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!

Stoney Creek Pale Ale - Stoney Creek Brewing Company

Not Rated.
Stoney Creek Pale AleStoney Creek Pale Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
77
okay

27 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score

(send 'em beer!)
Ratings: 27
Reviews: 27
rAvg: 3.23
pDev: 12.69%
Wants: 0
Gots: 0 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Stoney Creek Brewing Company
Michigan, United States

Style | ABV
American Pale Ale (APA) |  ABV ?

Availability: Year-round

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

No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: Mitchster on 07-31-2003)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Ratings: 27 | Reviews: 27 | Display Reviews Only:
Reviews by russpowell:
Photo of russpowell
3.2/5  rDev -0.9%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Would've scored better on appearance if the beer would've dropped completly bright. Nice white head that dropped off fairly slow. Coloring was red leaninfg to amber.

Good presence of spicy hop nose.

Tangy hops flavor gave way to a slight excess of malty sweetness, shame it the hopniess in taste didn't quite catch up to the nose!

Mouth feel was a bit thin, with slight overcarbination.

This beer needed a little more body and a even more hops bite to make me hoppy, er happy.

russpowell, Sep 16, 2005
More User Reviews:
Photo of Billolick
3.53/5  rDev +9.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

12 ouncer sampled, no freshness dating on label. Pours light dull orangy amber, cloudy, minor white head, tiny bubble film, leaves big time, nice sticky lacing. Nose is lightly hoppy. this is a decent pale ale, on the light side of the "wow" spectrum. Balanced quaffable ale. Decent but not very inspiring APA. Could benefit from an infusion of fresh hops and a tad more malt.

Billolick, Apr 22, 2005
Photo of ElGordo
3.28/5  rDev +1.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Pours a darkish golden hue with a smallish head that goes away very quickly. Malty aroma, with a touch of hops and pine. Rich, hoppy taste, with pine, bitter hops, and a hint of nuts. Slightly astringent aftertaste, a bit lemony and bitter. Kind of thin on the palate. Pretty decent overall.

ElGordo, Jan 11, 2004
Photo of PhantomVodoo
3.6/5  rDev +11.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Off-white head that sticks around till the finish. Hazed brownish golden color.
Fruity, citrusy hop aroma. Bready, toasty pale malt as well.

Taste shows a toasty, cookie malt flavor. Well balanced by a citrusy hop presence. Has some good qualities to it, but is a bit rough around the edges.

Mouthfeel is a bit fizzy.
Drinkability: Went down pretty easy, but definitely better ones out there.
Overall, a solid offering if you're a pale ale fan like me, maybe just decent otherwise.
Big thanks to AKSmokedPorter for the bottle.

PhantomVodoo, Jan 13, 2004
Photo of CRJMellor
3.13/5  rDev -3.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours hazy golden and copper colors with a moderate white head and spotty lace.
Aroma of pale malt with a light hint of citrus, hard water or mineral hit.
Flavor of grain, pale malt some metallic and gypsum hits and some oxidated hops. Very average IMHO.
Mouthfeel is gritty and watery. Not unpleasant but no real distinguishing characteristics.
Drinkability is OK. May be that the draught version is better but this is a very ordinary offering.

CRJMellor, Sep 27, 2004
Photo of marc77
3/5  rDev -7.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Lightly turbid pale amber hue. One fingered, solid, steadfast cream white head leaves sticky, tattered lace. Balmy citrus of a dilute grapefruit nature coupled with light lovibond caramel malt in aroma. Swirling releases a slight, but obtrusive metallic note, which thankfully fades quickly. Tame, yet rough around the edges aromawise. Flavorwise, a simple combination of orange zest and cracker like base malt is bolstered by a token light caramel malt backbone. Hop bitterness is mild but appropriate considering the high attenuation and meager residual sweetness. Bereft of esters, except for a subtle sourbread like yeast undertone. Lightly bodied, very dry, almost arid. Slightly chalky, but otherwise passably smooth in mouthfeel. Finishes slightly salty, minerally and parching. A prosaic, simplistic pale ale. Its most noteable character is its thirst inducing nature. Innocuously drinkable.

marc77, Dec 17, 2003
Photo of granger10
3.05/5  rDev -5.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

This beer poured a cloudy gold with orange highlights. The head was slightly tan and on the small side. The nose was strong in citric hop smell but there was some sweet bready flavor as well. The taste was caramel and bread up front. Really sweet flavor, almost too sweet up front. But then the hops come in and balance it out for a time but they become too prevalent and overtake the beer. The hops are definitely grapefruit in taste. Yeast helps create a dry finish but the bitterness remains. These flavors didn't mix too well and there never really was a base for this beer which made the body rather thin. Still, not a bad beer, just not that good either.

granger10, Mar 02, 2004
Photo of TastyTaste
2.8/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Was fine in appearance, a light copper color,w ith a big white creamy head. Smell was of floral hops, a nd slight carmel. I did't like the flavor, for a pale ale. It had too much sweetness, almost as if it were flavored with honey. Hops presence was pretty good, although I could've used more. Not bad, but different.

