1. Rating beers by attributes (look, smell, taste, feel, overall) is back! Read the latest update ...
  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!

Church-Key Cranberry Maple Wheat - Church-Key Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Church-Key Cranberry Maple Wheat
No picture uploaded.
Have one? Upload it now.
BA SCORE
78
okay

10 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 10
Reviews: 10
rAvg: 3.16
pDev: 13.29%
Wants: 0
Gots: 0 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Church-Key Brewing Company visit their website
Ontario, Canada

Style | ABV
Fruit / Vegetable Beer |  4.70% ABV

Availability: Rotating

Notes/Commercial Description:
This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 05-24-2004)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
Ratings: 10 | Reviews: 10 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of allergictomacros
2.8/5  rDev -11.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A - Clear gold with a half inch of white head.

S - Smells like black cherry bubblegum.

T - Much less sweet than expected from the aroma. Still getting tons of black cherry though, with a bit of cough syrup-like undertone. A bit of wheaty twang kinda doesn't help much. Little bit of graininess in the finish. Not medicinal in the usual sense, but this is bound to bring back memories of flu season.

M - Light body, quite fizzy.

D - Not a great combination.

allergictomacros, Oct 08, 2009
Photo of csmiley
2.9/5  rDev -8.2%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Thanks to thaichile for this brew.

A - Pours cloudy and gold. The white head is rocky and plentiful. Head shows decent retention and ends up as a very thin white cap. Lacing is very impressive.

S - Alot of fruit dominates the smell. Cranberry and maybe cherry is what I can pick out. Some pale malt aromas are in a distant background. No wheat. No maple. Aroma is a disappointment as I was expecting more than cranberry.

T - Cranberry up front. No surprise there. A light punch of wheat comes in midway but gets lost in the other flavors. Some maple is on the very end and is a compliment to the fruit. Could be some biscuit toward the end as well. Not really that impressed overall.

M - Light bodied with too much carbonation. Finish is clean and borders on bitter sweet.

D - Drinkability is average at best. This one is thin, has too much carbonation, and not enough complexity to keep me coming back for any more. The idea behind this brew sound interesting and could have potential but this attempt just doesn't work for me. Glad I got to try it but would not have it agian.

csmiley, Dec 01, 2008
Photo of pootz
3.73/5  rDev +18%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

On Tap at the Castle

Tapped a pale gold with a light hazed shimmer to it...1 finger white cap does not last too long but does lace the glass well.

Pungent aromas of cranberry but not synthetic or perfumery, undertones of sweetness and some grass.

Front side makes an impression like a wheat biscuit with cranberry sauce on it then mid palate the maple shows ...good hop character accents the tart cranberry...finish is incredible...dry and tart from the wheat and cranberry working together some maple tones...almost puckering dryness.

A summer deck beer...not a girly drink but I'm sure it will appeal to the ladies...well put together...flavors blend in proportion and give a decent amalgamation....good solid summer beer effort from a great micro.

pootz, Jun 28, 2007
Photo of Derek
3.28/5  rDev +3.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

A: Slightly cloudy yellow hue, with a white head. No retention or lace.

S: It is what it is... Cranberry!

T: Cranberry. Seriously. It's fairly one-dimensional. There's a slight sweetness, but subtle hints of tartness keep it in check.

M: Light to moderate body is slightly creamy; modest carbonation.

D: Easily approachable, but even on a hot day, I couldn't have more than one.

Derek, Jun 26, 2007
Photo of biegaman
3.1/5  rDev -1.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

On first taste - no cranberry, no maple, hell, no wheat! A bad first impression, I feel slightly dissapointed I have to admit!
A subtle cranberry aroma to accompany a light coloured (standard looking) body. An impressive white fluffy head over the excited tiny bubbles that would not subside. A great effort, but something is lost in the flavour, not much taste comes through unfortunately. I really can't get a tate for it at all!
This beer would however make a great alternative for those who want a fruit beer without the sweetness or excessive fruit flavouring that many brews tend to over compensate on. All in all, a very passive beer that didn't have much character at all. I'm sorry to say I couldn't take much out of this at all. At its heart, no better than any standard lager.

biegaman, Nov 15, 2006
Photo of Phyl21ca
3.78/5  rDev +19.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Bottle: Poured a light yellow color ale with a huge bubbly head with average retention. Aroma of cranberry bubblegum? mix with some strong wheat malt. Taste is very refreshing with lots of tart cranberry, strong wheat malt and some well balance sweetness from the maple. Nice mix between a wheat beer and a fruit beer. I’m starting to really like brewery.

Phyl21ca, Jun 17, 2005
Photo of tatterdash
3.58/5  rDev +13.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Had this at the Renaisance Cafe in Toronto. Pours a nice clear golden yellow with a white head, not much lacing, and the head vanished pretty fast. Smell was of cranberries, with a bit of a kool-aid smell, but not unpleasant. Taste was tart cranberries with the maple kicking in with the hops at the finish. Thin mouthfeel, which helps as the maple gets a bit aggressive as it warms. Not my favourite, but certainly drinkable.

tatterdash, Dec 08, 2004
Photo of TerryW
2.73/5  rDev -13.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

I'm afraid this one didn't quite work for me. I found it to be very thin bodied and far too perfumy in character. Quite dry on the palate – that's the nature of cranberries – with a bitter finish. The sweet nose and acerbic taste don't quite mesh.

Pours pale golden yellow with no significant head to speak of.

TerryW, Aug 25, 2004
Photo of baiser
3.2/5  rDev +1.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

On tap at c'est what, poured a clear straw yellow with a decent head that faded rather quickly.

The highlight of this beer is definitely the aroma. Could smell it a mile away. Was awfully sweet and smelled of cranberry pie. Almost like fruit juice.

Looked like such a promising beer, but the first sip was a big disappointment. Not much taste. Subtle sweetness, tartness, not much hops. Could pick out the cranberries, but had trouble finding the maple. At the end, it was like a mild cough medicine.

Overall, was drinkable, but won't have it again.

baiser, Jul 18, 2004
Photo of foamer
2.5/5  rDev -20.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

I tried this beer on tap at the brewery. It sounded like it might be an interesting flavour combination - cranberry with maple.

Well, it turned out to be just that...interesting. The tartness of the cranberry, and the sweetness of the maple did not really compliment each other at all. Instead, the combination created a medicinal taste that I was not fond of at all. Sort of like liquid tylenol.

Taste, I know, is a matter of preference and so if you get around the taste - better yet, if you can enjoy it - then I think you will be pleased by this beer. It is a nicely crafted, smooth-drinking wheat beer. Available in bottles from the brewery, or on-tap somewhere (Smokeless Joe's in Toronto has it on-tap now instead of the Holy Smoke).

foamer, May 24, 2004
Church-Key Cranberry Maple Wheat from Church-Key Brewing Company
78 out of 100 based on 10 ratings.