metallic body odor. I never knew that combo existed before this moment.

The taste was not as offensive as the smell, but still not a great beer in my opinion. The taste of briny green olives hit my tongue first, followed by the same odd metallic taste/smell. Green bananas and a splash of coffee finished the swallow.

The mouthfeel was unoffensive but had an oily feel to it. It lingered a little too long.

I'll finish this glass, but I won't drink again anytime soon.

Photo of rickyleepotts
2.19/5  rDev -34.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 1.75

First off, look where the brewery is. Fun! I have actually been to Pottsville. I have heard rumors then named the town after me. But I will leave that for you to decide. Also, we have to thank Scott for this. He brought us two bottles of this on his last trip to the Valley. He actually handed them to us after a pint at Fate Brewing Company right here in Scottsdale. He will be vital in the success of our list as much as he travels. Cheers, Scott!

I haven't had this beer before, but I am a HUGE fan of Yuengling. We couldn't get it in Indiana, but every time I went to Florida I would grab some. There were times I wouldn't make it out of the airport before I grabbed a pint. We moved to Arizona, and can't get it here, either. We have a bottle of Yuengling left, and thanks to our good friend Dennis, he snagged us a can of Yuengling Light the last time he was on vacation. We will be doing an "off the wall" review of those two beers next. Sad we can't get them here, but it makes the beer that much more enjoyable. Cheers!

In the Glass: The beer is pitch black in the glass. It has a nice thin white head with a carbonated lace. Hearing how thin this beer tastes has me concerned about my overall enjoyment of it, but the fact this recipe dates back to 1829 is pretty exciting. That, and it comes from the oldest brewery in the United States.

Nose: Not much going on here. There is a subtle malty aroma, but nothing to write home about. It's actually quite bland, to be honest. If I am getting anything it's a nice dark chocolate aroma. Granted, I have a glass of hops sitting there that I have been sipping on. Beats the Rolling Rock and Natural Ice I had at dinner! By the way, Culinary Dropout is a great restaurant if you are ever in the Valley.

Flavor: What flavor? There isn't much going on here. It is lightly carbonated, but the flavors don't really come out until the aftertaste. To be completely honest, this beer is boring with very little character. This is NOT a typical porter, that's for sure. I wonder what makes it "dark brewed"...

Mouthfeel: There is a light carbonation up front, but the beer is easy to drink. It is quite thin on my palate, offering very little body. If i was doing a blind taste test with this, I would never consider this a porter. I know that is the point… but add a little creaminess to it, or something. You do get a little bit of chocolate malt character toward the finish, but it comes and goes just as fast.

Aftertaste: There isn't much aroma on this. There isn't much flavor. There also isn't much in the aftertaste. I am not getting much of anything, really. I get this is an old recipe… but maybe they should consider changing the recipe to keep up with the modern craft beer revolution.

They might have named Pottsville after me, but this isn't a beer that I would approve them brewing in my town! (I am kidding… they didn't really name Pottsville after me. Or did they?) I will stick with my Yuenling and leave the dark brewed porter for the birds.

Photo of CRJMellor
2.2/5  rDev -34.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Pours black with red highlights and 3/4 inch head.
Aroma is attentuated citrus with some sweet chocolate in the background.
Flavor is awful, simply awful. Such odd sweetness and citrus mixture that it tastes like OJ and beer together.
Mouthfeel is hypersweet, no bittering or nuttiness or anything clost to resembling a porter.
Drinkability is awful, simply undrinkable stuff. First beer in a long time that I threw away.

Photo of chicagoanbeerone
2.2/5  rDev -34.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

not to much aroma . good beer but could be better needs more character. It is smooth but more of a lager dark beer. The apparence was dark but very close to a lager. overall worth trying but not somethnig really that special. could not taste the alcohol but i have had way better porters. It had taste of alot of water and vey little coffe beans typical dark beer more of a weak porter
would not buy again

Photo of IMincedTheKing
2.23/5  rDev -33.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

Pours almost black with a bit of brown at the edges. A tight mocha head vanishes pretty quickly.

The aroma is roasted malts and chocolate with a nutty edge. A sour, adjuncty characteristic is present as well.

In the mouth, it's dry and thin with no standout flavors. Roasted malts and not much else. A hollow finish with a slightly bitter astringency.

The only way I'd drink this is if it was offered at a party with no alternatives and I really wanted to get smashed.

Photo of charlzm
2.27/5  rDev -32.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Consumed March 5th, 2012. Poured into a pint glass.

Beer is a clear dark brown, a few shades lighter than any other porter I've seen, and sports a one finger tan head. Minimal sheeting/lacing.

Aroma is restrained. It's actually a lot like a Newcastle: slightly nutty with a vague caramel maltiness.

Flavor is weak, sporting only a vague porter character. More a brown ale due to the malt character (which can be charitably described as caramel and toffee). Sort of adjuncty aftertatse as well, like rice or corn. Weird and totally lacking in smoke, chocolate or coffee flavors. No bitterness.

Slightly thick in the mouth and slightly dry on the finish.

As a porter, this is uninspiring at best.

Photo of drugsbunny
2.28/5  rDev -32.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

I was a fan of the Yuengling brewery before I became acquainted with the better American microbrews, so I still look at their products optimistically. But this beer does not invoke any good feelings after drinking it. Yuengling Porter is a watery version of their lager. It is a porter in looks only. No hint of any chocolate or mocha flavors. Weak hop bitterness. Just all around weak. So many other decent porters to choose to ever drink this beer.

