Discussion in 'Beer Talk' started by DarkDragon999, Feb 19, 2013.
Talked to many brewers about this, have you?
Dominion Oak Barrel Stout. Really, really thin and watery, and way over-carbonated. It also has a very misleading name, being that it's aged on wood chips, not in barrels. One of the worst stouts I've ever had. Oddly enough, my lady really liked it, and she pretty much hated stouts/porters before that one. I gave her 4 out of the 6 beers I bought, and the next week she bought a six-pack of it for herself! So at least it was a good "starter stout", I suppose.
"Getting a porter/stout that's thin and watery instead of robust"
You mean anything from Left Hand?
Pipeline is good.
Bass just came out with a Stout. It is thin, watery and almost flavorless.
Knee Deep Tanilla porter was really thin imo, although I would like to try there new barrel aged imperial Tanilla, but never again their regular Tanilla. I also thought the same with New Holland's Dragons Milk.
I can get why nobody is going to want a thin and watery porter\stout, but not all of them are necessarily "robust" either. There are plenty of milk stout, oatmeal stouts, or porters that are mellow an very sessionable because of it.
If BA Wake Up Dead is thin, I don't want to know what thick is.
sounds like some folks definitions might be a little bit off & therefore their expectations are a little bit beyond realistic.
at just over a buck, accepting it for what it actually is, Black Butte porter is a definite "get by" in my wheelhouse.
That's disappointing I was going to get this a few weeks ago, but I only found the Black Robusto Porter, which I enjoyed and had higher hopes for Imperial Stout.
I thought the Lips of Faith Imperial Coffee Chocolate Stout was fairly thin.
Over the holidays, I tried this one: http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/28567/88942 It's as thin as Richard Simmons at a Bikram yoga retreat.
Central Waters BBS is a perfect example of this (like previously stated).
Porters in general are a gamble for me. Some have really come through, bt I seem to have lowered my expectations enough to amp my opinion of some. (Porter Square Porter rocks though). And any stout you can't eat with a fork doesn't deserve the name! (I'm looking at you, Breckinridge!)
Did op just try a Sexual Chocolate?
I believe your expectations are the problem. Porters typically have a medium-light to medium mouthfeel. Look up "Robust porter". There is also a catagory sometimes referred to as "Imperial porter" (These are usually indistinguishable and interchangeable with Imperial stout.) And of course there is a porter fermented with lager yeast called a Baltic Porter that is also a fuller bodied beer. Perhaps those are what you want? Black Butte Porter, on tap or bottled is pretty much the same. It is an excellant porter and a good example of the style.
Bell's Double Cream Stout. Not particularly creamy or robust.
I can count the number of alt beers I've had on one hand, but that seems like that's what you get when you get a bad porter. It'd be fine for a 90F summer day with fish and chips, but right now I want something that clings to the glass a little bit more.
Porters are generally gonna be lighter in body, and weight than stouts because they are lagers if memory serves me. Generally gonna be more carbonated, lighter in body, less dense head in most cases. Good for when you want some roast, earth and chocolate, without feeling as if you just finished a 72oz steak.
Stouts tend to be a little richer, heavier, and smooth (still/not as effervescent).
Agreed. Flavor is good, but the mouthfeel is a little underwhelming for an imperial stout.
I have no problem quaffing multiple pints of Guinness when the options at the bar are limited to BMC stuff. Not the best and certaintly not robust and thick, but decent enough when posted up at the bar for a few hours.
If light can shine through my stout, I smash the glass on the ground
In spite of what others have written in this thread, I found Smuttynose Robust Porter to be thin and watery, and just plain awful. It could have been a bad bottle, but it doesn't matter, because I don't plan to try it again.
I tried the Pipeline Porter for the first time this week. It seems to be a perfectly respectable porter. I feel I could drink a six-pack of this on a hot afternoon here in the South. However, I found myself switching to Rogue's Mocha Porter after two Pipelines...
If given the unlimited choice I would probably always go with the thickest, darkest, most robust, barrel-aged, and highest ABV porter I could find... That's how I like's 'em!
What category would you suggest if one is looking for big viscous beer?
Imperial Stout, Barleywine, Old Ale, Dopplebock, scotch Ale, quads
Oatmeal stouts for something lower gravity. Unless, of course, they are imperial.
Try Brooklyn Dry Irish Stout if you can.
I thought regular "normal" porters aren't supposed to be that thick. I thought it was just the style. Maybe I am wrong.
Stouts I agree.
Geary's London Porter. I'm a porter lover. Not a lover of this one though.
90% of the time!
2012 CW releases were definitely thin and somewhat watery. This year they are noticeably improved!
Tallgrass Vanilla Bean Buffalo Sweat fits into this category IMO!
Breckenridge Vanilla Porter is somewhat thin from the bottle, but I had a sample of it at the bar earlier, and it was much, much better than I remember it being. Of course, it was probably just the fact that it was on tap, but still...it was good. I would have ordered it if the bar didn't have Double Bastard.
KGB imperial from widmer brothers major let down the only thing i like about its 9.1 so i like that
Most vanilla porters I've had are thin/watery. Breckenridge, Tallgrass, and Empyrean to name a few.
I've found all of CW's stouts (even 15) to be fairly thin....they taste fantastic, but I wouldn't mind a bit more body.
YES! The Breckenridge porter and oatmeal stout taste like a watered-down Marzen.
Separate names with a comma.