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!

Tire Bite Golden Ale - Flying Dog Brewery

Not Rated.
Tire Bite Golden AleTire Bite Golden Ale

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

983 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 983
Reviews: 655
rAvg: 3.01
pDev: 17.94%
Wants: 8
Gots: 20 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Flying Dog Brewery visit their website
Maryland, United States

Style | ABV
Kölsch |  5.10% ABV

Availability: Year-round

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

No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: BeerAdvocate on 11-30-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Tire Bite Golden Ale Alström Bros
Ratings: 983 | Reviews: 655 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of garymuchow
3.18/5  rDev +5.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Sweeter mix of malt, hops to aroma. Almost has an Am. lager type of aroma at times. Again the appearance looks like a lager with a golden clear color with bubbles rising and white head (that's pretty solid). Even the flavors are similar to Am. style lager, just more robust malt. Hops provide bitterness in middle to end with medium finish. Bit of grassy quality, lingering light bittery and somewhat dry finish. Full feel from carbonation, otherwise medium to less. As warms develops some softness. This seems an appeal to the mass market, more than crafting an excellent brew. Lots of similarities to macros (as noted), but somewhat better, just not siginificanlty enough.

garymuchow, Jun 22, 2003
Photo of budgood1
2.68/5  rDev -11%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

pours out a golden straw colour. decent head which sticks around and leaves ample lacing. nice light malt aroma. a bit of grassy hopping too...can't complain. upon tasting...i liked the taste at first...then it the mouthfeel ruined everything. it came across as watery and thin and too crisp for an ale. i started to compare this to the SA spring ale i had the night before and thought it was better, but the nore sips i took....the more i realized that tire bite really bites. it doesn't really leave a pleasant aftertaste either. not too drinkable. i've found these golden ales or kolsch styles ride a fine line between being great and really bad. not and ale i will revisit.

budgood1, Jun 21, 2003
Photo of WesWes
2.85/5  rDev -5.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

This beer pours a very light golden color. The head is non-existant, a trait I'm finding more and more with their beers. The aroma is musty with hints of malt peeking through. The taste is quite poor. There is no malt character and no hopping. It tastes a lot like some crappy commercial wanna be. I hate to be this harsh, but for a "micro," hand crafted beer this is a total let down. The mouthfeel is it's only saving grace. It's a light bodied beer and is very drinkable, although I know this will be my last one.

WesWes, Jun 20, 2003
Photo of kelticblood
3.75/5  rDev +24.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 4 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Pour was a clear gold with carbonation rising up from the bottom.Not too complex with this one.It has the traditional mass-produced pilsner smell,but it's taste is different.A very good mouthfeel that leaves hints of wheat,rice,and grain.Very sweet in the nose and in the taste.Light bodied and lightly hopped,but has a malt thickness and is not watered down.A creamy rolling texture on the palate and is not over carbonated.This would be an excellent replacement for Bud or any other macro-beer.A good starter for the novice beer drinker.

kelticblood, May 25, 2003
Photo of 86MonteSS
3.9/5  rDev +29.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

I've often wondered how the lighter, "golden" ales could possibly measure up to their heavier, darker counterparts. Tire Biter is one of the lightest ales I've ever had, but damn is it tasty. An expectedly short-lived head, pale yet handsome color, and a surprisingly pleasant smell. The taste is sweet but not overly so. A slightly bitter aftertaste provides a poignant counterbalance.

Flying dog is quickly finding its way into my heart. This great-tasting golden ale definitely helps to seal the deal.

86MonteSS, May 24, 2003
Photo of GeoffRizzo
2.68/5  rDev -11%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a golden color with a thin head, some notes of carbonation. The aroma is weak, some hops and grainy characteristics. Very thin bodied from the get go, some malty and bready are barely detected. Some apple peel taste towards the finish, and a bit watered down. Don't know if this proprely fits the Kolsch family. Easy drinking, but lacks any true flavor.

GeoffRizzo, May 11, 2003
Photo of AtLagerHeads
2.9/5  rDev -3.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A golden color to match the name. This beer is average in almost every respect. The look is better than macro but only by a bit. The head is white and disappears pronto, the nose is strange and vague, and the taste is, well, average. Not a bad beer, but not one I'd ever crave. Got to love the name, right?

