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!

La Trappe Quadrupel (Oak Aged) - Bierbrouwerij De Koningshoeven B.V.

Not Rated.
La Trappe Quadrupel (Oak Aged)La Trappe Quadrupel (Oak Aged)

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
96
world-class

464 Ratings
THE BROS
95
world-class

(view ratings)
Ratings: 464
Reviews: 143
rAvg: 4.29
pDev: 11.66%
Wants: 109
Gots: 145 | FT: 2
Brewed by:
Bierbrouwerij De Koningshoeven B.V. visit their website
Netherlands

Style | ABV
Quadrupel (Quad) |  10.00% ABV

Availability: Rotating

Notes/Commercial Description:
BATCH 1 (blended on June 1, 2010).
New Oak Heavy Toast - 18.2%
New Medium Acasia - 9.1%
Port Medium Burnt - 36.4%
Port Medium Toast - 36.4%

BATCH 2 (blended on July 26, 2010).
New Medium Oak Toast - 9%
Port Medium Burnt Toast (Amer. Oak) - 64%
Port Medium Burnt Toast (French Oak) - 9%
Port Medium Toast (French Oak) - 18%

BATCH 3 (blended on September 17, 2010).
New Oak Medium Toast - 18%
Port Medium Toast (French Oak) - 55%
La Trappe Q. Medium Toast (French Oak) - 27%

BATCH 4 (blended on 5 November 2010).
New Oak Medium Toast - 27%
Port Medium Toast (French Oak) - 9%
La Trappe Q. Medium Toast (French Oak) - 18%
La Trappe Q. Medium burnt (Amer. Oak) - 36%
New Oak Heavy Toast - 10%

BATCH 5 (blended on January 25, 2011):
New Oak Heavy Toast - 20%
White wine used Oak Heavy Toast - 80%

BATCH 8 (blended in October 2011):
Whiskey - 70%
New Fr. Oak Medium Toast - 30%

(Beer added by: PapaEugene on 11-06-2009)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of La Trappe Quadrupel (Oak Aged) Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 464 | Reviews: 143 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of e_dawg
1.75/5  rDev -59.2%

This is batch 8. According to the bottle there is "pleasant variation from batch to batch."

Pours a dark red-brown color. No head and not much lacing despite 10% abv.
Smells almost like a whiskey, with oak and muted fruit scents. Some burned toast in there too.
Taste is a smokey beef jerky, finishes with some sweet caramel.

Overall it's not very enjoyable. The smell is quite unique and even attractive, but the beer drinks like liquefied beef jerky. I'm glad I had the chance to try it, but keep in mind that this is not a "better" version of the normal La Trappe. This is a different beer entirely.

I realize my rating may be considered a bit stingy but I am drinking this without any consideration given to the La Trappe label or the high price of this beer. It is afterall still a drink, and unfortunately this one just isn't very good.

e_dawg, Nov 10, 2014
Photo of BeerDrinkingDiver
2/5  rDev -53.4%

BeerDrinkingDiver, Nov 06, 2013
Photo of kmshivel13
2/5  rDev -53.4%

kmshivel13, Aug 16, 2014
Photo of Chrysostom
2.18/5  rDev -49.2%
look: 2.75 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 1.25 | overall: 2

Presentation: small, 12.7 fl oz corked and caged bottle. Price: $14.99 per small bottle. I was warned off of this buy the liquor store man who's knowledgeable in Belgians, stating, "it tastes like an ashtray". I'm a smoker. I'll take the risk. I've not tasted the beer yet. (Edit at the end of my review: now that I've tasted it, his judgment was borne out, although it wasn't as bad as he claimed it to be.)

Batch 7. Poured at 50ºF.

A: Pours a very dark, relatively clear dried-blood red colour, with copious amounts of black yeast floaties/lees in the bottle (whether due to a poor pour or what, I don't know - I poured it gently and am generally good at pouring Trappists and bottle-conditioned ales). Hardly any appearance of carbonation, with a small, loose, soapy head that quickly recedes in to a ring. Lacing is surprisingly strong for such a weak head. The large amount of lees are unappetizing; for whatever reason they are there: appearance is no higher than 3.25 at most. I've still yet to taste the beer.

