Fat Tire Amber Ale - New Belgium Brewing

Not Rated.
Fat Tire Amber AleFat Tire Amber Ale

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
81
good

7,563 Ratings
THE BROS
82
good

(view ratings)
Ratings: 7,563
Reviews: 1,947
rAvg: 3.59
pDev: 14.76%
Wants: 186
Gots: 1,451 | FT: 2
Brewed by:
New Belgium Brewing visit their website
Colorado, United States

Style | ABV
American Amber / Red Ale |  5.20% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: kbub6f on 10-07-2000

No notes at this time.
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Fat Tire Amber Ale Alström Bros
Ratings: 7,563 | Reviews: 1,947
Photo of schellsbeer
2.16/5  rDev -39.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

One word...OVERRATED!!!

In a few years, the hype will be over. This is by far not the best New Belgium has to offer. Everthing about this beer is average or below. Taste...what taste. There is hardly any. Don't get me wrong, this beer is very drinkable...if you like plain water. However, I found this beer to have little if at all any taste to it. Boring is what I call it. Now, some of their other beers, I like. This one, yeah....not so much. Come on people, get some taste buds. Expand your beer drinking vocabulary. Popular...yes, high priced...yes, worth the money...heck no!

Cool label though. Enough said.

Photo of scottfrie
2.17/5  rDev -39.6%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

12oz bottle in SA perfect pint.

A: Pours a light amber with hints of yellow-orange with a big foamy off-white head that slowly receded into a thin film that left impressive rings of lace down the glass.
S: Not picking up much, but is there isn't bad. Light notes of caramel malt, faint grassy hops, and a touch of grain.
T: Flavor is a sweet metallic coppery blast of syrupy malt and sour hops. Aftertaste is off putting. This is synthetic tasting.
M: Carbonation is very low and the mouthfeel is medium and slick. Body is syrupy.
D: Looks good, smells okay, but man no matter how many times I try this beer it still has that same nasty taste. NB other offering are usually fairly decent albeit not earth shattering, but I don't see how their staple beer has such a following.

Photo of NWer
2.18/5  rDev -39.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

12 oz. bottle poured into a Pilsner glass.

Quite frankly, I don't know what all the fuss is about.
Very bland beer, totally pedestrian. Flavors are difficult to ascertain with no hop feel - not that it should be a lot but there should be some kick to an amber and it's just not there.
A step up from your adjunct lagers but not by much.
I like amber ales but not this one.

Photo of JLeege
2.21/5  rDev -38.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

Appearance- Pours a clear amber with a bubbly white head, decent retention, a little lacing.

Smell- Bready malts. Sweaty socks, not very appealing.

Taste- Bready and biscuit malts. A bit earthy and hint of fruit. The doughy malt flavors pretty much over ride everything else. Simple and plain.

Mouthfeel- Medium body and carbonation. The best part of the beer.

Overall- I really don't understand the fascination with this beer, it is ok and plain at best. The breadyness of this gets very tiring, quickly. Meh, not for me.

Photo of Applesauce1
2.22/5  rDev -38.2%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

I had a tall glass of this at Applebee's near the Denver Airport while on my ski trip to Breckenridge.

Appearance: amber with a nice 1" head off the tap
Smell: some cereal malts??? this didn't seem too impressive
Taste: kinda tastes like a killian's...this did not seem like an amber ale....more like "better" macro lager like a killian's or yuengling...no hops presence
Mouthfeel: ehhh, pretty light body
Drinkability: I didn't feel like another one.

Photo of tjd112
2.24/5  rDev -37.6%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Had this on tap at some restaurant in Colorado

Appearance - Ugly amber with very little carbonation

Smell - Piss with bread in it

Taste = Bready but extremely watery

Mouthfeel - Medium bodied

Drinkability - Not very

Overall - Not a great beer, but still better than most adjunct lagers

Photo of hadleynj
2.25/5  rDev -37.3%

Fat Tire from a can. Looks good, tastes like onions.

Photo of vulgora
2.25/5  rDev -37.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

i have seen this beer every where , most bars , resturaunts what have you most places have it .
the art looks neat , ....
i tried it at $3 for 22 oz
and it just doesn't cut it for me , tastes like a light almost not much body or feel and well im just unimpressed ,
id rather buy colt 45 for half the price , .... i mean the flavor is lacking for a $3 beer

it just did not impress me , id rather drink coors or miller ....
if i want a good beer id buy magic hat #9

Photo of H8Ramsay
2.26/5  rDev -37%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 1 | overall: 4.5

The first is much better than the second which starts to taste a musty-cheesy

Photo of surfer4life
2.26/5  rDev -37%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Poured into a pint glass from a 22oz bomber.

