Brooklyn Local 2 - Brooklyn Brewery

Not Rated.
Brooklyn Local 2Brooklyn Local 2

Educational use only; do not reuse.

532 Reviews
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 532
Hads: 1,343
Avg: 4.03
pDev: 17.12%
Wants: 96
Gots: 257 | FT: 7
Brewed by:
Brooklyn Brewery visit their website
New York, United States

Style | ABV
Belgian Strong Dark Ale |  9.00% ABV

Availability: Rotating

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: ClockworkOrange on 02-02-2009

No notes at this time.
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 532 | Hads: 1,343
Photo of redneckchugger
2.21/5  rDev -45.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours brown with a tan head, about two fingers with a slow pour.
Smell is of stereotypical Belgian-style yeast and candi sugar. Lots of banana and clove notes. Very typical, but not in a good way, more like a bland imitation.
The tastes is as bad as the smell, its just bland to the point of being awful. The usual elements of a Belgian beer are there, the candi sugar, the yeasts esters of banana and clove, some dark fruits like plum and raisin from the malt, but its all a disjointed mess. The sweetness is cloying, the banana and clove almost artificial.
The mouth feel is particulary bad, its almost waxy, like drinking a a banns and clove scent candle.
I have a friend who maintains that most American produced belgian style ales are awful, and while i still disagree with him, after drinking this beer i see where he is coming from. This is a horrible beer. I said bland earlier, but its worse than that, its fake. This is the worst attempt at a belgian style beer i have seen in a long while.

 1,001 characters

Photo of ComputerBeer
2.57/5  rDev -36.2%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I expected this to be a much better beer! Brown to red color rocky white head. Some stone fruit in the nose, with some malt sweetness. Very sweet and boozy, seemed like an unfinished beer. Plenty of carbonation. Finished with out a hint of the "citrus" from the sweet orange peel it was brewed with.

 299 characters

Photo of rpstevens
2.62/5  rDev -35%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured from a bottle into a Portsmouth tulip. The beer is a ruddy amber/brown with very slim glowing orange edges. The pour produces a thick, frothy white head that fades quickly but leaves behind a generous amount of foamy bubbly lacing.

The smell is raisins, plums, maybe some dark chocolate and caramel, followed by a sweet syrupy alcohol. There is an unpleasant metallic component to the sweetness, and there is not much complexity.

The taste is better than the smell, but not much. The dark fruits are present, but a bit over-ripe? They are sharp and almost too sweet. The dark chocolate is more present in the flavor than the nose, but the caramel is overpowered by the alcohol sweetness.

The beer is too carbonated for the style, and it makes the beer feel too light. The alcohol overpowers the other qualities of the beer, and it's not something that I really want to finish.

 887 characters

Photo of ehagedorn
2.84/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I was really disappointed with this beer! I hadn't tried any Brooklyn Brewery products before but a knowledgeable Belgian aficianado suggested it. Not as much body as I expected. Not enough maltiness. It surely looked nicer in the glass than it tasted!

 252 characters

Photo of spointon
2.86/5  rDev -29%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 2

I poured this one from a 750ml brown bottle into my stemmed Allagash tulip glass.

A= This ale poured a deep brown color with a towering billowy tan head that seemed to last forever. Incredible head retention.

S= Very muted smell for a Belgian style ale. Some malty sweetness and candi sugar notes evident, but lacking in Belgian character. Very low yeast aroma.

T= Frankly pretty weak in the flavor department. Sort of a bland sweetness combined with sulfury (and a bit unpleasant) molasses. Yeast character almost entirely lacking. Finished too dry and a bit astringent.

MF= Light side of medium bodied with a decently crisp mouthfeel.

D= Wow, as much as I love Brooklyn Local 1, I seem to dislike Local 2. Overall pretty bland and lacking in character. Not recommended at all.

 787 characters

Photo of natelocc787
2.9/5  rDev -28%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Expected a lot form this beer ans was let down. Brown dubbel colcor when poured with outstanding head and lace. Nose has green apples and caramelized pear with Belgian yeast. Taste has light green apple, honey and ginger, light maple and dark belgian candi sugar. Mouthfeel was unimpressive. Got foam with every sip. Didn't get through this one fast.

 350 characters

Photo of Jesse13713
2.92/5  rDev -27.5%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Bought and took home from Winking Lizard's in Fairlawn, OH.

Appearance - Three fingers of head present itself immediately under a vibrant and well carbonated beer. Much darker than I expected it to be. A dark crimson red pour with hints of caramel brown.

Smell - Hints of odd hibiscus flowers and dandelions. Smells slightly spicy with very faint hints of chocolate in the background. Smells slightly like an Irish red ale.