TastyTaste, Oct 19, 2004
Photo of jdhilt
2.63/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours with a two fingered frothy white head that leaves a bubbly lace. Medium carbonation. Hoppy nose. Color is a light, cloudy amber. Starts smooth with hops and finishes with the normal hoppy bitterness of a pale but there is a hint of sweetness. The ABV is 5.5%.

jdhilt, Jan 04, 2004
Photo of moulefrite
3.65/5  rDev +13%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Pours a light caramel. The nose is clean with some light pine resin, but not overdone. The beer is refreshing with a nice biscuit character balancing some green bitter flavors from the hops, and a splash of maltiness on the tail end. A medium weight pale that focuses on balance and does it well. Worth a try for fans of the style.

moulefrite, Jul 31, 2003
Photo of Frozensoul327
3.25/5  rDev +0.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A worthy offering from the guys at Stoney. Poured out to a lager like golden color with a touch of cloudiness. Nice foamy head was present, and hung around to nearly the bottom of the glass. Aromas of grain, oats and hay were noted.Taste was not as bitter as I was expecting, making this brew quite palatable. Flavors of hops and dough were present, as was some sourness that evolved into almost a sweet aftertaste. Not a bad brew at all, when taking into consideration it's only 6.99 a sixer in the Metro Detroit area.

Frozensoul327, Jun 09, 2005
Photo of ypsifly
4/5  rDev +23.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4.5

From notes taken 7/18/05.

Undated 12oz poured into a pint.

Clear, bronze/copper with a small white head that leaves good lace while settling to a thin layer of foam that stays.

Smells malty overall. IMO, a PA should have more hop in the nose.

The taste is almost the opposite. The dry, almost piney hops make a good showing, and there's just enough malt to give it some balance. Clean, bitter finish.

The mouthfeel is good, almost feels like an IPA. Very drinkable. Works well at BBQs.

ypsifly, Jul 22, 2005
Photo of methtlcai
2.8/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured an awesome orangey opaque hue with an initially above average head that quickly receeded to a thin film. Lacing didn't last for more than 30 seconds. Smell took me off guard- not the usual pine or hoppy aroma, but more of a fruity one reminiscent of some wheat beers- definitely not grapefruity hops. Taste was strange- again, a fruity nectarine taste for a pale ale with an average amount of hop bitterness that lingered on the tongue. Not altogether bad, but not indicative of the APA style.

methtlcai, Aug 12, 2005
Photo of AtLagerHeads
3.65/5  rDev +13%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

A nice pale ale done with a good eye toward the hops. The look is mid-amber with slight red hues and a respectable, though not impressive, off-white head. This is a beer with aroma and it comes up nicely to deliver the piney citrus combo that is quite well done. The flavor balances decently but definitely leans into the hop arena as the glass begins to warm (strange.) The feel is medium and nice.

AtLagerHeads, Sep 17, 2003
Photo of beerguy101
3.2/5  rDev -0.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Orange gold color. Small white foamy head. Aroma is malty, hoppy (citrus and pine) and a touch hoppy. A medium bodied pale ale. Malts are bready and sweet. Hops are citrus and grapefruit. Balance is OK, but the hops and malts don’t seem to mix well. The compete more than they complement. Still not a bad pale ale. Mouthfeel is full and round. Finish is clean and smooth. Aftertaste is slightly bitter

beerguy101, Jan 03, 2004
Photo of Tballz420
3.2/5  rDev -0.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

This brew has a fairly murky orange body, with a big foam cream head. The scent is sweet malt and a touch of floral hop. The front is light, sweet pale malt, followed by a muted hop response. Bits of fruitiness, med mouth. This was so underhopped that i thought maybe i had a bad batch, but reading some of the other peoples thought on BA, it seems like its just a weak Pale Ale

Tballz420, Jan 08, 2005
Photo of sopor
3.7/5  rDev +14.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Orangeish amber with lots of small sedment under a finger of off-white head that leaves a thin lasting film and thick ring. Smells like butterd toast with a kiss of herbal hop.

Toasty and lager-like with a touch of sweetness. Hops are resinous and herbal and lead the way. Just an earthy herbal note left in the aftertaste. A hint of of those sweet german malts in there, but not enough to turn me off on that alone, although it does start to stick out in the end.

