No Limit Amber Ale
Hornpout Brewing
- From:
- Hornpout Brewing
- Vermont, United States
- Style:
- American Amber / Red Ale
- ABV:
- 5%
- Score:
- +4 ratings needed
- Avg:
- 2.49 | pDev: 20.88%
- Ratings:
- | reviews: 6
- Status:
- Retired
- Rated:
- Jun 17, 2006
- Added:
- Aug 24, 2005
- Wants:
- 0
- Gots:
- 0
NO SCORE
-
-
No description / notes.
Recent ratings and reviews.
Reviewed by ppoitras from Massachusetts
1.82/5 rDev -26.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5
1.82/5 rDev -26.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5
22oz bottle purchased as a single from Middlebury Discount Beverage, Middlebury, VT.
Upon uncapping, bottle explodes forth with as much froth as you'd expect from a science fair volcano demostration. Eventually able to pour into an imperial pint glass, formed a 2 1/2" (and growing) light tan head over the amber brew. Head finally fades some, with heavy frothy lacing. Aroma is tart with musty barnyard, not what I would look for or appreciate in the nose of an amber. Taste is grain husks upfront, lightly tart in the middle, and the farm mustiness appears and lingers through to the end. Mouthfeel and drinkability suffer because this brew is just not on. Seems like Hornpout either has some severe funky brews, or some severe QC issues. The bottles I bought we from central VT, relatively close to the source. Not really any excuse for stuff like this.
Jun 17, 2006Upon uncapping, bottle explodes forth with as much froth as you'd expect from a science fair volcano demostration. Eventually able to pour into an imperial pint glass, formed a 2 1/2" (and growing) light tan head over the amber brew. Head finally fades some, with heavy frothy lacing. Aroma is tart with musty barnyard, not what I would look for or appreciate in the nose of an amber. Taste is grain husks upfront, lightly tart in the middle, and the farm mustiness appears and lingers through to the end. Mouthfeel and drinkability suffer because this brew is just not on. Seems like Hornpout either has some severe funky brews, or some severe QC issues. The bottles I bought we from central VT, relatively close to the source. Not really any excuse for stuff like this.
Reviewed by goodbyeohio from Connecticut
2.11/5 rDev -15.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5
2.11/5 rDev -15.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5
22oz bomber, flourescent orange label with an ugly fish and a beautiful sunset.. pours effervescently into a pint glass.. first pour wasn't extremely cautious and produced 90% head. second pour was very careful and kept the champagney situation under control. looks brownish with a ruby tint, head is a nice mix of rainbow-tinged soap bubbles and 3D cloud patterns.
really spicy, yeasty nose. something about the peppery spice smell reminded me of american style saisons/dubbels gone wrong.. a clovey malt presence mingling with something sour and just not right.
taste is just downright vacant. the biggest thing i taste is the metallic gist to the carbonation in the bubbles of this beer, resulting in a dry feel with that weird smoky clove flavor backing it up. i like my ambers and reds big and caramelly with nice hop accents. this beer has neither.
there is no need for me to go on, this brewery should do something worthwhile or shut its doors. 2 beers? and one of them tastes like this?
Jan 16, 2006really spicy, yeasty nose. something about the peppery spice smell reminded me of american style saisons/dubbels gone wrong.. a clovey malt presence mingling with something sour and just not right.
taste is just downright vacant. the biggest thing i taste is the metallic gist to the carbonation in the bubbles of this beer, resulting in a dry feel with that weird smoky clove flavor backing it up. i like my ambers and reds big and caramelly with nice hop accents. this beer has neither.
there is no need for me to go on, this brewery should do something worthwhile or shut its doors. 2 beers? and one of them tastes like this?
Reviewed by Gogol from Massachusetts
2.28/5 rDev -8.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5
2.28/5 rDev -8.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5
(0004) Reviewed: 1/14/06.
A 22 oz. bottle purchased on a whim (label caught the eye) at a C-store by fellow BA. No freshness date on bottle. Bottle stored approx. 1 week at cellar temp (~50 deg. F) in (where else?) my cellar.
Appearance: Poured very carbonated. Immense, tan, rocky head that acted like cola (fizzed right to the top of the glass and stood proud above it), then faded to a thin film. sparse streams of tiny bubbles threaded their way upwards from side and bottom nucleation points. Color a clear, thin yellow-orange (i.e., amber).
Smell: Light whiff of crisp(?) malt, slight piney hops.
Taste: Taste? Um...trying not to be too harsh, this tasted a bit....thin. Strike that; there's a malty taste right at the beginning, but it disappears almost instantly, replaced by a mild to moderate sour taste. Hops are very spare, except the bitterness at the beginning mingling with the sourness. My impression is of a bitter/sour wave front, with near vacuum behind.
Mouthfeel: Its, um, almost like there's nothing there. In my very humble and somewhat experienced homebrewer's (7 yrs, ok?) opinion, it could do with a "beefier" malt base.
Drinkability: If the sourness can be removed, it might be a below-average-but-still-drinkable session beer. I just can't seem to get past the sourness and the lack of body.
With no freshness date, and the fact that it came from a C-store, it may be that this bottle was no good. More study will be required.
Jan 15, 2006A 22 oz. bottle purchased on a whim (label caught the eye) at a C-store by fellow BA. No freshness date on bottle. Bottle stored approx. 1 week at cellar temp (~50 deg. F) in (where else?) my cellar.
Appearance: Poured very carbonated. Immense, tan, rocky head that acted like cola (fizzed right to the top of the glass and stood proud above it), then faded to a thin film. sparse streams of tiny bubbles threaded their way upwards from side and bottom nucleation points. Color a clear, thin yellow-orange (i.e., amber).
Smell: Light whiff of crisp(?) malt, slight piney hops.