S: Stale smoke and ash. Nothing else comes through. 2.5.

T: Decent on the front-palate, displaying alcohol and dark fruit typical to the style, with a finish of incredibly dry, caustic stale ash, as if from an ashtray. There is an after-finish of sweetness. This beer coats the mouth. There is a mild malt backbone, and virtually non-existent hop character. Ash comes through strong. The charred oak character of this beer is SEVERELY unbalanced by anything else; if this was a Scotch whisky, maybe the alcohol would balance out the blackened oak taste.

Several more sips confirm my suspicion. The taste of this beer is not good, but it's not (that) horrible either. Below average.

M: Sweet water with an admixture of ash and alcohol. No carbonation, very unlively. Very poor. There is a sand-like feeling on the palate, however strange that may sound.

D: Almost nonexistent. No wonder this isn't served in 750mL bottles. I can't finish a 375mL.

O: Strongly disappointed with my first tasting of a Koningshoeven Trappist brew. I'll try some of their regular, non oak-aged stuff, next time. Speaking blasphemy, yet nevertheless true blasphemy, I would rather drink a BMC than this most any day, not even taking in to consideration the outrageous price ($30/750mL). Considering the price, this is a bad beer.

One thumbs down, one thumb horizontal, in the position of a Roman Magistrate deciding whether to give the death-sentence to the gladiator today, or whether to give him a stay of execution until the next time he's in the arena.

The beer looks like blood, and has a mild feel of sand: how fitting then, to say, as in the Sam Raimi Spartacus series, "Blood and Sand". Or as Mat Cauthon from the Wheel of Time would say, even more apropos, "Blood and bloody ashes" (as a curse), as this beer tastes like ashes.

Chrysostom, Mar 17, 2013
Photo of TubaDan
2.25/5  rDev -47.6%

TubaDan, Mar 20, 2014
Photo of josephwa
2.5/5  rDev -41.7%

josephwa, Mar 26, 2013
Photo of DMarlinJ
2.68/5  rDev -37.5%
look: 1.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.25

This was batch 9. Poured into a snifter. Heavy pour no head to speak of. Poured at 52 degrees
into a clean glass. I was alarmed at the pour. I had stored it in on my cellar floor in the dark, temp about 60 degrees should not have been a problem, others have done fine. Must have been the retail store or in shipping that made it go bad. Look stayed cloudy but no floaties.

It smelled ok, not spoiled but too much alcohol.

It had sour note with fruitiness. I don't care to go in-depth. Very disappointed because I had a batch 11 and it was very good. I rated it 4.5.

Mouth was flat. Unappealing.

Overall, I was very let down. Not often I get a bad beer. $15.99 down the drain, although I did drink it. Just suffered through it because I could not pour it out.

DMarlinJ, Aug 20, 2013
Photo of dunlap926
2.75/5  rDev -35.9%

dunlap926, Mar 03, 2014
Photo of alexhahn82
2.88/5  rDev -32.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Batch #3

A. Heavy brownish read in color with a non filtered appearance.

S. Smell is, well, disappointing, no real hints of oak, or as far as thats concerned anything at all, very tame.

T. Taste is very mild and tame, which could be seen as a positive thing given that it hides the the high ABV.

Mouthfeel: is very light with a heavy carbonation , very mild bodied and a soft finish.

Overall: The tamest most non memorable Trappist that I have had, if there was a style to tie it to I would call it a session Trappist, But this beer under-delivers for being a $15 bottle, disappointed, yes.

alexhahn82, May 04, 2011
Photo of notreallyme
2.9/5  rDev -32.4%
look: 2 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Batch 11 from 375 cl bottle. I paid $14. Generally I like or love Belgian Ales. This one was a big disappointment for me. The "cork" was made of some plastic that was very difficult to remove- I had to use a 16" set of Knipex pliers. Once I got past this issue I was excited about the pour. But disappointed that there was not even a millimeter of foam. This was seriously deficient in carbonation for me. I almost wanted to throw it out and drink something else. I did get through it and the taste was not so bad as it had complexity and flavor going for it. It didn't look pretty to me in a tulip glass-- Too thick, no bubbles, looked like flat cola to me. I haven't seen any Batch 11 reviews here so I thought this might add to the many reviews. Could be Batch 11 is particularly bad.

