Dragonmead Under The Kilt Wee Heavy - Dragonmead Microbrewery

Not Rated.
Dragonmead Under The Kilt Wee HeavyDragonmead Under The Kilt Wee Heavy

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
86
very good

197 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 197
Reviews: 120
rAvg: 3.82
pDev: 15.45%
Wants: 13
Gots: 13 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Dragonmead Microbrewery visit their website
Michigan, United States

Style | ABV
Scotch Ale / Wee Heavy |  7.80% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: putnam on 10-17-2002

Produced in the style of a Scottish Export Ale this beer is big on taste and body. Imported Scottish Ale Malt is combined with Roasted Barley and Crystal malt to give this beer a unique taste and aroma. Golding and Fuggles Hops help to balance out the taste of this unique beer.
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 197 | Reviews: 120
Photo of jampics2
1.56/5  rDev -59.2%
look: 2 | smell: 1 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1

12oz bottle from Tiffany's in K-Zoo. Purchased a few months ago on a road trip to Bells and stored in my beer fridge.

Opens with a huge "psst" and starts gushing. Oh no, do we have an infected beer here? Poured into my snifter, it's 1/2 beer and 1/2 head. Beer is reddish brown and the head is off white. It sticks around but doesn't leave lacing.

Smells of sour cherry, brown sugar, nuttiness, and failure. Taste is more of the same - this really reminds me of Shorts PB&J. No hint of Scottish ale or Wee Heavy. This is clearly infected and really bad.

Mouthfeel is sparkly and like pop rocks on my tongue. Drinkability is nonexistent. Perhaps one of the worst beers I've ever had, infected or not. Avoid at all costs, I spent like $4 on this bottle. Oh well, at least I didn't get a 6 pack. Down the drain with you, Dragonmead.

Photo of readbaron
1.97/5  rDev -48.4%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 1.5

Arrrgh. This must be an infected bottle.

Starts off looking good - ruddy dark brown with a bit of head.

However, from there it goes quickly down hill. Smell isn't terrible - there ate some wee-heavy like notes. Sweet malt and caramel, but theyre covered by sour fermented cherries. Boo.

Taste is no good. Tart initially, then mellows into a milder wer sweet malty profile before finishing with an odd amalgam of the two. Tastes refermented.

Feel is surprisingly good. Creamy, smooth, medium bodied.

I wish I had a non infected version.

Photo of chinchill
2.08/5  rDev -45.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.75 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Undated 12 oz bottle served in a snifter.

Pours dark but clear, with a tan head of moderate size and retention. Minimal lacing.

Aroma: more like wine vinegar than Scotch Ale.
Flavor: Some vinegar here too, about matching the dark malts. Light smoke in the finish.

O: "Unique taste" indeed. Probably not at its best, but then again the bottle was from a reliable store, and carefully cold-stored for just a few months. I note other reviewers have reported "bad' versions of the bottled ale.

Photo of dudemuskie
2.1/5  rDev -45%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Appearance- Hard pour builds short, quickly fading light creamy beige colored head. Appears to be very low CO2. Deep, hazy amber in color.

Aroma- Rich caramel, prunes, dried tart cherries, sweet juicy malt, and a whisper of roast.

Flavor- Starts off with a slightly sour kick- may have picked out an infected/contaminated bottle! Tart dried cherries and acetic sourness dominate, with some caramel and roast notes lost well beneath. Kinda makes for a nice sour beer, though its a bit disappointing that its nothing like the Wee Heavy it should be!

Mouthfeel- Slightly mouth puckering sourness gets the salivary glands going. Bacterial infection must have whittled down the residual sugars and unfermentables because this wee heavy is much lighter in body than it should be, and is almost on the verge of being dry! Some residual stickiness, but nothing close to what is expected for a Wee Heavy.

Overall- Sad I couldnt have this beer in its unspoiled glory, but I am still finding myself enjoying what is left of the complexities of this brew beneath a sour blanket. Dragonmead should consider deliberately souring some of this Wee Heavy! Next time I am in MI I will snag another bottle because I have heard nothing but good things about their brews! Hopefully I have a better experience next time around! My score is style based (as I said, its not bad soured!).