Whoops, I forgot to write about mouthfeel, and it's all gone now! That means drinkability is taken care of. Refreshing body.

sopor, Nov 13, 2005
Photo of JohnnyDuvel
3.25/5  rDev +0.6%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

A few types of beers from this brewery appeared in my local grocery store recently. I decided to give this one a try despite reading mediocre reviews. The concensus is correct. Mediocre pale ale. The promising pour and aroma are a tease. The beer is actually quite mild, with a small flavor profile. Well balanced, I suppose, between hops and malts (but not much of either). Taste nowhere near as fruity as the aroma. Slightly dry finish. Drinkable, but much better beers are readily available. Maybe I'll try their Vanilla porter. I give them credit for their distribution all the way down here, but I wish it were Bell's or Stone instead!

JohnnyDuvel, May 25, 2004
Photo of ngandhi
2.63/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Stoney Creek's round body makes it seem sweet with cane sugar, yet it finishes very dry. The bitterness is pleasant. Light with citric hops and creamy by bottle's end from the good deal of sediment, the Pale Ale otherwise lacks character. Is there chalk in this beer?

Relax, relax.
ng

ngandhi, Jan 20, 2004
Photo of Waltman
3.15/5  rDev -2.5%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Somehow a bottle of Stoney Creek made its way down to Sarasota, Florida and I thought I would give it a go (as I am pale ale enthusiast.) One word sums up this ale...mild. Don't get me wrong, it retains the characteristics of most of the beers in its category, but the Stoney Creek version neither packs the hoppy nose or finish I prefer. Very drinkable and pours well. I would rate it in the 60th percentile.

Waltman, Sep 17, 2004
Photo of proc
3.98/5  rDev +23.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

A solid Pale Ale offering from Stoney Creek. Pours out to a nice, amber in the glass with a decent head. Aroma is that of pine and light citrus. Taste is quite good, with a generous, but in no way, overdone, amount of hop presence. A quirst-quenching Pale if there ever was one. I've been seeing this more and more around the Detroit area and at $5.99 a 6-pack, Stoney Creek beers are quite the bargain.

proc, Aug 02, 2003
Photo of chilidog
3.25/5  rDev +0.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

The beer poured a hazy copper color with a fizzy, highly carbonated white head that disappears quickly. Lace is fast to fade as well. The carbonation dose help the brew on the drinkability end by giving the brew a soft mouthfeel as it seems to foam or carbonate in mouth. The aroma is of a slight hop & grain. The taste starts out a sweet malt then overshadowed by a hop kick at the end. A slight hop mouthfeel provides a crisp finish that adds to its drinkability.

chilidog, Apr 07, 2004
Photo of Mitchster
3.95/5  rDev +22.3%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Pours out to a murky dark golden with copper accents, forming a modest white head with average poor retention and sparse lacing. Fine layer of sediment quickly settles to the bottom of the glass. Carbonation is moderate. Aroma of fruity citric hops, with nice touches of vanilla, honey, pale malt husk...hrmm, kinda reminds me of a GLBC product, which is a bonus in my book. Mouthfeel is average with a smooth finish and medium body. Taste is an echo of the aroma...there is a nice fruitiness to the hops used here and it's not overly spicy, citric, harsh or acidic. The grain husk appears midway through and adds a nice dimension of balance to the well-balanced malts and hops. The bitterness is spot on for the style, and the finish is clean with pleasant floral hops lingering around. Light residual sugars add to the enjoyment. No off-flavors or aromas, with imperceptable alcohol.

A rather nice pale ale from Stoney Creek, a brewery that I haven't been impressed with in the past. Nothing upsetting here, other than a bit of sustained chemical bitterness in the finish. Would drink again.

Mitchster, Oct 15, 2004
Photo of jettjon
2.8/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Golden, slightly cloudy, with no yeast evident and few bubbles. Whitish head (I call it spit) that is thick and fades slowly. Slight sorghum nose that seems common to the Stoney Creek brand. Rather unremarkable taste, sweetish sorghum undertones. Slightly fruity. Very understated. Watery mouthfeel, ever so bitter finish. A decent “pale ale” but nothing remarkable.

jettjon, Jul 23, 2005
Photo of phishgator
2.8/5  rDev -13.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours into a pint glass with a gorgous pale unfiltered color with a nice 1" foam head. The aroma is the start of this brew not living up to its appearance. The smell is sort of a bland yellow fizzy lager. The taste is extremely thin for a pale ale and the aftertaste is a butterscotchy sweetness; hard to place! As far as drinkability, there are two ways to look at it. One, you can drink a lot of this brew because it never fills you, but you'd have to get past the taste.

phishgator, Oct 19, 2005
« first ‹ prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | next › last »
Stoney Creek Pale Ale from Stoney Creek Brewing Company
77 out of 100 based on 27 ratings.