New Holland Red Tulip Ale | New Holland Brewing Company

164 Ratings
no score
Send samples
New Holland Red Tulip AleNew Holland Red Tulip Ale

Brewed by:
New Holland Brewing Company
Michigan, United States

Style: American Amber / Red Ale

Alcohol by volume (ABV): not listed

Availability: Spring

Notes / Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

Added by Mitchster on 04-24-2003

For Trade:
User Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Ratings: 164 |  Reviews: 146
1.82/5  rDev -49.9%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

I bought several of these in a mixed six because the description sounded good. Over the weekend I drank three of these all at different times. Hoping it would grow on me I reviewed it on the third try, and my opinion has not changed much from the first one. I like new holland and was just overall disappointed by red tulip, especially b/c almost all of their other beers are really wonderful. I had the 2006 version.

Red Tulip poured a dark amber color with strong red highlights that were present even when light was not shining on the glass. The head was 1/4 inch and cream colored. It looked good but that was the best part.

The smell was of sweet malts(sweet definitely), and there was no discernible hops.
Taste: This beer was full bodied, but there was nothing to interesting going on. Very smooth , with just a slight bitterness. The malt presence was predominant to the point where there was little else to taste. I could not detect any hops(if there were any they were so mild I could not notice).

Red Tulip was very heavy on the stomach. It had very little carbonation. Overall the taste was fairly bland. Maybe if there was the slightest bit or carbonation, or hops, or something I might have thought a little more of this beer, but in the end it fell short of what new holland is capable of. I actually could not even finish my last bottle...there is something about how it hits the stomach, and feels on the mouth that is really unpleasant.

 1,466 characters

Photo of nrbw23
1.92/5  rDev -47.1%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A- Pours a deep amber, with a nice one inch thick off white colored head. A good amount of delicate lacing is left behind. Looks really different and nice but that's where it all stops.

S- Almost nothing going on here. I had my nose buried in this and could maybe pick up a little bit of sweeter malts and nothing else.

T- Very fruity and sweet,dark fruitiness and almost a flowery tast. Did not like this at all.

M- Medium in body

D- No thanks I'll pass on this one.

 471 characters

Photo of AlMarzo
2/5  rDev -44.9%

Photo of olivermonster
2.5/5  rDev -31.1%

Photo of Pitmonkey
2.52/5  rDev -30.6%
look: 4.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I am not overly familiar with Reds and I picked this up on a lark just to test the waters.

Poured a lovely deep almost garnet red, 1/3" head.

Some aroma speaking of grain, I detected almost no hop (or I just don't know what to look for)

Had some malt flavor, but not as rich as I expected from the appearance. There was a low malty sweetness and almost no bitterness.

While refreshing with good carbonation, it left my longing for more flavor. Very drinkable but it just didn't hit the spot. Taste did not live up to the look. I've generally been impressed with New Holland beer, could be I hit it at an inopportune time.

 626 characters

Photo of beace
2.6/5  rDev -28.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Not to impressed with the apperance of this beer. Head was almost non-exsistant and has slightest trace of belgium lace. There isn't much to the aroma, just a dull malt note.

The taste is not complex and the malt character is fairly boring. There is an unique hop spicyness flavor that steps out in front of the malt. I would like to have tasted more caramel and felt more dextrins.

Layers of flavor is what this ale lacks. The experience of enjoying this New Holland offering is a bit disapointing.

 506 characters

Photo of ibashmuck
2.6/5  rDev -28.4%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Purchased as part of "build-your-own-six-pack" at local grocer. Big creamy head on an amber body. Smell was nice, floral, sweet, caramel certainly the dominant scent as well as dominant taste. Sadly, the citrus bitterness really overshadowed everything else. Would be nice to have that toned down a bit and see if that floral scent could come through a bit in the taste.

 370 characters

Photo of BigDaddyWil
2.62/5  rDev -27.8%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured from a 12oz. bottle into a pint glass.
No freshnees or batch date.
2006 batch, purchased at Siciliano's in Grand Rapids.

Don't really know what to say about this beer. The best part about it was the appearance. Pours a deep amber, orange color, with a nice one inch thick off white colored head. A good amount of delicate lacing is left behind. Weak smell, all I can pick out is a hint of malts, maybe some earth tones. I have no clue. The taste is very bland. Slight fruity malt flavor and finishes with some bitterness. Mouthfeel is medium bodied, smooth, slighly oily in texture. If this beer had some flavor I would have rated it higher. Unimpressive and very disappointing. I will give this a try later in the year, I really hope its better.

 758 characters

Photo of plaztikjezuz
2.66/5  rDev -26.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

pours a reddish color with a pillowy head that fell into a nice lace, with so lacing on the glass.
the aroma is very bready, fruity, hint of alcohol
the flavor is very odd to me, i dont know, maybe this bottle is bad? but it has a solvent-like flavor behind the beer, its kinda rubbery. but its not perdominent its behind the fruity, malty, hint of hopsack.
the mouthfeel is what i would expect
i almost dumped this beer out, i am going to review this beer agian. i know new holland and there was something wrong. they make great beers and i have heard that this was a good beer. but this beer was not good.

