1. BeerAdvocate on your phone?! True story. Try the beta now.

AleSmith Wee Heavy - AleSmith Brewing Company

AleSmith Wee HeavyAleSmith Wee Heavy

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
93
outstanding

780 Ratings
THE BROS
93
outstanding

(view ratings)
Ratings: 780
Reviews: 410
rAvg: 4.17
pDev: 9.83%


Brewed by:
AleSmith Brewing Company visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
Scotch Ale / Wee Heavy |  10.00% ABV

Availability: Winter

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 03-08-2004)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Latest | High | Low | Top Reviewers | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of AleSmith Wee Heavy Alström Bros
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
Ratings: 780 | Reviews: 410 | Show All Ratings:
Photo of gfreed
gfreed

Massachusetts

2.45/5  rDev -41.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Any 10% 750 that I can drink entirely by myself and *still* walk a straight line afterwards is deficient in some way. The problem with this scotch ale is that it lacks scotch aleness-- it's thin in the aroma and taste; it has no gravitas, no depth, no weight; there is no smokiness; there is no umph. It's the 98-lb weakling that Charles Atlas warned you about. The bottle is pretty but they ought to put more effort into the contents. If you're looking for a decent American scotch ale, go find a Founders Dirty Bastard. Pass.

Serving type: bottle

03-12-2011 23:29:38 | More by gfreed
Photo of Knuckles
Knuckles

Washington

2.73/5  rDev -34.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

I like my wee heavies to have a bit of subtlety to them. I don't want to be mugged by the alcohol or gassed by the boozy nose. This beer has all the subtlety of "Natural Born Killers". When I poured it out, I thought I was smelling the red wine my friend had been drinking earlier. Then I stuck my nose in the goblet. Whoops.

Appearance: Easily the best part of the beer. A deep, dark brown with a lovely tan head.

Smell: Umm, so I understand there's a bit of alcohol in this thing because it smells like I could douse a shirt-wrapped stick in it, light it on fire and explore underground Seattle with that sumbitch lighting the way.

Taste: The alcohol really overwhelms everything else in this beer. I don't know what the malts taste like, or if there is any peat or anything else, because all I taste is hooch.

Mouthfeel: Hey, with a beer this high in gravity, it should be nice. It is. Very velvety and smooth.

Drinkability: To be truthful, this was undrinkable for me. Too much alcohol and very little else going on. I've had this beer for over six months, properly stored in my cellar. Thank god I didn't open it when I got it, or it might have killed me. I've got a few more Alesmiths in the cellar, I hope they are a bit more complex than this one.

Serving type: bottle

08-12-2006 20:36:20 | More by Knuckles
Photo of francisweizen
francisweizen

Arizona

3/5  rDev -28.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I Miss JPS! This one is ruddy brown with some yeast particulates and a small off-white burnt tan head that dies quickly and khaki. Aromas of roasted malts, some coffe, caramel, maybe some chocolate and a fiant whiff of greeny hops. Taste is ok, a bit muddle really, a bit hot and boozy and not very multi-dimensional. Mouthfeel is slick and hot in the mouth, drinkability suffers...Blah, sums it all up...C'mon Alesmith. Brew up that JPS recipe again! Bitches!

Serving type: bottle

03-16-2006 15:35:10 | More by francisweizen
Photo of GreatWeisseHope
GreatWeisseHope

Oregon

3.23/5  rDev -22.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

A; Murky (not to style), dark brown with tan head - good retention.

S: Not a strong caramel component, which is necessary for this style. Low esters, low hops, no diacetyl, and alcohol present (all to style).

T: Caramel notes come across as crystal malts, not kettle caramelisation, hop bitterness bites and lingers (not to style), finish with a bit of roast was rough, the malt notes are overwhelmed by the alcohol.

M: Alcohol warmth dominant, full bodied, moderate carbonation.

D: Rough and strong, just begging for a hangover if you can manage to drink more than one. The bottle I had will probably be the last one I have.