AtLagerHeads, Apr 24, 2003
Photo of clvand0
3.9/5  rDev +29.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 4.5

Pours to a normal golden color with a small white head and little lacing on the glass. The aroma is somewhat malty with hints of wheat. The flavor was very enjoyable and very smooth - not like the aroma. This is a very easy to drink beer and I would recommend trying it to anyone. It doesn't have any really complex flavors or aromas nor is it anything too special, but I think it's the best offering from the Flying Dog Brewery and it's an enjoyable drink.

clvand0, Apr 21, 2003
Photo of BeerBuilder
3.15/5  rDev +4.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours to a brilliant golden color, with a white head that left excellent lacing. The aroma was grainy, with slightly sweet malt, and a touch of fruit. The flavor was about the same as the aroma; grainy, fruit hop flavors, and a slight malt flavor in the back. It was a light bodied beer with light carbonation, and a semi-dry finish. Overall, it was an easy drinking brew; it would be a great session beer.

BeerBuilder, Apr 10, 2003
Photo of elmocoso
2.78/5  rDev -7.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

After sniffing and sniffing i finally realized it was the smell of sour kraut that was haunting my nose. Why is it there? There are other smells: Citrus, apple, others i cant discern.

The taste is there also. This is a very interesting beverage. Is it interesting in a good way? I don't think so. I might enjoy this one, but it would be the last. Interesting experience.

The color is a dull cloudy gold with a thin veil of bubbles sitting atop. Other than that, not much else.

elmocoso, Mar 31, 2003
Photo of jreitman
3/5  rDev -0.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Really, when you get right down to it, average is the pretty much the best word to describe everything about this beer. I could easily see people picking up cases of this stuff as it is very much like the american macros in a lot of respects. Aroma was next to non-existent with only a faint sweetness managing to make it to my nose. Flavor, as well, was quite subdued with breadiness being the only word to describe what I tasted. A dry, nutty finish was followed by a fairly strong bitterness to the finish. I would certainly not have labelled it a Kolsch.

jreitman, Mar 18, 2003
Photo of feloniousmonk
3.28/5  rDev +9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

On this sampling, the label has changed a bit. Now it's that crystal clear terminology "golden ale", and away with the ever-so-confusing term "kolsch".
Color's a bright gold, decent, but short white head. Aroma is dry, herbal, buttery, a touch of fruit (apple, pear), a little buttery, too. Nice hop spark upon the tongue, and quite smooth on the palate. Light body, very drinkable, smooth, and tasty. Downable indeed, but rather run-of-the-mill.

feloniousmonk, Mar 05, 2003
Photo of drizzam
2.88/5  rDev -4.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I was a little taken aback by this beer...it was a clear gold color with very little head to speak of. Citrussy undertones, thin mouthfeel and it finished clean and crisp. This wasn't that spectacular of a beer...almost tame and (I don't want to say bland but there wasn't anything too spectacular about this beer.) I wouldn't turn one down but I wouldn't go out of my way to buy it either.

drizzam, Feb 22, 2003
Photo of johnrobe
2.98/5  rDev -1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

This brew pours a pale straw with a mere white cap of a head. It smells of herbal hops some faint fruity esters and bit metallic. Herbal hops are dominant in the taste with just a touch of grain and some mild metallics. Although this should be a light-medium bodied brew...this one still comes across as being too light. It reminds me somewhat of Sam Adams Light. This one would be best for a hot summer day and would make a good crossover brew to let your macroswill drinking friends try.

johnrobe, Feb 15, 2003
Photo of ADR
2.4/5  rDev -20.3%
look: 2.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Very clear light yellow appearance, refugee head with no chance to cling to the glass. Off aromas, an odd sense of faint white vinegar and ammonia. I swished and swished this beer to the point of a gargle in an attempt to discern a flavor profile, but to no avail -- just the barest malt (some raw grains) and a finish of golden raisins. There’s just not enough here (and the smell was not pleasant) for me to say that I would ever drink this beer again.

