Lava Lake Wit | Crazy Mountain Brewing Company

BA SCORE
76
okay
181 Ratings
THE BROS
-
no score
Send samples
Lava Lake WitLava Lake Wit
BEER INFO

Brewed by:
Crazy Mountain Brewing Company
Colorado, United States
crazymountainbrewery.com

Style: Witbier

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 5.20%

Availability: Year-round

Notes / Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

Added by Schmittymack on 09-06-2011

BEER STATS
Ratings:
181
Reviews:
51
Avg:
3.23
pDev:
18.27%
 
 
Wants:
3
Gots:
17
For Trade:
0
User Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Ratings: 181 |  Reviews: 51
Photo of AndrewSpankology
1/5  rDev -69%

I have never rated a beer on this site before, but after tasting this horrible concoction at a cafe in Edwards I was inspired to write this review.

This beer sucks. It should not be called a beer. It should be sold as an alcoholic version of Celestial Seasonings tea. It should be used to clean out your toilet after a nasty bout of diarrhea.

This was the first beer that I have ever opened that I was unable to finish, except for the time that I attempted to drink a keg of Milwaukee's Best.

Please, for the sake of humanity, stop brewing this beer.

 560 characters

Photo of Ryandey
1/5  rDev -69%

Photo of ArrogantB
1.72/5  rDev -46.7%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 4 | overall: 1

On tap at Crazy Mountain Brewing in Edwards, CO. This was by fat the worst beer I tasted at the brewery and possibly one of the worst I've ever tasted. Also odd that their description was "wild fermentation", not sure if that means brett or open fermentation or what. Color was pretty much spot on for a wit, looked like a hazy yellow. Aroma was bad, smelled nothing like a wit, just gross. Flavor was terrible, offensive, I could not take more than two sips and I can;t even describe what I was tasting, rotten flowers? It was like no wit I have ever had nor that I wish to taste again. I am surprised at how many of Crazy Mountain's beers I have had that are just awful.

 672 characters

Photo of Beer_Slayer
1.75/5  rDev -45.8%

Photo of beerbrains
2/5  rDev -38.1%

Photo of stuart3368
2/5  rDev -38.1%

Photo of drone
2/5  rDev -38.1%

Photo of jsprain1
2/5  rDev -38.1%

Photo of Kataco16
2/5  rDev -38.1%

Photo of J_Billington
2/5  rDev -38.1%

Photo of urdaddy117
2/5  rDev -38.1%

Photo of nach0king
2.01/5  rDev -37.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2

Not to my taste at all. Didn't finish it.

Poured into a pint glass.

A: Quite dark and rich for a wit but it had a hint of cloudiness that actually ended up looking appetising.

S: Sweet toffee, burnt condensed milk - really too sweet for a wit. Some weird, industrial/herbal smells, like discount shampoo.

T: Similar to the smell but not as sweet. Some appealing tang at the start but fades out to a mealy-apple aftertaste.

M: Anonymous.

Will not be drinking this again and I'm not likely to seek out others by this brewery.

 529 characters

Photo of woodychandler
2.14/5  rDev -33.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.25 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.25

This was another beer from blargimus that got set aside and glossed over between a backlog of bottles and the onslaught of the school year. I do not take full responsibility for the delay in review, however, as one of the major tenets of The CANQuest (TM) is that no beer is to be reviewed without an approved picture in place. The accompanying pic is mine, but the lead-time for approval is much longer than it used to be and so I set the CAN aside. All is now well.

From the CAN: "A beer brewed with spices"; "Get Crazy"; "This Ale is our take on a classic Belgian Wit. To make this wit unique, we add un-malted wheat, rolled oats, two varieties of classic European hops, chamomile, curacao orange peel, coriander, grains of paradise, and a rare yeast strain from the Old Country. This is a brew that [CAN] be enjoyed both on the slopes or on the beach."; "Located in Edwards, CO in the heart of the beautiful Vail Valley"; "Preserving Rivers Where We Live [-] 1% of all proceeds from sales go toward Eagle River Watershed Council."

The Crack and inverted Glug went off without a hitch, producing a foamy finger of bone white head with reasonable retention. Color was a hazy lemon-yellow which left me curious as to whether I might have left any lees in the CAN. I had agitated it as best I could before the Crack and left some liquid in the CAN to CANtinue to agitate, but that is what I got. Nose had a flowery, perfume-y smell, like they might have overdone it with all of the ingredients of which they were so proud. It was tough to distinguish what one adjunct had produced as opposed to another. Mouthfeel was kind of thin and watery and the taste had a flowery, perfume-y spiciness that I just could not get behind. I think that it may have been the chamomile that I really disliked. Finish was semi-dry and slightly spicy, but it just had the mish-mash quality of a witch's brew - throw in everything and see what results. I was not pleased by the result, but I will also say that Wits are not really my style of choice, either. I will leave it to you as to whether you want to give this a try.