Serving type: bottle

12-30-2009 20:05:42 | More by GreatWeisseHope
Photo of TexIndy
TexIndy

Texas

3.25/5  rDev -22.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Poured from a 750ml capped bottle with no dating info into a tulip. It was a dark reddish brown color. It had a small head that quickly disappeared. Good carb fountain in center but no lacing. The aroma was heavy on the alcohol and dark fruits (raisin or plum). Slight malt in the back. The taste was also heavy on the alcohol. Kinda reminded me of a Belgian Strong Dark Ale. It was missing the smoky, peaty aroma and taste that I love in most wee heavy/scoth ales. Really disappointed in this one. One is enough and half bottle at that. (3.5, RTL, M, N)

Serving type: bottle

12-12-2007 02:55:12 | More by TexIndy
Photo of RedDiamond
RedDiamond

Oregon

3.28/5  rDev -21.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Initial smells of moldy dog turd with sugar give way to musty barnyard broom closets of soiled dishrags and camphor. There’s also butterscotch, medieval dungeon, and a slightly smoky-swampy scent mixed with industrial alcohol. Ah, Scotland (by way of San Diego)!

Despite this brutal (yet accurate) panoply of smell descriptives, I actually appreciate the aroma of this beer much as I might appreciate the smell of certain common pheromones. The taste however, reaches like a broken limb and is unaccountably dilute. My Wee Heavy achieved perfect cellaring and serving at 50°F (exactly as it recommends on the bottle). But this beer doesn’t taste like a full-bodied ale that has mellowed. It tastes like a stick figure trying to be a body builder. It’s not that the essential flavors don’t exist, they’re just never delivered until whatever flavors might have once achieved identity, are arrested by a blunt alcohol finish.

Serving type: bottle

12-05-2005 05:52:51 | More by RedDiamond
Photo of TheLongBeachBum
TheLongBeachBum

California

3.35/5  rDev -19.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

A trip to, and a tour of, the Alesmith Brewery, was the second stop on EyeChartBrews recent Bachelor Party ‘Tour de Force’ of San Diego.

I had chance to pick up a mixed case of Alesmith brews whilst here, which included 4 x 750ml bottles of the Wee Heavy. I had committed the cardinal sin of asking for J.P. Gray’s Wee Heavy when ordering my Case. Apparently, “old JP” was Skip Virgilio’s maternal grandfather. According to the AS Website, JPGWH was release in 98, 99, and 2000, but I also have had a bottle dated from 2001 which does not appear on the Site. Interestingly enough, this beer is described as both 8.5% and 9.0% on the Website. Note to Alesmith – update your Website please!!! Anyways, I digress, as brewmaster Skip had himself ‘skipped’ (so to speak) Alesmith, the precursor has now been dropped. Hence, the new name for 2004, simply “Wee Heavy”. This will now be an all year round beer.

Whilst the distinctive Belgium green glass 750ml bottle remains, the bottle design has distinctly changed. Gone is the high quality gold leaf that is on the empty 2001 bottle that I still have adorning my kitchen worktop. The 'Pint on Anvil' logo is now white and purple. The printed bottle has the word “Alesmith” in a small white Arial like font, whilst “Wee Heavy” is in a much larger purple scripted font below. It is finished with the words “Scotch Style Ale” in white wording close to the base. Listed as 9.5% ABV, stronger than past years I note. The presentation is finished with some thick black foil over the simple brass colored crown cap. No cork.

Pours with a beautiful looking cherry wood body, lots of mahogany that sparkles with a ruby hue when backlit. But what happened to the head? Erm, not much carbonation at all. This is a big difference from the original JP version I note. I’m sat waiting for something to happen!?! On the second glass I get a quick “fizz” that releases a thin but solid light brown disc like head, but this almost immediately disappears to reveal a broken covering and a tan colored ring around the edge of the glass. Flat looking.

Molasses and caramel malts in the nose. One dimensional, but nice. As it warms it reveals lots of dark bonfire toffee. The initial taste is of malts, caramel, sweet dark toffee and dark fruits which are all exhibited in the mouth with a moist sponge like Parkin feel. The body is of a solid Ale, but the burning raw sugary sweet aftertaste and warming alcohol bite are a little too much for me. It is malty to start with and aggressive in the back end. It lacks complexity and the gorgeous smoke character that I remember from the 2001 J.P. version I had previously. It feels like all the ingredients are here, but they need time to synchronize and synergize in my opinion. Very raw at the moment.