 611 characters

Photo of nsmartell
2.71/5  rDev -25.3%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

I enjoyed this beer in pint glass poured from a bottle in the comfort of my own living room.

Appearance: Nice red hue. Small, off-white, head.

Smell: Not much going on here. Kind of disappointing.

Taste: Kind of weak for a red.

Mouthfeel: A little bitter for my liking out of a red.

Drinkability: I'm not sure if I would drink this again given the choice, but would certainly give it another try if offered.

 414 characters

Photo of JudgeRoughneck
2.78/5  rDev -23.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

A-I genrally like a little more clarity in my red/ amber but this one had a very nice head that stayed till the last.

S- Very typical mild malt smell, no big deal here.

T- My biggest issues were here. This is a deeply sweet beer with fuller caramel tones than you typically find in the style and that seemed to fight with, rather than balnce the hop bitterness. I can tolerate sweet amber but the balance just isn't here.

M- Rather heavy with prickly carbonation.
D- Had trouble ending this one.

 505 characters

Photo of scruffwhor
2.78/5  rDev -23.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a leather like amber, well more like cherry wood hue with no visible bubbles. Good head after the pour and leaves a par film o' foam for drinking. The aroma is almost like candi, corn syrup sweet. Very malty sweet. Too sweet for my nostrils. The flavor is a very ice cream malted flavor. Tastes like butterscotch.Sweeter than I'm used to malt profile. Some toasty hints intermingled here and there. No real hop bittering balance. This beer is very syrupy on the tongue, almost coating it with malt.

 504 characters

Photo of jcdiflorio
2.87/5  rDev -20.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

12oz brown bottle served into a nonic glass.

Hazy,coppery color with amber highlights with a 1" off-white head with a light tannish look,head was slightly creamy looking and fizzled loudly and quickly diminshed into a slight coating.Some very spotty lacing with a few small stinging bubbles on the sides of the glass.

Perfumy aroma with candied maltiness,toasty with hints of chocolate. A good bit of fruity esters with a prune likd note being the standout.Malty and fruity with a slight mustiness.

Very fruity and sweet,dark fruitiness being most noticable with a semi-burnt carmellness and chocolate tones. some metallic tastes,not offensive,has a smooth bittering finish with a good deal of tartness.

Light to medium bodied with graininess the gives the body a slighly heavier feel. Mediocre beer,drinkable,just nothing here exciting enough to make me want another.

 872 characters

Photo of wagenvolks
2.98/5  rDev -17.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12 oz. bottle into a Carolina Brewing Co. pint glass.

The body presents an appealing, ruby red/copper hue, clear with faint traces of carbonation. The head is light khaki in color, well-retained and leaves slight traces of lacing. The aroma is heavy on the caramel-malts and balanced by floral hops, fruit punch, toffee, and some citrus.

I wasn't feeling the flavor of this beer at all...some caramel, medicinal hops, and a hint of nuttiness, but nothing to keep my interest. Maybe the Weyerbacher Double Simcoe IPA I drank an hour previous to having this beer affected my palate, but I doubt it. Mouthfeel was overly carbonated, with a medium body and a lackluster aftertaste. Finishes dry. This is not a beer I'll be purchasing again. New Holland is now 1-for-3 in my book, with only their Poet oatmeal stout coming across as a good, drinkable beer.

 853 characters

Photo of AdamGarcia
3/5  rDev -17.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

12oz btl poured into Kasteel goblet.

A: Copper with bright red highlights shining through. Little bit of head from strong pour, not much of it sticks around for long...just some clingy remnants.

S: Sweet, pleasant aroma. Fruity undertones, but I have to really linger to get much from this one. I'll give Red Tulip a pass in this department b/c I am slightly under the weather, but I don't detect much.

T: Not terribly impressive. This is a very mild beer. Flavors are strictly sweet. No real hop presence to speak of, but certainly this is intentional. Something about it tastes vaguely Belgian...most likely the bread-like finish.

M: So-so in this department also. Feels slightly undercarbonated.

D: I wouldn't necessarily want to, but you could drink several of these mainly b/c there is nothing offensive or particularly distinct about this beer that would prevent sessioning.

I'm not a big fan of this style and that has a lot to do with the low score. If red/amber ales are your thing give it a try. In fact my girlfriend loves malty brown ales and this happens to be a beer that she really enjoys. New Holland has many other offerings that are well worth trying, most notably Dragon's Milk.

 1,204 characters

Photo of beavers
3.01/5  rDev -17.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Pours an amber honey brown with a creamy tan head. Fairly lacking smell from which I pick up toasty caramel malt, sweet apples and a strange almost vegetal aroma. Slight sweetness from the caramel malts that doesn't really open up to any complexity because it feels quite watered down. I'm still getting that faint vegetal doesn't leave an overwhelming aftertaste, but is still noticeable. Aftertaste is actual quite mild and actually refreshing, but leaves me wanting more (more flavor, not beer). This beer doesn't do anything that bad...but is mediocre at best and lacks depth in both the aroma and taste.