 2,106 characters

Photo of blakelive784
2.19/5  rDev -32.2%
look: 2 | smell: 2.25 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 1.75 | overall: 2.25

12 fl oz can served in a weizen glass, reviewed live:

A - Pours a transparent straw golden color. No yeast visible. It's got a soapy white, one finger head. You'd be hard pressed to differentiate this from a BMC based on appearance alone. Far from appealing.

S - Very, very light floras and citrus notes. Honey and (maybe?) soap. Light spice. Very mild but not unpleasant. Better than I'd thought it'd be.

T - The light floral notes I found on the aroma taste nearly identical to soap. Straight soap.It's hard to find any other notes beyond it. Lemon and bland base malt. Simple and poorly executed. Doesn't even fit the style. Watery. Where's the spice? Where's the yeast?

M - Watery and flat.

D - Why would you even put this on the market? This is the first beer I've had from Crazy Mountain and I'm not impressed.

 824 characters

Photo of ninaturner
2.25/5  rDev -30.3%

Photo of jrohrbacher
2.25/5  rDev -30.3%

Photo of trotnixon
2.25/5  rDev -30.3%

Photo of DoubleJ
2.41/5  rDev -25.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.25

Where I live, I can only dream of a white Christmas. But in the world of beer, dreams of a white Christmas are a reality. Enter the witbier style, and while it's still a few days before Christmas, it's close enough for me. Here's my white Christmas, brought to me by Crazy Mountain. On to the beer:

Not much life in the appearance, as the beer is a paler yellow color with some tiny bubbles running through the body, and a short lived head which drops to barely a lace. I hope it get better. A few whiffs of the aroma, and I repeat to my myself, I hope it gets better. It smells okay, with faded orange peel, flowers, scented soap. Please get well.

The name Lava Lake conjured images of a lake that was formed as a result of lava millions of years ago. As a beer, it's a watery witbier with little inspiration. The chamomile adds a uniqueness per style, though that's the highlight. It feels watery, tastes watered down, and while it does have a refreshing aspect, I'd much rather conform to Hoegaarden or even Blue Moon.

Crazy Mountain has made a witbier that did not interest me, which itself is crazy. Thank goodness that alcohol is a by-product provided.

 1,164 characters

Photo of smcolw
2.46/5  rDev -23.8%
look: 2.25 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.25 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 2.25

For a wheat beer, it is stunning how little head is present. Settles quickly to only rim bubbles. The little lace there slides down the glass quickly, leaving nothing. The brew is straw in color with no cloudiness. Frankly, it's disappointing.

Sweet, like Kool-ade. No wheat smell. I do smell some "apple", which I'm not sure where that comes from. Disappointing, again.

Cider sourness is the strong flavor I identify. This is not a Wit from my perspective. The body is decent with an appropriate, if elevated, carbonation level. If this were a cider, I might be fooled. For a Wit, this is a clear miss.

 605 characters

Photo of Indecisive-Chemist
2.47/5  rDev -23.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.25 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.25

By far the worst crazy mountain I have had. Just had an off flavor to it. The wit style is not realized in this beer.

117 characters

Photo of Bluegrass49
2.5/5  rDev -22.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

NOT ONE OF MY FAVORITES.

24 characters

Photo of WhitmansNiece
2.5/5  rDev -22.6%

Photo of Stigh
2.5/5  rDev -22.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

just to weak in flavour and taste

33 characters

Photo of kjkinsey
2.5/5  rDev -22.6%

Photo of GraduatedCashew
2.5/5  rDev -22.6%

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Lava Lake Wit from Crazy Mountain Brewing Company
3.23 out of 5 based on 181 ratings.
  • About Us

    Founded in Boston in 1996, BeerAdvocate (BA) is your go-to resource for beer powered by an independent community of enthusiasts and professionals dedicated to supporting and promoting better beer.

    Learn More
  • Our Community

    Comprised of consumers and industry professionals, many of whom started as members of this site, our community is one of the oldest, largest, and most respected beer communities online.
  • Our Events

    Since 2003 we've hosted over 60 world-class beer festivals to bring awareness to independent brewers and educate attendees.
  • Our Magazine

    Support uncompromising beer advocacy and award-winning, independent journalism with a print subscription to BeerAdvocate magazine.