I dearly love Alesmith beers, but I have to be honest here and say that this was somewhat of a disappointment overall, especially for $10. I hate to mention cost, but like it or not, in the real world, everything has a price. The Abbeye des Rocs Grand Cru that I can purchase locally for $6.99 for the same volume is now my Bench-Mark “premium” drink straight away or cellar beer. If you’re going to compete in the higher priced echelons of the beer market, you better get your shit right and know your competition. That said, this is not a bad beer, far from it, but it is rather more that I expected greater and better things from it. It’s good, but I think this one needs a lot more time to be great to be honest. If I splashed $10 and drank this fresh, then maybe I would be a tad let down. Give it another 24 months, or more, maybe only then will I be happy with my investment. But that's a long time for a return on a high priced beer. Thankfully, I have a few more bottles that are stashed away. But this will have to do much better to even have me consider splashing out another $10/bottle to even contemplate cellaring any more than the few I already have; the Grand Cru and Speedway Stout are much better for the same coin IMVHO.

Serving type: bottle

03-22-2004 06:41:42 | More by TheLongBeachBum
Photo of lifebeer
lifebeer

New Jersey

3.38/5  rDev -18.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

bought this from south bay drugs and liquor. served cold, probably too cold, which one should take into consideration while reading this...

a. poured a murky, lake-mud brown, caramel edges when held to the light, slowly forming head with a short-lived but impressive cascade resulting in a finger of tan foam

b. not too much here, serving temp might have something to do with it, the usual caramel and raisin of a wee heavy, sweet wine scent

t. overwhelming chewy raisin flavor, if concentrate really hard, capped with a scotch ale smokiness

mf. some nice chewy body that finishes closer to watery

d. it was difficult to finish this one, a little to sweet, probably my last one

Serving type: bottle

12-24-2007 18:58:02 | More by lifebeer
Photo of Dope
Dope

Massachusetts

3.38/5  rDev -18.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

A: Pours a clear, very dark brown with a bit of red in there. Big and dense light brown head. Fades slowly, leaving really nice solid lacework behind.

S: Toffee, molasses and some peat with hints of smoke. Decent caramel in there as well.

T: Loaded with smoke and peat up front. Toffee, caramel and molasses abound especially in the middle. Some dark fruits fill in the middle as well, fig, grape and maybe raisin? A touch of nuttiness too. Finishes with lots of peat and toffee. Fairly boozy. I get a fair amount of of odd sawdust and leather in there too. Hard to describe.

M: Heavy, thick, boozy.

O: Definitely a very strong, boozy and complex scotch ale. The weird leathery/dusty/woody aspect really detracted I thought. It almost tastes oxidized in a way but this is super fresh (just came into the store last week). Fairly smoky and peaty too which I generally don't like too much. I was kind of torn on the scoring as I didn't like some of the flavors but it also has a lot of good flavors as well as the complexity and balance. The smoke and peat seems in-line with the style so it's hard to take away points for that either. Tough one to score. I did not enjoy this one at all, however.

Serving type: bottle

10-13-2012 03:51:11 | More by Dope
Photo of dbalsock
dbalsock

Vermont

3.4/5  rDev -18.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Appearance: Dark brown with a little head, but a decent amount compared to other wee heavy's i've experienced. There's the slightest lacing on the glass, but not enough to make pretty designs.

Smell: The aroma is very malty and quite nutty at that with a hint of alcohol and piney hops.

Taste: Reminded me a little bit of scotch, except nuttier. It tasted heavily of alcohol and toffee.

Mouthfeel: Thick bodied and smooth on the palate until the sharp bite on the swallow.

Drinkability: I would have this on special occasions, but would only sip a small glass of it. It's a little too intense, even for a wee heavy.

Serving type: on-tap

11-25-2006 05:58:37 | More by dbalsock
Photo of atigerlife
atigerlife

Hawaii

3.4/5  rDev -18.5%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Pours a darker brown with some lighter highlights. Almost no head. Opaque.

Aroma of roasted malts, some fruitiness that I couldn't quite figure out. Somewhat winey.

Taste of malts, alcohol...sort of reminded me of port/bourbon.

Med-heavy body, creamy and cleansing.

Overall, this was interesting. Worth a try. I couldn't drink too much, but I found it to be a nice curiosity. Something tells me I would enjoy it more if it was aged for a while. At this point in its life, it wasn't overally impressive.

Serving type: bottle

04-18-2008 04:28:25 | More by atigerlife
Photo of aasher
aasher

Indiana

3.4/5  rDev -18.5%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

This beer pours a rich and smooth medium bodied dark brown, borderline black, in color with a one finger cream colored head. It smells of sweet caramel malts, cream, nuts, and a red wine sweetness. It tastes of candied sugar, super sweet caramel and dark malts, and cream. It also has a strange and faint red wine like aftertaste. I would rate this so much higher if not for the sweetness. God damn it's sweet. This one drinks far too light for what it should. It is creamy, like the Speedway, but in an overly thin manner. What the deuce! Overall I'd describe this as a sweet and flavorful malt bomb. Compared to Big Sound from Cigar City, this one needs work, and less sugar. Long live Big Sound!