Taste - Very crispy and malty with hints of caramel. A lot of floral notes. Very, very sweet thanks to the Belgian dark sugar and honey additions. Yeasty and fruity.

Mouthfeel / Drinkability - Very dry on the finish. Very complex spices. A lot of different flavors working together here. I didn't like this at all the first couple of drinks, but it slowly grew on me. The flavors are working together quite brilliantly here; but it just didn't adhere to my tastes.

Mouthfeel / Drinkability - A very sweet beer with floral notes. Medium bodied.

 972 characters

3.06/5  rDev -24.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

After trying local 1 i was eager to try 2.
Did not love it like i liked 1.
Big head with legs. Had lots of smell of bourbon dark fruit and caramel. .dark beer in color. Dark beer in flavor. .
Dos not care for this heavy beer. Was not what i was expecting.
Was a little disappointed. Did not finish the bottle

 310 characters

Photo of dirtylou
3.08/5  rDev -23.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

750ml bottle, brawleys

notes. i've had a day to reflect on how dissapointing this beer was.

appearance: dark cola body, frothy tan head with lively carbonation and foamy retention

smell: dark fruits, booze, wood, dark malts

taste: bitter orange rind, honey, dark malts, booze, woody notes, hoppy, booze soaked dark fruits. split this one and it was really too much.

mouthfeel: really bad - carbonation way over done, spicy boozy finish. basically the opposite of good

drinkability: bad.

 492 characters

Photo of woosterbill
3.09/5  rDev -23.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 2.5

750 corked & caged bottle into a Duvel tulip.

A: Dark, opaque black-vermillion body with a lovely 3" head of frothy, creamy tan foam; good retention and light lacing. Great looking beer.

S: Rather dull aroma of bready malt, dark fruits, and spicy yeast. Not bad, but nothing special - especially for such a great style.

T: Starts out with fruity yeast, then the bready malts, then a distinct bit of cherry flavor (nice), and finally a wave of booze. Fairly complex, but overly boozy and not especially tasty.

M: Very smooth and fairly light, with abundant fine effervescence. Quite pleasant.

D: Not so great here. Mediocre taste and overly apparent alcohol make it a bit of a chore to drink a whole 750.

Notes: Much like Local 1, this was a faint imitation of the best Belgians (and, for that matter, top-notch American versions like Three Philosophers and Allagash Quad/Odyssey). Unlike the Local 1, it wasn't all that tasty in its own right. Even though this isn't a bad beer by any stretch, I was pretty disappointed. I'd recommend steering clear of this one in favor of one of the offerings from Rochefort, St. Bernardus, or Chimay, get the idea.


 1,174 characters

Photo of rapidsequence
3.16/5  rDev -21.6%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

750 ml bottle, $9.39 from my grocery store. Been in my cellar for a year.

Appearance: Pours a dark cherry brown with an off white head. Excellent head retention and some sticky lacing. When held to the light, the beer is a clear garnet color with lots of bubbles. The head and lacing on the second pour is even better, so I'm upping the score. Good looking beer.

Smell: Definitely its a BSDA, but not the best. Some dark fruit and bready yeast, but not too complex. Very spicy and peppery. The "citrus peel," which I assume is curucao is very tart smelling. Unfortunately spice and citrus drown out some of the other nice aromas.

Taste: Up front, a thin example of fruity and yeasty Belgian dark, followed by a ridiculous amount of sour, tart citrus all the way through to the finish. Why, just why? Why add citrus peel to a Belgian dark, and if you must, why this much? Its not terrible, but just wrong.

Mouthfeel: I like the carbonation. It allows it to be foamy and creamy without being too much. It does finish a little too dry/puckering, maybe because its so tart. That makes it seem a little thin though rather than thick and rich.

Drinkability: All in all, its an OK BSDA with too much citrus flavor. Its drinkable and decent, but not for $10 a 750. Much better BSDAs to be had for that, both North American and Belgian.

 1,332 characters

Photo of Hoppington
3.2/5  rDev -20.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

The bottle discretely states: "Ale brewed with honey and citrus peel". Sounds good to me so I bought a bottle.

I have mixed impressions here. It is a decent Abbey influenced beer, but the taste is not evoking either honey or citrus peel. Still, its a good beer - but pretty much a straight belgian style ale...and not particularly distinctive.

The malt notes strike me as a bit muted and the overall mouthfeel is a bit more liquidy than I would expect for this style. Also there is a slight lagerish nose which turns me off a bit.

I'm not going to pan it completely, but I probably won't be drinking this one again unless they refine the recipe a bit. This has potential, but it's just not quite there yet for me. It needs to be more distinctive and exhibit a bit more character. This one seems a bit timid.