Photo of StoutHunter
2.53/5  rDev -33.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I picked up a bottle of Dragonmead's Under The Kilt Wee Heavy last week for $2.79 at The Lager Mill. It's been a long time since I've had this beer and I thought it was about time to revisit it and give it a review, so lets see how it goes. No visible bottling date. Poured from a brown 12oz bottle into a snifter.

A- The label looks ok and it goes a little with the name, but I don't think it's too eye catching. It poured a nice dark brown color that took on more of a crimson hue when held to the light with just a thin ring of bubbly light ten head that quickly faded to nothing and it didn't leave any lacing behind. This wasn't a good looking beer, the color was nice, but the head, retention and lacing never showed up.

S- The aroma starts off with a higher amount of medium sweetness that has a honey like aroma to it with the malts being the first to show up and they impart a mixture of sweet malts, caramel malts, slightly stale malts, caramel and toffee like aromas with some very noticeable tobacco leaf aromas. Up next comes the dark fruits with the raisins sticking out the most and that makes for a sherry like aroma when combined with the sweetness and there's just a slight nutty and a light cardboard like aroma. This beer had a decent aroma, but it didn't seem too true to style and it did have a couple off aspects.

T- The taste seems to be pretty similar to the aroma and it starts off with a lower amount of high sweetness that's still a little honey like with the malts still being the first to show up and they impart same aspects that they did in the aroma, but this time it's the sweet malts, caramel, toffee and tobacco that seems to stick out and it make for a unique flavor. Up next comes the dark fruit which are exactly the same as they were in the aroma and they impart a heavy sherry like flavor. On the finish there's no bitterness with some more sweetness lingering into the aftertaste along with some tobacco, toffee and lots of sherry. This wasn't a good tasting beer, the sweet and sherry like flavors seemed to dominate this beer.

M- Not the smoothest, cloying, a little sticky, flat, on the thicker side of being medium bodied with a very low amount of carbonation. The mouthfeel was poor, it needed some actual carbonation to it and the cloying aspect didn't help either.

Overall I didn't like this beer and I thought it was a poor example of the style, the taste didn't remind me much of a Wee Heavy and I thought it tasted more like a poorly brewed Old Ale. This beer didn't have good drinkability, it wasn't the smoothest, it was cloying, a little sticky, flat, not too filling and the taste didn't do a good job of holding my attention, half the bottle is enough for me, anymore than that and I think it would really start to wear on me. What I like the most about this beer was the aroma, it wasn't bad and it was fairly unique, but it just wasn't true to style. What I liked the least about this beer was how off of the style it was, the only aspect I think that could be identified to be Scotch Ale like would be the appearance, other than that it would be a tough sell to convince me this is what a Wee Heavy is suppose to taste like, I also didn't like how it had pretty much no carbonation. I wouldn't buy this beer again and there's a good chance I would turn it down if I was offered one. I wouldn't recommend this as a beer or a Wee Heavy, it's not a great example of either. All in all I didn't enjoy this beer, it just had too many things wrong with it and it didn't do justice for the style. This is now my least favorite Dragonmead beer and it's now one of my least favorite Wee Heavys. Better luck next time guys, this one needs a lot of work.

Photo of kbutler1
2.78/5  rDev -27.2%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Bottle. Poured into a tulip glass a VERY dark copper brown color with a slight tan head that settles and then collars around the glass. The aroma on this is...interesting, with a sour fruit like smell mixed with caramel, and vegetable. Medium mouthfeel with a creamy texture. The taste is I think a little better than the aroma with a soft, subdued spiced apple taste mixed with some notes of alcohol. Also has a sour pear taste. Not terrible but like no other Scotch Ale I have ever had before.

Photo of akorsak
3.03/5  rDev -20.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A 12 oz bottle from a Dark Lord day trade with brewcrew76.

A: The ale pours with a whole lot of head. The first pour, quickly aborted, resulted in a mammoth head that exceeded 6 (!) fingers. The head to beer ratio was a solid 4:1. Even on settling, the second pour created a 2 or so finger head. The wee heavy's body is a dark brown, almost stout, color that allows almost no light through.

S: The nose has an undercurrent of thicker, smoky malts that is dominated by a stronger caramel aroma.

T: The flavor seems to more stout-like, chocolate and burnt, than wee heavy-like, smoky and malty. It also finishes with a slight sourness that conjures up a low-key flanders red. The finish kicks back to a sweet caramel malty body. There is an absence of smoky flavors that I often look forward to in a wee heavy.