Serving type: bottle

06-22-2011 07:31:31 | More by aasher
Photo of nassaubeercop
nassaubeercop

New York

3.48/5  rDev -16.5%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

A- Pours black, coppery red when held to the light, very thin tan foamy head. head quickly fades very little to no lacing.

S- Roasted malt, bourbon a little lactose.

T-Bourbon, malt a little sweet on the palate. Nice flavor but a little light, not as bold as some other example of the style. A little alcohol.

M- Light carbonation, a little thin and watery. Slight alcohol burn. Not much aftertaste.

O- I like this beer but it is not the best example of the style I have tasted. Good smell and flavor but not as bold as I would like. Very drinkable despite the high alcohol content.

Serving type: bottle

09-02-2011 00:22:25 | More by nassaubeercop
Photo of scott
scott

Ohio

3.5/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

V.06
Grade "b" molasses, with a root beer float head. Nice lacing.
Aroma was of caramel malt, with a little bite in the back of your nose.
A little too sweet for my liking - too mellow and mouth coating to make me want to ever finish this expensive bottle. But I will. It has to be terrible for drain pour consideration. This offering is so boring, I really don't have much to say about it.

Serving type: bottle

01-17-2007 23:36:53 | More by scott
Photo of jmalex
jmalex

Pennsylvania

3.5/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I decided to break this out tonight to celebrate a couple great days of Phillies baseball. This bottle has been aged about 1 year.

2007 vintage

APPEARANCE: Pours brown with reddish-amber highlights into my Delirium tulip. A dense, creamy off-white head forms at a finger and a half's height and gradually shrinks down to a thick full cap of foam. Web-like lacing encircles my glass as I drink it down.

SMELL: Very aromatic and full of flavors. It's caramelly and nutty with strong toffee notes and a decent backing of alcohol. Deeper down, one can get smoke, some figgy fruits, and chocolate. Nicely complex.

TASTE: The flavor doesn't quite hit as hard, but still comes through reasonably nicely. Caramel and smoke are prominent as is a significant alcohol burn that keeps going and going long after I've swallowed it. Toffee and sherry notes lurk in the background and definitely deepen the beer considerably.

MOUTHFEEL: Malty with a lower carbonation, but I can't help but think this beer seems a little thin.

DRINKABILITY: The alcohol heat seems way to intense for this beer. The complexity is incredible, but this is probably a bottle to share.

AleSmith Wee Heavy is a huge beer with so much going on in it. It's quite hot though and doesn't quite have the body worthy of a knife and fork. Definitely give it a try as anything from AleSmith is always worth it.

Serving type: bottle

10-11-2008 02:25:14 | More by jmalex
Photo of jwc215
jwc215

Wisconsin

3.53/5  rDev -15.3%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Thanks to PhxHrn and Solomon420 for each sending me a bottle!

750 ml bottle, poured into tulip glass:

Pours hazed brown(a bit too cloudy, but fine as the darkness covers it enough). A nice light brown creamy head tops it off. Rich, then descends to a cover that holds up. Trailing lace sticks.

The smell is bready with dark (slightly tart) fruit (cherry/raisin), then some bitter chocolate. Not much of the expected peat smoke, if at all. Alcohol does show its strength. I liked the subsequent, and following, a bit more than the initial.

The strong alcohol and bitterish sharpness give way (though still show) to a chocolate sweetness, and earthy fruity bitterness. A hint of smoke comes through in the finish.

Creamy, though carbonation showing a bit more than expected when slowly swirled over the tongue. Sharp alcohol pierced the palate.

It's malty, but with big booze and some light bitterness (and hint of tart), with just a hint of smoke in the finish. A big, "different" (though certainly with enough traditional characteristics), interpretation of a Wee Heavy.

Serving type: bottle

07-05-2009 23:21:19 | More by jwc215
Photo of diomz88
diomz88

California

3.53/5  rDev -15.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

aroma: alcoholic with chocolate and coffee hints with raisins.
appearance: dark brown to black, very dark, minimal head, resides quickly
taste: little sweet, more alcoholic than a beer. light bitterness with chocolate and coffee hints smokey at the end.
palate: med to full bodied, average carbonation, smokey finish.
had high expectations, still a good sipper beer.