 811 characters

Photo of matty
3.2/5  rDev -20.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Dark brown colored beer with a rapidly fading head.Aroma is dark fruit.Taste is the same dark fruit,alcohol and a bit of hops on the finish.Overall it's ok but this is not something I can see myself buying again in the future.I would probably recommend to try once but as for me one is plenty.

 293 characters

Photo of WalrusJockey
3.22/5  rDev -20.1%
look: 4 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

750ml bottle into Duvel tulips.

A- very clear and crisp brown on the pour, in the glass it is a darker, reddish color. The head is thick, and the color they call mocha that looks nothing like the coffee of the same name.

S- very sweet with lots of forest-berry aromas, with a choco-vanilla hint, assumedly from the malt.

T- spice and fruit linger behind and alongside the thick malt profile, with the fruit of the nose far removed from where it was expected to be. The dominant flavor is of spices, like a spicy cinnamon loaf, combined with the 9% ABV, the result is very warming. The berries of the nose are sadly underrepresented, and the label's "honey and citrus peel" seem to be more added to sound enticing on the label than to be significant ingredients.

The end result isn't *bad,* in fact it is rather nice, but it is not what the aroma, or the bottle itself, might lead you to expect. For a BSDA I find it to be far too much malt and not nearly enough...flavor besides malt.

M- much thinner than I expected. Not creamy or thick at all. In the glass, it looks quite heavy, and the head is fairly substantial, but in the mouth, the beer is light, and with the heavy amounts of malt and spice present, it winds up feeling lacking in body, though it isn't wattery by any stretch. Honestly, if the mouthfeel had matched the flavor profile in ANY way, this beer would have received a much better score from me.

D- I don't think any 9% is going to be overly drinkable, but I don't especially like this beer, so I would rate it poorly.

Notes- if you want a strong, spiced-unto-spicy beer that won't weigh down your stomach with tons of body, and isn't distracted by fruit flavors, you might like this beer. I don't care for "winter warmer" types, and if I had known that was what this is, I probably would have passed on it. Rated as a BSD it fares even worse.

 1,869 characters

Photo of psyphin
3.23/5  rDev -19.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

A - Very dark brown with ruby highlights. Huge slight off white head on top, no lacing.

S - Boozy with typical belgian esters. Dark fruit and malt hidden behind.

T - Heavy malt, fruity with a heavy alcahol heat.

M - Slightly thin with aggresive carbonation.

D - The overwhelming sensation of the alcahol detracted from an otherwise interesting beer. Worth a bottle for sampling, definitely not intended for session drinking.

 428 characters

Photo of TPatterson70
3.26/5  rDev -19.1%
look: 4.75 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.75

Great look. Missing a smell. Carbonation kills the palette initially and there is very little taste up front. Finished with Carmel, alcohol and malt. It's ok. Very flat flavor. Carbonation has to much punch. A 91 BA score is generous.

 234 characters

Photo of whoneeds8
3.28/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours out a dark brown with a one finger head that disappears rather quickly. I can't tell anything along the line of smell because of allergies. This is the worst time of year for me to be reviewing anything, lol. The taste doesn't really have the flavor intensity I would like for a beer at this price level. The taste is well balanced, but I am having trouble finding the honey advertised on the back of the label. There is a sort of mapel taste upfront, maybe that's what they were talking about. The spices from the belgian yeast is there, just not very strong. The mouthfeel is way way way too carbonated. So much so that it almost takes away from the flavor. It definatly takes a notch off drinkability.

 710 characters

Photo of champ103
3.28/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: Pours a cloudy brown color. A large beige head forms with good retention. Light lace is left as the foam recedes.
S: Brewers yeast, some fruity esters, and some alcohol.
T: Follows the nose. Yeast and fruit. Sweet sugary malt and alcohol. A strange mineral flavor.
M/D: A medium body that is way over carbonated. The alcohol is noticeable, but still a good beer to sip on.

Not bad, but kind of bland IMO. Worth a try, but not my favorite for the style or brewery.

 467 characters

Photo of farrago
3.28/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Big, frothy head with hyper-active bubbles, they pop in front of you like they are on fast forward, about average lacing, everything wants to go "pop." Murky dark brown in color, the bubble beads which flow near the glass sides clear in their vigor, more jaundice yellow than orange around the rims. Cola, chocolate, molasses, rum raisin, candied orange peels fill the nose, has to make room for an abundance of banana, apricot, cherry fruit, no hoppy spine thus it leans back in your nostrils like they were a beanbag. Medium-bodied, would be heavy if not sloth-like were it not for the foamy carbonation to mask a good deal of the sweetness. Date, prune, raisin, plum, cherry fruit leads with moments of apricot, banana. The floral side lacks clarity, muted by honey, molasses, brown sugar flavors. Leesy quality to the yeasts, round and coating. Glazed nuts. Dark chocolate bitterness appears through the finish, welcome sight. Maybe it's me but seems overwrought and it takes awhile to get a whole glass down.