A - Pours on the yellow side of amber, maybe just a tad darker than yellow. Small head, with average lacing. Freshness date on the bottle.

S - Smells a bit like a malt liquor to me. I get some corn in there, some other grains, but no floral hop nose at all. Faint sweetness, but again nothing defined enough to identify.

T - Not much taste really, I get what I smelled. Corn, some kind of sweetness, perhaps from syrup, but not to great. No hops detected at all, the malt is subpar.

M - Medium bodied and way undercarbonated. Mouthfeel is not pleasant at all.

D - I'm afraid I would rather go without. It's possible I got a bad bottle, but the drink before date has been maintained. I will try it again with hopes for a better outcome.

Photo of alysmith4
2.26/5  rDev -37%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Was excited to find this on tap at a pub in LA.. it seems it was a popular beer everywhere out there, even though it's from Colorado I think.

Regardless, I wasn't terribly impressed. There wasn't much to smell, and even less to taste. I kept taking sips looking for any soft of flavor, but kept coming up short. It was definitely a red ale, but a very mild one at that. Low in carbonation as well. Not much to report on this beer I'm afraid, and I even had another just to make sure - yet had the same experience. Great in color I must say, but lacking in all other areas. Not worth trying.

Photo of JoshBeer86
2.26/5  rDev -37%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

I had this beer on tap at a pizza joint. It didn't live up to the hype.

Appearance was dark, golden brown

Smell was hardly there

Taste was a little to sweet, even for an amber. It lacked complexity that I enjoy in many microbrews.

Mouthfeel was nice, with good carbonation.

Drinkability was fine, but the sweetness made it hard to finish. I will refrain from ordering this beer again.

Photo of beer272
2.27/5  rDev -36.8%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 1.5

Labeled as an amber, appearance more golden than amber.

*Appearance - nice, lacing, stabilized foam around rim. Yes the carbonation was pronounced when opened. Then the foam faded as others mentioned.

*Smell - slight malt sweet smell

*Taste - where the beer fell down. Has body. Very balanced between malt and hops. It looks like they hit hit the biscuit taste they wanted. I could not pick out the hop type, Cascade?

*Mouthfeel - ok

* Overall - I would not buy this beer again. I bought in Elkton, MD primary for the 22 oz bottles. Drank this Oct. 2011, ~60°F, expiration labeled Jan 1, 2012 (01 Jan12). Rats, have ~8 more bottles. Getting rid of this beer by putting it in the 'frig then drinking quickly.

+++

Update: I gave a bottle to a friend. He said it tasted like water, with no smell. The Busch lite he drinks is better. He gave the beer a 2 out of 10 only since it had alcohol. We both noted the color was more golden than amber.

My rDev (2.25-3.63)2.25 = 66.7%

Photo of theozag
2.28/5  rDev -36.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

This beer appears in the glass as a clear yet dark amber after pouring a deeper wood brown colors. The eggshell-white head fades very fast.

Smell is faint but what I can detect seems sharply sour.

The start of Fat Tire is rough with plenty of hop bitters. The beer then settles medium-bodied, bitter, and with a distinctly heavy taste. Flavors in this beer include caramel and oats, but it is overall slightly dry in the mouth and unpleasant. Finish provides the strongest of the flavors in this beer with just one extra bitter hit as Fat Tire heads out of your mouth. There is a lasting but not terribly bad aftertaste.

Photo of Carpentiere
2.32/5  rDev -35.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.25 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.25

Very metallic tasting. I won't try this again.

Photo of joecast
2.33/5  rDev -35.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

abv listed at 5.2% best before 17/mar/06

clear amber with a light orange tinge. light carbonation and almost no head. very little white lacing on the surface.

aroma is light, even after letting it warm a bit. mostly sweeter malt over anything else. nothing to rave about.

pretty dry, almost medicinal taste. comes across as a macro lager with some crystal malt really.

some plasticy quality about the mouthfeel. pretty tough to finish. in fact, i dont think i will.

ive read some good things about new belgium, and this beer in particular. maybe this is just a bad batch, but didnt see anything else available from them. disappointing.

Photo of TheSteiny
2.33/5  rDev -35.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A- Good, clear orange/amber color poured out of a bottle into a pint glass. Head starts out around one finger white foam. Quickly degrades into foamy film.

S- Smells sweet, yet hoppy.

T- Slightly sweet, slightly hoppy taste. Reminds me of a more flavorful PBR, but not much else, to be honest.