Serving type: bottle

01-01-2011 11:01:24 | More by diomz88
Photo of Beaver13
Beaver13

Colorado

3.53/5  rDev -15.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

750 ml bottle. Pours dark brown with a big creamy light tan head that retains well and laces the glass some.

The aroma is sweet smokey peat malts.

The flavor is sweet caramel and toffee malts with a little dark fruit and some smokey peat in the finish. The mouthfeel is medium to full bodied with light carbonation.

Overall, nice scotch ale - a little too sweet.

Serving type: bottle

10-07-2013 04:53:36 | More by Beaver13
Photo of theopholis
theopholis

California

3.55/5  rDev -14.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Appearence - Body had a deep burgundy/mahogany color. The head was a creamy, tan head that settled into a thin ring. Good retention, nice Belgian lacing. Continually but slowly effervesced through-out

Smell - Lots caramel malt and toffee presence up front. Had a nice but sudued aroma of dark fruits, especially red plumb in the back ground. some earthy tones.

Taste - Sweet and malty overall with hints of dark fruits, especially plum. Finishes with mild earthy bitterness. Nice complexity as it warms.

Mouthfeel - Nice full body with good CO2. The weird thing is, it was very soft. Not really to style, but it works nicely with this beer.

Drinkability - Very well done.

Serving type: bottle

04-19-2009 23:40:40 | More by theopholis
Photo of StephenRich
StephenRich

Ontario (Canada)

3.55/5  rDev -14.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

What is a Wee Heavy? Thats a bit of a strange name for a beer style. Its actually just a very old name for beer. It represented an ale of stronger nature originating in Scotland. The Scotch Ales were anywhere between 7 and 10% abv, and hence were a "wee heavy".

This beautiful bottling by AleSmith fits the bill. It is a Scotch Style Ale brewed in California at weighs in at 10% abv as appropriate for the style. I've had a few AleSmith beers before, and they have all impressed me. This would be my first experience with the Wee Heavy, and I was definitely very excited as scotch ales are among my most favorite beers.

Like many of their beers, this Wee Heavy has been decorated with medals and awards since 2004. I was very glad it came in a 750ml bottle, cause this beer was build to share with friends.

I opened the Wee Heavy up around cellar temperature close to 12C (54F) - I was anticipating big thick malt flavors, so I wanted them to all stand at attention rather than be muted by the cold. Poured into wide based tulip this beer brewed a deep nutty brown color lifting a smoothly dense, creamy tan head. The beer showed deep garnet reds when held into the light, but overall it is a softly transparent close to black beer with a maroon shade of brown growing within it.

The nose is classic with malt sweetness, touches of caramely roast, dried cocoa and hints of floral bitter hops. It has big deep aroma but is not terribly bounding or powerful. It glides easily into the air and penetrates your nose. Make no mistake though, there is much flavor here. Its shows an alcoholic warmth and comes back to big malty sweetness and dark fruits.

Letting the Wee Heavy in was like washing your mouth with roasted candy malts. Big and lush malt candies pour over your palate totally engulfing your senses. It really is malt forward. The first rush of malt is the big sweet round flavor of burnt brown sugar and rich butterscotch. It is quite abrupt at first showing a very aggressive malt character. It all comes across your tongue very intently and falls heavily onto your cheeks bringing roast and toffee with it.

The malt flavors here are truly complex and deep. As the beer warms overall character of the beer smooths out and becomes more gentle allowing greater layers of aroma and flavors to emerge. Now warm figs, dates, plums, banana and vanilla open to your taste buds, and yet more warm toffee, and thick sticky caramel flow with pronounced purpose all over your palate. A soft and slightly earthy hop aroma helps balance this beer a touch, but really, it fails. This is a hugely malt focused beer which is dominated by the warm, mellow, sweet, and potent flavors of malted barley. Really, if you are buying a wee heavy, it is exactly what you are looking for.

It even shows flavors of dark bitter bakers chocolate, lightly toasted bread, and smooth dark espresso. It was quite the treat, but certainly not for everyone. Although I could depict alcohol on the palate, it comes across more as an aged port, really just aiding the beers sweet and direct profile. Touches of spice begin to emerge here to, but are overshadowed by toffee and malt.