M: The mouthfeel has a lot going on, too bad none of it screams wee heavy.

D: One bottle is enough for me, the flavors are intriguing, even boundary-pushing, but they just don't do it for me.

Photo of levifunk
3.05/5  rDev -20.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

a - pour is pretty dark with little carbonation. a small tan head forms, but dissipates quickly.

s - some nice dark fruit sweetness....plum. scotch ale yeast and caramel. some grainy smell.

t - somewhat weak flavor. some plum sweetness and a bit of a roasted flavor, but very grainy.

m - medium body, but kind of watery and thin.

overall - not a scotch ale worth seeking out. while i would still consider it a scotch ale, its pretty close to being called a scottish ale due to the weak flavor and thin body.

Photo of abar22
3.06/5  rDev -19.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Some quick notes...

Murky brown, off white head, solid cap, no lace.

Toffee, slightly sour grapes. Not bad but not a Wee Heavy.

There is malt in this beer but this sourness owns the taste. Where's the smoke? Peat? It doesn't taste bad but this is more like a malty ale with a kriek blend. Good but not the style at all.

The sour adds a puckering bitterness to the beer. Again it doesn't scream Wee Heavy.

A good beer overall but I'm not sure what it's supposed to be. The sourness reminds me of Three Philosphers but there's no mention of it on the bottle or packaging. It's not a bad beer overall but it misses the style mark like crazy.

Photo of rings
3.16/5  rDev -17.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

One of their better known brews is Under the Kilt, a Scottish style export ale. With an attention grabbing name, it's often the first contact many drinkers have with Dragonmead.

A hefty 7.8 percent ABV and 1.080 O.G., this is no training wheels brew. It pours a deep, rich amber, nearly brown in color, but with nary a head to speak of. The nose is sweet, molasses and dark fruit in aroma, as is the first sip. Very rich, the sweetness pours over the tongue and almost demands a slow drinking pace. This may be an advantage, however, as the flavors open up at warmer temperatures.

Towards the end, there was a hint of sour tang, probably due to age, but this was nonetheless a satisfying interpretation of a rather uncommon style and is definitely recommended.

Photo of gustogasmic
3.17/5  rDev -17%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

DUDE !!!! I was less than a half-second into the pour of this beer into my oversized-flute-shaped glass, when the head was already foaming out the top! Big, puffy, caramel head all over my kitchen table!!!! WTF? Almost half the beer went into the sink in the form of foam as i slowly, slowly, poured it off. The beer itself is beautiful, but the ridiculous foam knocks the appearance down.

Phew, now that that's over- veyr murky dark burgundy-brown; light only comes through on the edges. Yeast can be seen moving around the bottom and getting teased around by the slow but constant carbonation.

The smell is very apple-juicy, with dark toffee malts distantly in the background.

It looks like I've got some oxidization here- the malts are very well-balanced, but now too subdued, as the apple-juicy notes have begun to dominate.

A really nice ballsy mouthfeel, as I hope for in scotch ales. This aspect of the beer hasn't suffered from the age. Nice and full, with a creamy leave that sticks the beer's flavor to your tongue.

I'll give this beer the benefit of the doubt for the "overall" category, and wouldn't hesitate to try it again, fresh.

Photo of brentk56
3.19/5  rDev -16.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Appearance: Pours a cola brown color with ruby highlights and a Brobdingnagian head with excellent retention

Smell: Odd, fruity aroma, like tamarind juice that has gone a little sour

Taste: Opens with a sour, fruity taste that has sweet, brown sugar undertones; the flavor profile becomes a little sweeter after the swallow, but the sour element persists

Mouthfeel: Full bodied with high carbonation

Drinkability: A very odd Wee Heavy, lacking in the appropriate butterscotch, smoke and peat and replacing that with an unusual sourness; drinkable, but way off style and not particularly tasty

Photo of EricCioe
3.23/5  rDev -15.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This pours dark brown, almost blood red at the edges, with a big, fluffy cream head that leaves no lace but has excellent retention. On the nose, it's a strange mixture of caramel and some banana notes that really reminds me of Final Absolution, this brewery's trippel. In the mouth there is a sweet toffee to go with the caramel, some dark fruit further back, and some alcoholic heat at the back. There is some oak here, but it seems to be missing a lot of the things I suspect from the style. The body is medium, and carbonated well enough to keep the bubbles coating my mouth, but the finish is just odd and seems all wrong for the style.