 1,013 characters

Photo of YouSkeete
3.28/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A: Deep dark cloudy mahogany color. Very opaque. Enormous tan colored head.

S: Honey, dark fruits and chocolate are the main aromas coming from this one. Smells pretty malty and pretty yeasty. Strong aromas.

T: Sweet upfront, notes of chocolate and honey. Caramel and some darker fruits can be noticed after the initial taste. Also tastes a bit nutty, like a brown ale. 9% ABV isn't very noticeable. Fizzy finish, almost like champage.

M: High carbonation, light to medium body. Again, tastes like champagne.

D: Easy drinker, though not really my style. Too simple: very face value.

 586 characters

Photo of WorldWideStout
3.28/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

I drank this beer about two weeks ago, so I unfortunately don't remember all the nuances of scent and flavor that have been captured by previous reviewers. I felt I needed to say, however, that this beer tasted much more like a Belgian triple to me than the strong dark ale it is listed as. I usually love honey in beer, but maybe it was too much this time. I felt the honey, hibiscus, and sweetness dominated all the other flavors. I'm not a big fan of triples, and I was disappointed by this beer.

 499 characters

Photo of beancounter
3.29/5  rDev -18.4%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A-Pours medium brown with a thick beautiful head.

S-Bready smell dominates with a faint touch of unidentified spice and candy.

T-Malty and candy like with bitterness at the back of the tongue.

M-Thin and watery.

O-Overall, a drinkable beer, but not very complex. Worth a try, but not one that I'll buy again. I'll stick with local number 1.

 344 characters

Photo of stageseven
3.31/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

The beer poured a deep, murky brown with reddish highlights. It's head was a dirty brown color, 2-3 fingers thick, and frothy. The head had good retention, sticking around for quite a while, and leaving some lacing on the glass.

The smell was fairly complex, and predominantly wild and sweet. There was a tart smell, apple cider and spice that dominated the nose at first. It then gave way to more grassy aromas - hay and other sweet plant smells, with a hint of flowers underneath. The smell of honey comes through as well. Even though it says it was brewed with citrus and honey, I didn't notice any citrusy smells, although it could have been masked by one of the other aromas.

The taste was initially round and sweet, with some of the hay flavors coming through as well. I didn't notice citrus in the taste either, so it made me wonder what exactly was going on with that. Still the smell was a fairly good indicator of the flavors of the beer, and I got some apple in the taste. The one major surprise was the moderate level of bitterness present in the back of the mouth, leaving a rounded bitter aftertaste that sticks with you for a while. However, there was a disturbing medicinal flavor, possibly from the honey, possibly from the alcohol, but it sat just around the edges of the flavor and reminded me of vicks vapo-rub or minty breath spray. I tried to ignore it and just enjoy the beer, but it kept getting in the way for me.

In the mouth the beer sits somewhat thick, round, and heavy. It's got a substantial feel to it. The carbonation is moderately high, but round rather than sharp. I found the carbonation a little distracting as I drank the beer, and I felt like this was contributing to the medicinal flavor somehow. The beer was on the wet side, and at first was warming from the alcohol, especially in the throat.

I felt that this brew was a little bit of a chore to get down. It's disappointing because I had such high hopes for it. There were definitely some very good aspects to the flavor, but between the high carbonation and the medicinal quality I had a hard time focusing on them. The sweetness was a little cloying, and the bitterness although unexpected did not offset it quite enough for my tastes. As the glass progresses it gets a bit better as the carbonation drops off some. I really enjoyed the wildness in the aroma and flavor too. All in all it's decent, but not one I'd go out of my way for. The balance just seems off.

 2,464 characters

Photo of mikereaser
3.31/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Poured from a 750 ml bottle on 12/1/09

A - Pours a deep mahogany brown with an inch of foam that slowly disappeared

S - yeast and peppery aroma, some brown sugar and berries

T - malty, berries at first, then dark fruit, plums, raisins, brown sugar

M - good carbonation, smooth, slightly creamy

D - good flavor, a bit sweet, but nice array of flavors

 354 characters

Photo of SierraFlight
3.31/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

750 ml bottle poured into shaker pint. Billowing tan head settles to a thin layer atop hazy iced tea colored liquid. Minimal lacing. Aroma is subtle, fig, bread, citrus, and dark fruit. Taste is stronger with citrus, malt, caramel, and honey sweetness followed by a slight floral bitterness. Medium body, creamy texture, high fizzy but soft carbonation, and a sweet finish.

 373 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Brooklyn Local 2 from Brooklyn Brewery
90 out of 100 based on 532 ratings.