M- Very light beer. Carbonation is higher, as many lighter ales tend to be. Feels a little watery for my tastes.

D- Not the worst beer I've ever had. For a "craft" beer, I expected more flavor and less of a watery feel. Past that, it's decent, and if you can find it cheap, pick it up. If your choice is this or bud of some sort on tap, go with this.

Photo of DFN
2.38/5  rDev -33.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

This is one of those beers with a reputation that exceeds its actual wonderfulness. It's not awful, but overall I found it unexceptional in every way. I just drank about 2/3 of a bottle, and poured the rest down the sink. This never happens with a beer I really like.

Photo of merddyn2002
2.38/5  rDev -33.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Had this on tap in Clear Lake on Nasa Road 1 in the bar at the Holiday in near Hwy 3.

not much on the aroma at all, hard to pick up anything other than a faint malt.

Taste was smooth, but the finish left a taste faintly reminiscent of french fries for some reason. I originally got it for my wife because I was drinking. St. Arnold's Amber Ale. She didn't like her Fat Tire so I swapped glasses with her. After 2-3 drinks of the Fat Tire I gave it to a buddy who ended up finishing it off.

Mouth feel was as expected. Finish was short but as described above.

Photo of charlatan
2.38/5  rDev -33.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Bottle has December freshness date. Beer pours a fairly dark amber with a minimal head. It has an unpleasant musty basement smell which suggests malt domination. Its malty flavour reminds me at best of chocolate graham crackers, and at worst of stale digestives. Does have decent carbonation.

I had thought that perhaps my draught experiences of Fat Tire were unfortunately with stale beer, but apparently this was not the case.

Photo of DogFood11
2.4/5  rDev -33.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2.5

I'm having a bad night of reviews. This is the second beer in a row that had dissapointed to say the least.

The biggest problem I have with this beer is the heavy grainy/earthy smell and taste that you have to basically drink this quickly or the aftertaste will annoy you. Malty but this beer is really unfocused on what its supposed to be. It wants to be an amber ale but its to earthy/biscuity to qualify in my judgement. My wife tasted it as well and couldnt take another drink and she loves amber ale's. sometimes theres a reason that beers are on-sale all the time and this one seems to always be on-sale.

Photo of brewcrew76
2.41/5  rDev -32.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

22 oz Spring 2006 Chicago Inaugural bottle
Best before June 9 2006

A - A transparent/clear light amber/copper with a thin off white head. A very pale/watery looking beer.

S - Hint of biscuit and malt, wet cardboard or maybe even old vegetables, mild sour/vomit smell.

T - Earthy biscuit, slight yeasty taste, slightly nutty. All the flavors just taste off for some reason. I also get some wet cardboard or old vegetables again.

M - Thin to medium and dry. Aftertaste feels like when you are at the dentist and they take the cotton out of your mouth.

D - The different aspects of this beer to not mesh together very well and I think I would pass if offered another. I purchased a bottle for my wife because she was curious about all the hype surrounding its arrival in Chicago and I ended up having to finish the bottle for her she disliked it so much. Hopefully this will open the door to other NB beers in Chicago.

Photo of clickpush
2.42/5  rDev -32.6%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

Pour: draught to pint glass. Amber bodied beer with a half inch of head that likes to hang out, slowly letting its thick body dissipate into some nice lacings. No bubbles coming up through the beer.

Nose: Cardboard, peanuts, soy sauce, some light hop undertones, waxy. Boring and un-beer like.

Mouth: Chili pepper taste, Play-Dough, slightly sour, nutty, and a strange after taste like jarred jalapeños. The mouthfeel is good, but obviously does not improve the flavor!

Photo of Rumrunner
2.47/5  rDev -31.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

16 Oz. Pint style glass
This was not my favorite amber ale. I personally did not like it. The appearace is nice. Medium amber with a small head. Nice bubbles when looking through the glass. The smell was better than the taste. Nice biscuit scents with mild hops and a delicate fruitiness.

Here is my problem. The flavor. The biscuit turned to charred burnt toast. All the fruit flavors were gone and the malt took over and crushed the hops. No balance and the burnt flavor killed it for me.

I found the mouthfeel and the drinkability unpalatable. After every sip there was an oily feel in my mouth. This oily feel left a tang flavor that I did not enjoy. This ale did not go down well for me.

Photo of Peter1977
2.49/5  rDev -30.6%
look: 2.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

It Tasted a little flat

Fat Tire Amber Ale from New Belgium Brewing
81 out of 100 based on 7,563 ratings.