notreallyme, Jun 02, 2013
Photo of azerrima
3/5  rDev -30.1%

azerrima, Apr 08, 2014
Photo of BrokenStones
3/5  rDev -30.1%

BrokenStones, Jul 18, 2012
Photo of Vidal_Villarreal
3/5  rDev -30.1%

Vidal_Villarreal, Feb 19, 2013
Photo of drummermattie02
3/5  rDev -30.1%

drummermattie02, Feb 18, 2012
Photo of sennin
3/5  rDev -30.1%

sennin, Apr 28, 2012
Photo of sbricker
3/5  rDev -30.1%

sbricker, Mar 03, 2012
Photo of kustard
3.25/5  rDev -24.2%

kustard, May 11, 2013
Photo of Zman632
3.25/5  rDev -24.2%

Zman632, Mar 16, 2013
Photo of JackOfAll
3.25/5  rDev -24.2%

JackOfAll, May 29, 2013
Photo of Konkretek
3.25/5  rDev -24.2%

Konkretek, Aug 09, 2014
Photo of 2neardead
3.25/5  rDev -24.2%

2neardead, May 03, 2012
Photo of DavoleBomb
3.33/5  rDev -22.4%
look: 3.25 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

Poured into a goblet. K03E11 10:32, Batch 7 (I think, though I can't be sure since the "7" is printed on the black part of the label). I performed a feat of strength when I got this cork out.

3.25 A: Murky purplish brown color. Just a touch of beige head that didn't last too long.

3.75 S: Twould appear that this is one of the whiskey versions. Though I can identify the aroma as whiskey, it has a strange rubber/latex component to it. Despite how it sounds, it's not unpleasant. TONS of date aroma in this, probably more so than in any other beer I've sniffed. Caramel, fig, toastiness, and plum. Whiskey does a good job of not overpowering the base beer and for that I'm thrilled. Aside from the rubbery aroma, the whiskey offers a solid earthiness, plenty of peat, and oak. Strange, but quite nice.

3.25 T: The taste is fine, but it falls flat (more on that in the MF). The base beer can't compete with the whiskey despite the whiskey not being overly strong. Date, brown sugar, fig, toastiness, plum, and molasses are still there, but they all play second fiddle to the whiskey. It is for this reason that I believe most Belgian styles do not benefit from any flavored barrel treatment, though I still can't help myself from trying them. Anyway, peaty whiskey gives earth and oak again.

3.0 M: Lighter medium body. There isn't enough carbonation. I like my Belgians spritzy and bubbly and this doesn't have enough carbonation to fulfill that. Otherwise, it's not bad. Goes down super easy.

3.25 D: It's an easy drink, but it doesn't have enough quality in the taste or mouthfeel to justify paying $15 for it. Give it a try if you must.

DavoleBomb, Feb 22, 2013
Photo of GRG1313
3.5/5  rDev -18.4%

GRG1313, Nov 11, 2013
Photo of largadeer
3.5/5  rDev -18.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Bottle from Gourmet Haus Staudt. Batch 3.

Muddy amber, atypically pale for a quad. The head rises fairly high, but quickly settles to a film. There's some scattered lacing.

There's a ton of banana on the nose, totally uncharacteristic of the style but fairly enjoyable all the same. Some phenolic spice, alcohol and spicy oak round things out.

The palate likewise has a huge ripe banana flavor. Sweet, malty, lightly boozy and vinous. I don't get a ton of oak, not even much tannin in the finish. Spicy phenols appear in the finish, along with mild but noticeable alcohol. Ends on a semi-dry note.

Overall it's a pretty good beer, though the huge banana character was unexpected and not very quad-like.

largadeer, Feb 25, 2011
Photo of paulmcm
3.5/5  rDev -18.4%

paulmcm, Dec 06, 2012
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
La Trappe Quadrupel (Oak Aged) from Bierbrouwerij De Koningshoeven B.V.
96 out of 100 based on 464 ratings.