Dismiss Notice
We're celebrating 10 years of BeerAdvocate magazine with $10 print subscriptions for US residents.

Subscribe now!

Lava Lake Wit | Crazy Mountain Brewing Company

Log in or Sign up to start rating.
BA SCORE
76
okay
50 Reviews
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
Reviews:
50
Ratings:
178
Avg:
3.24
pDev:
34.88%
 
 
Wants:
3
Gots:
17
For Trade:
0
User Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | nextlast
Reviews: 50 | Ratings: 178
Photo of AndrewSpankology
1/5  rDev -69.1%

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 ArrogantB
1.72/5  rDev -46.9%
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 nach0king
2.01/5  rDev -38%
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 -34%
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 -32.4%
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 DoubleJ
2.41/5  rDev -25.6%
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 -24.1%
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 CO-Bloom
2.73/5  rDev -15.7%
look: 3.75 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

I really want to like these guys - they grew like crazy, which is a great small business story - have a pretty cool setup in Edwards and a really nice staff at the brewery - but I have been vastly disappointed by 95% of all their beer. This is possible the worst of the lot that I have had...

L- look is fine, I agitated the last 5th of the can and got a nice cloudy, light-orange.
S- Smells like lemon hand soap with faint yeast spices.
T- unfortunately lemon zest soapiness shows up here. And I also get chamomile coming through, which I find off-putting. I barely get any of the Belgian yeast as the additives are franking gross and distracting, at least in this execution. It truly taste like a soapy, lemon tea to me - not good.
F- doesn't have the creamy body I want from a yeasty, fruity wheat beer (Odell Easy Street for reference) - a little watery with strange lingering aftertastes.
O- I think this it the worst beer I have had so far this year. Not a huge fan of the style, but I can certainly appreciate them. I would grab a blue moon before this - while a BM tastes sugary and "fake" at least its flavor profile is overall pleasant - cannot say the same for this. I am not sure this will be finished (not worth the calories or alcohol intake IMO)

 1,265 characters

Photo of allengarvin
2.89/5  rDev -10.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.75

A: Hazy straw color with very little head, that fades quickly.
S: Odd aroma--very sweet citrus. Not orange-peel citrus but lemony. Never had a wit that smelled like this.
T: Ugh, not a good flavor. Unpleasantly sweet, with no detectable coriander, with a fruity lemon taste like in the aroma.
M: VERY watery. Almost no carbonation.

One of the worst wits I've ever had. To let you know how bad: I would rather be drinking a Blue Moon than this!

 445 characters

Photo of Robloc303
3/5  rDev -7.4%

Poured like a very light lager, see through yellow. Lots of floral notes on the nose with a hint of honey. citrus, and Chamomile. The Chamomile is the most potent, but the other flavors mixed create a sweet tea flavor. Some spice on the finish... The absolute most interesting wit I have ever tried.... Not really too sure how to describe it besides unique. It is honestly not really a wit beer, but more like a Chamomile flavored domestic.

 440 characters

Photo of mactrail
3.08/5  rDev -4.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Pale golden, lightweight beer. Modest foam but pleasant enough carbonation on the tongue. Peculiar herbal smell.

I was baffled with the taste. But I still have bad memories of a Rogue chamomile beer and sure enough, that's the surprise taste. The brewers didn't totally overdo the chamomile, so if you like the flavor at all, it won't bother you. To me, it seems like a way to spoil a rather delicate wheat flavor.

Attractive, well-made beer with quite a tanginess. Faint bitter touch but no flavor of hops. Medicinal aftertaste. From a six-pack bought at Mayfair Liquors in Denver.

 584 characters

Photo of BryanCarey
3.08/5  rDev -4.9%
look: 3.25 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Lava Lake Wit pours to a hazy shade of yellow with a mildly pleasing nose of wheat, yeast, bread, citrus, and spice. The white foam doesn’t last very long and leaves no lacing as you consume.

This beer offers a taste that is similar in some ways to other wits, with its wheat, yeast, and other qualities but is different in other ways, with spicy flavors not found in most other beers of this style. Along with the unusual spice blend are flavors of oranges and lemons, but the spice is what I remember most, particularly that of chamomile.

This is a refreshing beer for the hot days of summer, but I have to admit that the spicy flavors present, while certainly different, are not necessarily what I prefer to taste in this style. I still find it okay, however, and I predict most who try it will find it at least palatable, even if not very impressive.

 859 characters

Photo of TheManiacalOne
3.09/5  rDev -4.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

On-tap 7/6/2014 at Battleship Brewhouse in Fall River, MA served in a US tumbler pint glass.

A: The beer is a bright yellow color, with a short white head that fades slowly and leaves a thick lace on the glass.

S: The aroma is faint but contains wheat, lemon and light caramelized malts.

T: The taste starts out with a strong lemony citrus flavor followed by some wheat and light malt breadiness. There’s a touch of spice and a very faint hops presence but not much balance. The after-taste is slightly sweet and slightly bready.

M: Crisp and a little smooth but watery, light body, medium carbonation, finish is clean.