This beer is okay, but to me it almost seems like a dark Belgian rather than a scotch ale, and not great at either. I'll seek out another bottle at some point to see if something was abnormal with this one, or better yet, make a trip to the brewery, because all the tap reviews look a lot different than the bottle ones.

Photo of flowerysong
3.26/5  rDev -14.7%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Appearance: Opaque dark brown body with one finger of tan head that displays excellent retention.

Smell: Sweet caramel malt and some peat-like smokiness.

Taste: Malt sweetness, a background of chocolate and coffee notes with some smokiness. Definite peat influence, and an oddly sour flavour overall.

Mouthfeel: Creamy, full-bodied with mild carbonation.

Drinkability: Somewhat discordant components, and not really a good example of the style.

Photo of jwinship83
3.29/5  rDev -13.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

12oz bottled donated to me from by lorena. thanks! drank from my stone IRS snifter.

A- this one pours out of the bottle a very murky dark brown colored body with a rather large khaki colored head on top. the head takes its time falling, and leaves behind complete rings of lacing. off to a good start.

S- the first thing i notice in the nose is sweet caramel malts. then comes some chocolate. maybe a little bit of nuttiness. the peat/smoke that is usually in beers of this style seems to be gone from this one. odd.

T- the taste starts out with some sweet caramel malts and a little bit of chocolate. once again, theres no peat or smoke to be found anywhere. theres a faint chocolate that can be tasted. a little bit of nuttiness and some lightly roasted malts. interesting and unique for this style.

M- the mouthfeel is pretty big. id almost call it full bodied. the carbonation is low, which is nice. the alcohol is well hidden. theres only a slight warming from it.

D- this is my first dragonmead beer, so im not too familiar with them. i liked this one, but i wish it was a little more to style. i would grab a sixer of this once in a while if it was available to me. a couple in a night would be fine, but more than that would get me into trouble.

Photo of blackthistle
3.31/5  rDev -13.4%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

12 oz. brown bottle; no freshness date; $2.79 for single bottle

Pours clear brown with ruby tints around the edges and a thick creamy tan head that forms lacing to the bottom of the glass. Aroma consists of some sweet maltiness and a bit of smokiness followed by a hint of noble hops. Flavor is fairly malty with a bit of a husky/grainy note, just a hint of smoke and fruitiness, and enough noble hops to balance the malt. Overall, a very good scottish ale, but I don't really think it's "big" enough (in both aroma and flavor) for a wee heavy and it falls a bit short of my expectations. I prefer mine with more body, mouthfeel and a thicker, maltier presence.

Photo of DerekStek
3.32/5  rDev -13.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Under The Kilt pours an opaque amber color with a light tan head that dissipates rather quickly.

The smells malt, malts, and a hint of malts.

The taste is reflective of the smell, malts. There is very little carbonation in this drink but I may have grabbed an old bottle.

It doesn't leave a bad taste--or any for that matter.

Easy to drink. Not quite a sipper but perhaps a little dark for kicking back more than 3.

I have had my eye on this beer for a while. I've come to love Dragonmead but am slightly disappointed in their Wee Heavy interpretation.

Photo of Westsidethreat
3.33/5  rDev -12.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A: Aggresively carbonated with serious head retention. The oatmeal colored mushroom shaped mass of bubbles is in no hurry to be going anywhere. Cheap coffee colored brew with the same hue and density as Yuban.

S: Milk chocolate, aluminum, red fruits and a mild smokiness.

T: Little bit of sourness starts this one off (grapejuice, blueberries and cola). Some underlying currents of American milk chocolate, but unfortunately its overshadowed by the sourness. Really minor cold smokiness with strafes of peat add some depth. Little bit of raisin, caramel and peanuts. Finishes off with hints of raspberry and plum buried under the other flavors.

M: Medium body, sort of hard across the palate.

D: Its safe to say that this is a run of the mill, mediocre wee heavy.

Photo of Shumista
3.4/5  rDev -11%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Poured from a 12 0z. bottle into my New Holland Brewing pint glass.

A- Under the kilt pours dark brown with a reddish tint, small lighter brown head.

S- Very sweet dark fruit, caramel malt. A little bit of booze as it warms up.