The mouthfeel was soft and gently carbonated showing big flavors. This is a full bodied beer, and I do wish it was a bit creamier, but overall, especially as it warmed, it became very smooth and gentle. The finish was sweet and malty with a hint of molasses, as every other moment of the beer was. It does fit the Scotch Ale bill pretty perfectly, and I wish I was enjoying a deep chocolate cake at the time with it. That being said, do look for big rich deserts with it or roasted game. Anything too light will be overpowered by this big beer.

I am also willing to bet that it will cellar very well. I'd give it 2 years upright and it should become even deeper with smooth and mellow flavors of deep buttery figs, and rich sticky malt.

Serving type: bottle

08-20-2010 02:48:01 | More by StephenRich
Photo of wisrarebeer
wisrarebeer

Wisconsin

3.55/5  rDev -14.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

750ml bottle.

A: pours an incredibly deep, dark copper color, nice frothy head that dissipated to a thin veil
S: medium nose, slightly disconcerting sour plum nose, oxidized?
T: well-balanced deep roasted malt and nice hop finish, might be turning as some sourness is evident in finish, EtOH is very warming in finish
M: very smooth beer
O: I don't know if this is a beer that's slightly turning (I've had it for 2 years) or is how it's supposed to be

Serving type: bottle

11-12-2011 01:44:58 | More by wisrarebeer
Photo of laituegonflable
laituegonflable

Australia

3.55/5  rDev -14.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours a slightly dark brown with a distinct red tinge. Head is medium-thin, but gorgeous, dense and foamy. Settles to nice bubbles with some great lacing left behind.

Sweet, roasty and nutty on the nose. Almond, hazelnut, buttery toffee. Hint of sunflower seed and honeyed cereal grain. Would have liked a bit more grounding, or oomph to take it to the next level.

Taste is a bit more substantial. Coffee notes on there, with burnt roast character, dark cherry, blood orange and toffee. Slight spice. Still very much on the sweet side which I'm generally not a fan of, but there's depth of flavour here; it's clearly well made.

Lot of texture. Body is not all there though, so it's a bit sharp at times and ends pretty dry. Not bad.

Not quite kismet with me and this beer; in the right person's glass this could be heaven but it makes me craving more spice or something to balance out that sweetness.

Serving type: bottle

03-21-2013 10:22:42 | More by laituegonflable
Photo of lackenhauser
lackenhauser

Maryland

3.58/5  rDev -14.1%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Murky, ruddy orange color. Very little carbonation-almsot seems flat. Nice heavy aroma. Quite vinuous and winey. Sharp tang to it-slight alcohol tinge to it. Fruity and slight sourness in the flavor. Some oak and vanilla. Plenty of bitterness. Moderate mouthfeel. Lacks some of sweetness I have seen in other scotch ales. An ok beer overall. Enoyable-better as it warms. Thanks to callenak for the Secret Santa sample.

Serving type: bottle

02-11-2007 02:20:11 | More by lackenhauser
Photo of jcalabre
jcalabre

California

3.63/5  rDev -12.9%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Originally sampled on 18 July 2002. This baby is a dark reddish brown w/ a tan head. Sweet w/ tastes of carmel & dried fruit greet you. Lots of malty taste on the tongue. But it was a touch too sweet for me. I'm sure many will really enjoy this one, but for me, it was very good, but not great.

Serving type: bottle

06-12-2003 20:23:56 | More by jcalabre
Photo of granger10
granger10

Wisconsin

3.63/5  rDev -12.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

This had the potential, it coulda been a contender. Unfortunately, upon cap poppage I noticed there was little life in it. On the pour, no head whatsoever. A second pour with a different glass got me a minimal head. It had a nice ruby dark color to it but lacked carbonation completely. Looked like a red wine. Aroma was really, really sweet. Toffee, figs, plums, molasses, and alcohol were all that I got. Is this a scotch ale or a dubbel? Taste had much less sweetness but still had notes reminiscent of wine. Figs were most dominant. A chewy body held up a drier malty flavor. Finish was alcohol and a little stinging. It was actually quite enjoyable and had a lot of potential. But where's the smoky flavor, the hops were minimal, and the lack of carbonation was quite upsetting (esp. for the price!). Good beer but a bit of a letdown.

Serving type: bottle

06-09-2005 13:04:48 | More by granger10
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | next › last »
AleSmith Wee Heavy from AleSmith Brewing Company
93 out of 100 based on 780 ratings.