O: Not very tasty, goes down ok, not filling not filling at all, mild kick, not the best representation of style, this is just a mediocre beer at best.

 778 characters

Photo of JimKal
3.11/5  rDev -4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.75 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: pours a dark gold with a thin head that dissipates quickly despite quite a bit of carbonation.

S: Not a lot of aroma but definite spice notes.

T: This one is growing on me. the camomile gives this a different taste than other wits.(After some reflection, it has stopped growing on me and has receded. I just tried it again and couldn't finish it. I think is like 21st Amendments Hell or High Watermelon. You just have to like that taste associated with beer. I do like camomile in tea but it has stopped working for me with beer.)

M: With the carbonation a the spices this has a nice mouthful. Medium but very good for a wit.

O: Wits are not my favorite style but I do like this one. (Well actually, as it turns out, I don't like it and won't be repeating it.)

 767 characters

Photo of WoodBrew
3.12/5  rDev -3.7%
look: 3.75 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

The LavaLake Wit has a interesting twang to it. The beer poures an clear yellow with thin white head that is leaving a spotty lace. The smell includes a lemon zest with hints of grass. The taste has an acidic flare to it with lemon and blood orange seemingly dominating the taste. The mouthfeel is average....lighter in body with decent carbonation. Overall this is not a good wit and I would not go seeking to have this beer again....It should also be known that I'm not a huge Wit fan.

 487 characters

Photo of kylehay2004
3.18/5  rDev -1.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A: no head really with some lacing on a relatively bright golden clear body.

S: mild lemon and orange peel citrus, musty grains and pale malts. a little medicinal

T: very light with pale malts, light lemon sweetness, grains finishing with an almost 7up or champagne sweetness.

M: light body and relatively light caerbonation, definitly under carbonated

Overall: drinkable but the flavor isnt that impressive, its undercarbonated and not at all memorable.

 458 characters

Photo of beergoot
3.2/5  rDev -1.2%
look: 3.25 | smell: 2 | taste: 3.75 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 3.25

Pale yellow body with a thin white head. Boiled cabbage and cooked corn aroma. Spicy flavor; cinnamon; indeterminate esters; some graham cracker tones. Medium body; smooth.

A somewhat tough call on this one. The appearance is so-so and the smell bad, yet the taste and feel are pretty damn good. Well, it is what it is. I wouldn't go out of my way to have another one based on this single sample, but perhaps a future experience might reveal better qualities in appearance and smell than my experience with this can. Still, taste and feel are primary considerations for a brew (in my opinion), so I'll give this one a positive nod based on the rather top-notch qualities I experienced.

 686 characters

Photo of Alieniloquium
3.23/5  rDev -0.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

12 oz. can poured into a Logsdon chalice.

Appearance - Bright yellow hazy body. Big white fluffy head. Well-retained. Wispy on the surface when it settles.

Smell - Lots of spice. Coriander is the only one I can really distinguish. Lots of wheat, too.

Taste - Something like cinnamon right at the start. Strange. Grainy wheat flavor midrange and a spicy bite at the end. No real depth. Mostly spice.

Mouthfeel - It's light and crispy. Easy drinking, if low in flavor. Funny aftertaste, though.

Overall - No better than any other wit out there. Way over spiced, but it does make the nose interesting.

 603 characters

Photo of StoutHunter
3.26/5  rDev +0.6%
look: 3.75 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

I picked up a can of Crazy Mountain's Lava Lake Wit a couple weeks ago for $1.79 at Boyne Country Provisions. I was in the mood for a Witbier and I thought I would take a chance on this one so lets see how it goes. No visible canning date. Poured from a 12oz can into a imperial pint glass.

A_ The can looks good, it's got a nice design to it and it's eye catching. It poured a nice a yellow color that took on more of a brighter yellow color when held to the light with a fingers and half worth of bubbly white head that died down to a thin ring that eventually faded away and it left a little bit of patchy lacing behind. This is a pretty nice looking beer, I have no complaints.

S- The aroma starts off with a medium amount of sweetness with some grainy. biscuit and pale malt aromas being the first to show up and it's followed by the spices with chamomile seeming to show up the most. Towards the end comes some citrus like aromas with a little bit of lemon zest coming through. This beer had a decent aroma, but it wasn't as true to style as I would like.

T- The taste seems to be very similar to the aroma and it starts off with a medium amount of sweetness with those same malts that I got in the aroma being the first to show up and it's followed by a slight doughy yeast and wheat flavor. Up next comes the spices which imparts the same aspects that they did in the aroma with the chamomile still sticking out the most. On the finish comes the same lemon zest aspects that I got in the aroma with pretty much no bitterness with a citrusy aftertaste that was just a little watery. It's a decent tasting beer, but it still isn't as true to style as I would like.

M- Smooth, slightly creamy, a little crisp, slightly refreshing, on the light side of being medium bodied with a medium amount of carbonation. The mouthfeel is nice and it works well with this beer.