 619 characters

Photo of Brent
3.03/5  rDev -16.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Overall, a pretty bland example of the style. Poured an amberish-ruby. Aroma was vague sweet malt. Overall flavor profile was on the sweet side, with little distinctive about the hopping. Mouthfeel was a touch thin. Not bad, just uninteresting and average.

 256 characters

Photo of lackenhauser
3.03/5  rDev -16.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured a nice amber to reddish color.Minimal head.No real discernable aroma-slight hoppiness but very slight.Some malt flavor.A tad sweet in the finish.Decent enough body.Pretty mainstream stuff here-would be a good training wheel beer to expand a macro drinkers horizons with.

 277 characters

Photo of GbVDave
3.06/5  rDev -15.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured from a 12oz bottle into a 20 oz imperial pint.

A: Nice dark honey-red hue. Small, off-white, one-finger head that leaves no lace.

S: Not much of a smell here. Small pinch of fresh berries. Not too much else.

T: Slight flavor of toasted malt with some berries, bread, and that's about it.

M: Bitter and dry. Not very exciting.

D: I put the drinkability at average. It's not terrible, but, there's so many better options out there. I don't know what they were aiming for with this, but I don't think they hit their target.

 543 characters

Photo of oelergud
3.06/5  rDev -15.7%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Long neck brown 12oz glass bottle with a pry-off cap. Gray label, red and white oval encircling a tulip.
Semi transparent deep ruby body, slightly off white creamy large bubbled head with great retention and clumpy lace.
Mild green scent and white bread.
Bready, pinenutty flavor, mild and slightly hopped. Shortlived malty aftertaste.
Light medium body, a bit of a dry finish.
Decent drinkability.


 409 characters

Photo of giblet
3.09/5  rDev -14.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

poured kinda flat in my glass. one eighth inch head but did have steady carbonation. rich red amber color. smelled good of roasted malts. the taste was a little sweater and a little less than i hoped. a good beer but not one of my favorites in this category.

suckem up and movem out.


 292 characters

Photo of nightcrawler
3.1/5  rDev -14.6%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Poured a beautiful golden-red color. The smell was fruity with a hint of malt. Produced a offwhite head that lasted until I was through half the glass.

The first taste was smooth, almost bland except for a sweet malty taste. No bittering from the hops to be found.

The second taste was much more of what I except from a 'red' beer. Much more hops bittering with toasted malt. This bitterness increased as I took more sips to the point on the last few swallows, I was afraid of how bitter it would be.

The mouthfeel was fairly watery, but not sure if this was on purpose.

Not a beer I would pour down the drain, but I probably won't buy a second 6-pack after these are gone.

 686 characters

Photo of malcontent
3.11/5  rDev -14.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Well, it IS red. More of a cloudy, dark amber really, with an uneven head but good lacing.

Predominantly malt aromas with a sweet black cherry component and some burnt edges in there as well.

No, this really isn't doing it for me. There isn't a whole lot of malt sweetness and yet there isn't a great deal of bitterness either. There is a bit of an unidentifiable earthiness to the beer that doesn't exactly endear itself to me. Remeniscent of weakly-brewed tea. Actually, as this warms up the nicer bitter fruit qualities come out. Still, I don't dig the aftertaste.

A watery mouthfeel with a rather thin flavor palate doesn't make for an especially attractive brew. One of New Holland's more disappointing beers. If you want a Michigan-brewed amber why not just go with a Bell's?

 790 characters

Photo of Absumaster
3.18/5  rDev -12.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A clear brown, copper beer with a thin head.

Smell was hoppy with US hops that are citric and aromatic. The beer is (a bit too) fruity from the yeast and has some mild caramel malty smells.

Taste is very fruity with some light tartness, it tastes like higher alcohols or oxidation, not my favorite. The hops are OK, not too bitter and probably Cascade or Centennial, I like the taste of them, which is a little raw hoppy and resinoud. The malt is supporting the yeast products and is subdued and is biscuity and caramellic. Body is thin and drinkablity is OK.

 565 characters

Photo of kels
3.21/5  rDev -11.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Had this on tap last night at Fries Cafe. Poured into a pint.

Appearance: Pours a reddish brown, ruddy color, mostly clear, with a short, quickly disappearing white head.

Smell: The fragrance is full of grainy malts, with no hop presence. Very light and hardly detectable overall.

Taste/Mouthfeel: The malts come across as light and biscuity with a slight sweetness and are accompanied by a light, floral hop finish. Overall not very flavorful or impressive - I wouldn't necessarily know this was a red ale if the bartender hadn't told me or the name hadn't alluded to it. Feel is moderate and slightly flat, not really helping accentuate the taste.

Drinkability: Moderately high, but not because it's full of great flavor or feel; just easy to keep drinking because not much gets in the way.

 798 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
New Holland Red Tulip Ale from New Holland Brewing Company
3.63 out of 5 based on 164 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.