Photo of Folderol
2.29/5  rDev -31.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Wouldn't it be nice to find that a well-distributed old-line brewery from Pennsylvania makes a damn good porter? Fortunately, one does: Lion Brewery (Stegmeier Porter). This Yeungling stuff on the other hand may as well be ordinary bland American lager with some caramel color added. It smells like a plain yellow lager, all bread and yeast and no malt, let alone dark malt. The taste is a bit sour and tastes like the big brewery beers that turned me off of beer before I discovered stouts. There's a hint of chocolate malt roast here and there but it's way in the back, barely noticeable. The appearance was the only thing right about it: dark brown with a nice creamy head. All in all, pretty much a bust. Maybe this passed for Porter back in 1940, but by today's standards, US or UK, it's nothing more than a brown macro lager.

Photo of kojevergas
2.3/5  rDev -31.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

"Dark Brewed", eh? What does that even mean? 12 fl oz brown glass bottle with twist-off cap acquired at Wally's Wine in Westwood, California, and served into a conical Guinness pint glass in me gaff in low altitude Los Angeles, California. Reviewed live. I don't recall the cost. I believe this is me first beer from Yuengling.

A: Pours a two finger head of slight tan colour, slight cream, okay thickness, and bad (~40 second) retention. Colour is a solid black littered with an abundance of carbonation bubbles. No yeast particles are visible, though it's nontransparent. No bubble show.

Sm: Dark malts, caramel, chocolate malt, and a light hint of roasted barley. A mild strength aroma. Rather predictable for a porter.

T: Light roast and caramelized malts comprise the weak foundation, which feels empty rather than full-bodied. Dark malts fill it out somewhat, but not much. Sparse chocolate malt is there when I really search for it. Otherwise, there's no complexity or subtlety. One of the most simple flavor profiles I've experienced in a porter. That said, it's not a bad taste. Boring and bland, certainly. No yeast or alcohol comes through.

Mf: A touch dry and coarse for the style actually, a feature I quite fancy. No cream. Slight overcarbonation. A touch too thick and heavy on the palate for its lack of flavour.

Dr: A generic porter from Yuengling with little to offer craft beer fans. Almost tastes like more of a schwarzbier to be fair. I certainly wouldn't get this again, but I support Yuengling as a better brewery than Budweiser or Millercoors. This is better than most American macrolagers. It's drinkable but low quality.

D+

Photo of BuckeyeNation
2.3/5  rDev -31.5%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Deep, dark brown with dark cherry highlights. I can't quite see light all the way through the glass even when I hold it up to my front window. Of course it's nighttime (just kidding). The head is light chocolate brown and looks insubstantial. It fizzed pretty aggressively and dropped to a thin film within minutes. Lace? Nope.

The first question that comes to mind as I smell the beer is: 'this is a porter?' There's very little oomph behind the nose and what's there isn't making me think porter. Weak dark lager at best. The flavor isn't much better. This may be the worst porter that I've had yet. For starters, it has almost no chocolate or coffee notes whatsoever. Mildly roasted dark malt with a sour 'bite' is about it. It's also way too thin and fizzy.

I'm not impressed by Yuengling Porter. No sir, not at all. This brewery seems to have somewhat of a loyal, cult following, but after sampling two of their offerings, I fail to see the attraction.

Photo of four2oh
2.31/5  rDev -31.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

living in ohio where there is no yuengling, i had high hopes for an elusive beer...the only way i can describe it is, a beginner porter...i felt the carbonation was too much..im used to a much flatter more robust porter, that has the flavor, the long finish, etc...what i noticed immediately was how quickly the taste was gone, unlike some of the other porters ive had...i had this porter at a get together with friends, many of my friends tried it and liked it (never trying a robust porter), so now thanks to yuengling, i have several friends that are currently drinking porters from great lakes brewing and thirsty dog brewing company..one of my friends mentioned that the yuengling was a porter with training wheels..but those training wheels came off when said person tried a Leghumper from thirsty dog, and an edmund fitzgerald from great lakes...

appearance- decent color, but the head had alot of bubbles going on..

smell-smelled the like the bottle it came out of

taste-crisp, and a quick finish

Photo of DrinkinBuddy
2.33/5  rDev -30.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured into a pint glass a extremely dark almost black with red hues. Head was a very thin, not frothy what so ever. No lacing followed. Smelled very faintly of roasted coffee. Taste wasn't appealing either, slight roasted coffee and very little balance. Drinkability wasn't good either. So far, this was the worst porter I've tried. I personally wouldn't try it again.

Photo of Stimack
2.36/5  rDev -29.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I remember years ago having this brew and enjoying it, and at $5.50 a six-pack I thought I would give it a try. Well I guess over the past few years my taste buds have changed a bit. While this brew looks very nice, the flavors to me where seriously lacking in any character, very pedestrian and slightly off. The brew looks great dark brown/light black color with a good-sized tan head that had great retention and left a nice amount of lacing. The flavors just don't do it for me, reminds me of a basic bland lager in taste. The flavors seem to have a strange astringency to it, but not from a charcoal, etc. It took me a while to finish that six-pack as I seemed to only reach for one when my fridge was empty of anything else. Will not get this one in the future as my palette has changed to much.

Photo of Bierleichen
2.44/5  rDev -27.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

a sad excuse for a partner not a bad beer but just like everything this brewery makes... subpar

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Yuengling Dark Brewed Porter from Yuengling Brewery
77 out of 100 based on 981 ratings.