T- Sweet and fruity up, the sweetness lingers for a long time. Different from the some of the darker tasting, roastier wee heavys I have had. Not bad though, just different.

M- Somewhere between medium and full-bodied. Creamy texture.

D- Probably too sweet to enjoy more than one.

Overall a unique representation but definitely not my favorite example of the style that I've had. I think both Dark Horse (scotty karate) and Founder's (Dirty Bastard) both brew better local representations. Because of the better local alternatives I probably will not buy this one again.

Photo of emerge077
3.41/5  rDev -10.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Single from Siciliano's cooler.

Deep dark brown, compact head of tan foam. Spotty lacing here and there. Seems to have good head retention.

Trace alcohol, wood and sour dark fruit in the nose. Something mildly funky as well, like wet hay. It takes on a downward turn when it produces a whiff of pasture. Weird.

Overripe and decaying fruit, astringent tartness, antiseptic notes. A hint of roasted malts, wood and cola, but none of the sweet maltiness or peat you might expect for a Scotch ale. Really off for the style, this one was unfortunately hard to finish. I'll re-review when I can find another sample.

edit: Had some on tap at the Great Taste '08 and it was significantly fresher. More richness in the flavor, no astringency. I'd get this on tap again, but would avoid the bottles.

Photo of Ozzylizard
3.41/5  rDev -10.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Undated bottle at 50 degrees into standard pint glass
Aroma of malt
Head small (2 cm), off white, creamy, rapidly diminishing to partial 2mm layer
Lacing scant; few small clots of bubbles
Body dark amber, hazy
Flavor moderately sweet and malty; no alcohol, no hops, no diacetyl. Ends sweet with stomach afterburn.
Palate medium to full, creamy, soft carbonation.

Meh. OK but not wonderful.

Photo of nrbw23
3.46/5  rDev -9.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

A- Pours a dark brown color with red highlights when held up to a light. A very small tan head that leaves no lacing.

S- Fairly light here. Sweet and roasted malts, hint of smoke and bit of an alcohol smell.

T- Caramel and roasted sweet malts and an alcohol burn.

M- Full in body, thick and rich.

D- Not too bad just nothing to write home about.

Photo of enfield249
3.46/5  rDev -9.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

A - Pours very dark brown, dark red highlights in the corners. No head.

S - Can't get much off of this.

T - First thing is a malty roast. That leaves quickly, and then all over my tongue there is a alcohol warming sweet favor. That leaves also, but lasts longer then the first.

M - Very full, almost creamy. Slides across my mouth.

D - Not a great choice for summer, but overall not bad. I would get this again, and worth a try if you haven't.

Photo of techfed87
3.47/5  rDev -9.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a nicely sized head. Color is quite dark amber, almost not able to see all of the way through it. Smell is pretty malty.

First sip is fairly sweet, although it can be a bit distracting from the overall mouthfeel. Taste is a bit more coppery than I was expecting. Still, as scotch ales go, this one is pretty much what you should expect from it. Not that it's quite on par with a Founder's Dirty Bastard or Dark Horse Scotty Karate. But still, a pretty

Photo of Mitchster
3.47/5  rDev -9.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

$2,70 for a 12oz bottle, which is a ridiculous asking price for this beer, as are Dragonmeads other bottled brews. Pours out to a cloudy dark mahogany, forming a modest dark tan head with average retention and sparse lacing. Medium carbonation. Unfiltered. The aroma is quite interesting...a distinct port wine grape nose with the suggestion of sour fruit (rotting raspberries?), mixed with dates and prunes and dark chocolate. Mouthfeel is kinda tangy with a big body for the style, approaching (and in some cases, exceeding) that of a stout. The taste begins with the port taste and then is followed by a big dark amber malt body, an odd fruity sourness, a touch of smoke, and then some fusel alcohols. Aftertaste of chocolate, herbal hops, distant smoke, and fusels. The fusels are really pronounced, especially in the aftertaste, limiting it's drinkability, giving me a near instant headache.

Hrmm, I seem to remember this being better on tap at the brewery. Not my cup of tea, with quite a few faults, and totally out of style. Pass on this, especially if you're getting charged up the wazoo for bottles. A heavy, intense, and totally inappropriate interpretation. Rated as 'a beer', not as a Scotch Ale.

« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Dragonmead Under The Kilt Wee Heavy from Dragonmead Microbrewery
86 out of 100 based on 197 ratings.