Overall I thought this was an Ok beer and I thought it wasn't a great example of the style because it seemed to not stay true to the style, but it didn't taste bad, it just tasted more like a Saison than a Witbier. This beer had decent drinkability, i could drink a couple, but it might start to wear on me after that. What I like the most about this beer is the appearance and mouthfeel, to me those were the highlights of this beer. What I like the least about this beer is that it wasn't too true to style. I might buy this beer again if I'm in the mood for it and I wouldn't turn one down, but I wouldn't get it if I was looking for a good and true to style Witbier. All in all I didn't hate this beer, but I didn't love it either, it kind of fell right in the middle. It's now my least favorite beer from this brewery and it's average at best for the style. Better luck next time guys, this one could use a little work.

 2,823 characters

Photo of pat61
3.28/5  rDev +1.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.25

From a can poured into a shaker glass. Appearance: Hazy straw, 2” foam cap dissipates to ¼” film Smell: has a very spicey nose that approaches perfumey. The orange peel is very strong as is the coriander and the grains of paradise. There is some chamomile in there contributing to the perfumey quality.Taste: This beer has a lot added into it for as light as it is. Along with all the spice it’s almost like an orange lemon juice was added. Mouthfeel: Overall: This is a fun beer that borders on a shandy – all the additions overwhelm the beer base. For balance it could use some hops or tartness.

 606 characters

Photo of AlCaponeJunior
3.29/5  rDev +1.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.75 | overall: 3.25

Slightly cloudy yellow-tan, little head, not a lot of lacing.

Aroma is pretty heavily lemon, with a little yeast and a little wheat.

Taste wise I thought it was a shandy when I popped the first can. Very, very lemony, like it's got part lemonade in it. The lower carbonation also led me to believe this might be a shandy*.

Body wise it's light and refreshing, just like a shandy. Lemony aftertaste compliments the light body.

It's not bad, just somewhat strange, and not what I expected. I don't think it's going to shatter any craft beer sales records, but it's a good enough lawnmower beer.

*obviously before I read the can, didn't have my glasses with me when I bought it

 681 characters

Photo of Mebuzzard
3.29/5  rDev +1.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.25 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.25

An interesting twist on the Witbier.

Pours a light golden, some amber tints. Low white head, but my glass wasn't to type.

Aroma is a unique one for a wit. Spicy-yes. Zesty-yes. It has a nice hint of floral spice. the grain of paradise and chamomile blend oddly, but not badly. Provides a hint of sweetness, but not really. Beer finishes dry and is easy drinking. A sharp grain bite got me about halfway through. Didn't seem all that light at that moment, but it vanished
Some tweaks here and there can make this an excellent summer beer. As it is, it's pretty doggone quenching.

 582 characters

Photo of Sabtos
3.31/5  rDev +2.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.25

Cloudy pale yellow with minimal head.

Aromas of cinnamon, clove and graham cracker. It actually smells like rice pudding.

Belgian yeast characteristics surface in the flavor, but they are pushed far into the background by the spices. The wit attributes of orange and lemon are present, but also faint.

Tangy, fizzy and crisp in texture, which would make it refreshing, if it weren't so heavy on the spices. As it is, it feels kind of indulgent, and nearing Christmas beer territory.

 485 characters

Photo of tillmac62
3.33/5  rDev +2.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.25

Pours a cloudy golden amber. World class head volume, retention and normal lacing.

Light nose of coriander, orange and chamomile over a weak biscuit. As it warms, it becomes much sweeter and has hints of clove.

Light medium body with a texture that approaches creamy. Normal carbonation with a bit of effervescence in the middle and a nice burst in the finish.

This is a uniquely flavored wit that is intense, slightly complex and somewhat balanced. It begins with a blend of flavors from the nose that separate very little. It has a general tart flavor that flows to clove and coriander in the middle. The middle has a very subtle bitterness that slowly becomes phenolic. The finish is a lingering phenolic that slowly becomes medicinal.

 748 characters

Photo of nickfl
3.33/5  rDev +2.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

A - Pours with one finger of white foam on top of a clear, golden body. The head settles quickly and leaves little lace on the glass.

S - Musty, sour malt with a touch of sweet coriander in the background.

T - Dry, grainy malt up front with a hint of honey in the middle. Finishes with a. Strong herbal note of coriander and a bit of chamomile.

M - A moderately light body, fairly low carbonation, and a dry finish.

D - Not bad, but way too light and with a kind of over the top coriander presence in the aroma. However, I do like the touch of chamomile in the finish and I think if it had a thicker body and proper carbonation it might be a pretty decent example of the style.

 681 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50  | nextlast
Lava Lake Wit from Crazy Mountain Brewing Company
3.24 out of 5 based on 178 ratings.
  • About Us

    Your go-to website for beer (since 1996), publishers of BeerAdvocate magazine (since 2006) and hosts of world-class beer events (since 2003). Respect Beer.
  • Extreme Beer Fest® Cometh

    February 3-4, 2017. Boston, Mass. Limited tickets available. Prepare for epicness.

    Learn More
  • 10 Years of BeerAdvocate Magazine

    We're celebrating 10 years of BA mag with $10 print subscriptions for US residents!

    Subscribe