Taste: Taste? Um...trying not to be too harsh, this tasted a bit....thin. Strike that; there's a malty taste right at the beginning, but it disappears almost instantly, replaced by a mild to moderate sour taste. Hops are very spare, except the bitterness at the beginning mingling with the sourness. My impression is of a bitter/sour wave front, with near vacuum behind.
Mouthfeel: Its, um, almost like there's nothing there. In my very humble and somewhat experienced homebrewer's (7 yrs, ok?) opinion, it could do with a "beefier" malt base.
Drinkability: If the sourness can be removed, it might be a below-average-but-still-drinkable session beer. I just can't seem to get past the sourness and the lack of body.
With no freshness date, and the fact that it came from a C-store, it may be that this bottle was no good. More study will be required.
Reviewed by Citadel82 from New Jersey
3/5 rDev +20.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
3/5 rDev +20.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3
Bought this at Winooski Beverage while in Vermont on Vacation. A decent, very drinkable brew.
Pours copper/amber with a generous white head that left some nice lacing and faded to a thin color in a fairly short time.
Aroma was carmel malt and floral hops in a nice balance.
The taste was balanced overall but there seemed to be a disconnect between the maltiness up fron and the hop dryness at the tail end. The transition was too abrubt.
mouthfeel was medium to thin.
Very drinkable overall, though not something to run out and buy.
Sep 23, 2005Pours copper/amber with a generous white head that left some nice lacing and faded to a thin color in a fairly short time.
Aroma was carmel malt and floral hops in a nice balance.
The taste was balanced overall but there seemed to be a disconnect between the maltiness up fron and the hop dryness at the tail end. The transition was too abrubt.
mouthfeel was medium to thin.
Very drinkable overall, though not something to run out and buy.
Reviewed by weeare138 from Pennsylvania
3.33/5 rDev +33.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5
3.33/5 rDev +33.7%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5
22 oz. bomber with a big ol' ugly catfish welcoming you with his whiskers. Actually, that's probably the only reason I bought it, as I hadn't heard of these guys yet and I purchased a few bombers while I was in VT last month during the Brewers Fest...
Appears a hazy dark amber with an off white 2 finger head that slowly fades. A few large streams of bubbles can be seen making their way up to the top. A light white collar is formed within the glass, along with a little bit of tiny lacing.
Smell is slightly weak with some malt and herbal grains coming through.
Taste is slightly sweet malts mixed with a bit of a red grape undernote. It actually gets a bit better(well...much better) as it warms up a bit.
Mouthfeel is slightly sour with some smooth sweetness and lots of fizzy, gritty textured feels running along the palate.
Drinkability is ok. I would drink this again if nothing else was jumping out at me. Reminded me slightly of another Lyndonville product, Trout River's Red. Perhaps the water source?
Aug 25, 2005Appears a hazy dark amber with an off white 2 finger head that slowly fades. A few large streams of bubbles can be seen making their way up to the top. A light white collar is formed within the glass, along with a little bit of tiny lacing.
Smell is slightly weak with some malt and herbal grains coming through.
Taste is slightly sweet malts mixed with a bit of a red grape undernote. It actually gets a bit better(well...much better) as it warms up a bit.
Mouthfeel is slightly sour with some smooth sweetness and lots of fizzy, gritty textured feels running along the palate.
Drinkability is ok. I would drink this again if nothing else was jumping out at me. Reminded me slightly of another Lyndonville product, Trout River's Red. Perhaps the water source?
Reviewed by Sycodrummer from Massachusetts
2.43/5 rDev -2.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2
2.43/5 rDev -2.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2
Was the reccomendation of the beer guy at a local store so I decided to give it a try and see what it was like. I had never heard of the brewery nor the beer so I went into the beer with a very open mind.
Poured from a 22oz. brown bomber into an imperial pint glass the beer was a light brown near bronze color with a think and frothy two-finger white head. No signs of carbonation on the sides of the glass and no real appreciable lacing throughout the sample.
The smell was slightly fruitty and floral with a good hop presence in the nose. Overall a bit bland with no fragrance jumping out to meet you.
The taste was rather light and crisp with a soft fruit flavor that gives way to a mild hop character and bitterness. The beer finishes off slightly maltly but overall has nothing really coming thru to taste. Very bland, and after one pint and on to the next, it began to taste like wet, chewy, cardboard.
Medium body, with rather good carbonation
I finished the bomber but also split some with a friend (who agreed in most part to the above). It just didn't do anything for me and was overall a VERY average perhaps below average, run-of-the-mill beer. It had no true flavor or quality to it that would make me go out and buy, or even drink another. Below par, IMO.
Aug 24, 2005Poured from a 22oz. brown bomber into an imperial pint glass the beer was a light brown near bronze color with a think and frothy two-finger white head. No signs of carbonation on the sides of the glass and no real appreciable lacing throughout the sample.
The smell was slightly fruitty and floral with a good hop presence in the nose. Overall a bit bland with no fragrance jumping out to meet you.
The taste was rather light and crisp with a soft fruit flavor that gives way to a mild hop character and bitterness. The beer finishes off slightly maltly but overall has nothing really coming thru to taste. Very bland, and after one pint and on to the next, it began to taste like wet, chewy, cardboard.
Medium body, with rather good carbonation
I finished the bomber but also split some with a friend (who agreed in most part to the above). It just didn't do anything for me and was overall a VERY average perhaps below average, run-of-the-mill beer. It had no true flavor or quality to it that would make me go out and buy, or even drink another. Below par, IMO.
We love reviews (150 characters or more)! Check out: How to Review a Beer. You don't need to get fancy. Drop some thoughts on the beer's attributes (look, smell, taste, feel) plus your overall impression. Something that backs up your rating and helps others. Thanks!