ADR, Jan 28, 2003
Photo of jackndan
2.9/5  rDev -3.7%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Tire Biter: From Flying Dog brewery. Golden color, not much head, but what little there was left a nice lacing down the side of the straight up pint glass into which it was poured. As for aroma and taste, welcome to the Orange Bowl, 2003. I was struck by the obvious citrus aroma, which carried straight down through the entire glass. This beer struck me as slightly odd, easy enough to drink, but not at all representative of the style. Odd.

jackndan, Jan 19, 2003
Photo of bditty187
2.65/5  rDev -12%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Light golden tone, poor “head” retention, tiny bubbles faded fast, no lace... just a soapy residue. Musty-fruity nose, clean. Light malt, a touch of sweetness (seems unnatural), faint hint of lemon. Not much flavor, bland with a thin mouthfeel, does finish slightly dry and crisp. This is really a poor beer and one lousy Kolsch. It’s barely worthy of our attention on a hot summer day. Not recommended.

bditty187, Jan 03, 2003
Photo of RBorsato
3.5/5  rDev +16.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Hazy, unfiltered yellowish light gold with a low white head. Light grainy malt aroma and taste. Light bodied (leans medium). All around decent beer but no real outstanding characteristics.

I would not have thought this was a Kolsch but more of a traditional American Blonde/Golden Ale....

RBorsato, Dec 30, 2002
Photo of Gusler
3/5  rDev -0.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

The pour a crystal clear light gold color, the white head is adequate in size, the lace lumpy sheets, and they both dissolve quickly. Nose is malt, fresh and clean, front starts malt sweet, the top lanky, the finish spitefully acidic, sparsely hopped, with a very dry somewhat bitter aftertaste. Average overall but, quite drinkable nonetheless.

Gusler, Nov 16, 2002
Photo of ZAP
2.55/5  rDev -15.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Bright golden in color...fruity nose...taste is acidic..body is OK...real bitter finish and not in a good way...I'm having a hard time putting this one to words but I can say I think this is definitely below average bordering on poor. I would not drink this again..

ZAP, Oct 19, 2002
Photo of Pegasus
3/5  rDev -0.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Pours a golden bronze color with a modest off-white head which fades to a paper-thin layer rather quickly, lace rings the glass nicely. Aroma consists of citrus notes, and floral aromas. Tasting yields malt flavors with bread overtones, yields to hops with a medicinal character, finish is dry and crisp. Overall, the mouthfeel is rather watery, as others have noted. Overall, this beer is inoffensive, but nothing special. I was surprised to discover that Shiner Summer Style beats this one hands down.

Pegasus, Sep 29, 2002
Photo of beernut7
3.63/5  rDev +20.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

This deeply colored golden ale pours with no real lasting head and just a bit of lace. The malt aroma is a bit fruity. The delicate flavor combines a slightly sweet smooth malt profile with a subtle hop spiciness with just a hint of bitter. Not bad for teh style and quite easily consumed.

beernut7, Sep 04, 2002
Photo of Wildman
3.63/5  rDev +20.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

This beer was a light golden color with a bubbly white head. There was some carbonation present. The aroma was of hops and some grain. The flavor was of hops with some grain and citrus lightly present. The finish was astrigent, yet a bit tangy. Not a big fan of this style, but it was servicable on tap.

Wildman, Aug 26, 2002
Photo of Dogbrick
3/5  rDev -0.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Kind of maple-colored, mine was not skunky or smelly which a lot of people seem to have to contend with in this Ale. Possibly because mine was from a case that was not exposed to light? Anyway, this was crisp and lightly hopped. Not too bad at all.

Dogbrick, Aug 13, 2002
Photo of Murph
3.15/5  rDev +4.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a bright straw color with a creamy white head that leaves a nice looking lace all the way down the glass. Smell has lots of sweetness in it as well as some slgith graininess. Very sweet on the tongue but a decent grainy huskiness keeps the sweetness from running away. The sweetness makes the brew a bit cloying and it is definitely neither crisp nor dry enough. Although it isn't as refreshingly dry and crisp as it should be the brew still manages to be fairly drinkable. So far I am unimpressed with this brewery. This one is definitely too sweet and not dry enough, there are better Kölschs out there.

Murph, Aug 12, 2002
Tire Bite Golden Ale from Flying Dog Brewery
70 out of 100 based on 983 ratings.