Brooklyn Pennant Ale '55 | Brooklyn Brewery

617 Reviews
Brooklyn Pennant Ale '55Brooklyn Pennant Ale '55

Brewed by:
Brooklyn Brewery
New York, United States

Style: English Pale Ale

Alcohol by volume (ABV): 5.00%

Availability: Year-round

Notes / Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

Added by BeerAdvocate on 05-06-2001

For Trade:
User Reviews
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Alström Bros
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 617 | Ratings: 1,512
Photo of jtierney89
1.5/5  rDev -58.6%
look: 1.5 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1.5

Semi-hazed bright copper with about an inch of sticky white head. Lots of euro hop influence on the nose. Earthy and wooddy.

Semi sweet buttered biscuit upfront followed by an unwanted fruitiness. It's like it starts as a nice dry english pale ale and then jumps in a fruit bowl. Spicy hop finish. Ugh. Am not enjoying this. flavors that just dont belong together trying to get along in one well blended sip but can't help but be layered into a catastrophic one.

No thank you, this was a slow mover at my store for a reason.

As i drank through the rest of the glass the flavors seem to find eachother a bit more but still seem to battle for dominance. Not as bad as my initial reaction to the beer, but still doesnt seem right. These flavors just dont wanna blend.

 769 characters

Photo of jps0869
1.93/5  rDev -46.7%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Drank on-tap at the local Flying Saucer. Appearance is a hazy, nondescript copper, with a white head that creates no lacework and has little retention. Nose is watery, with notes of corn. Tastes like it couldn't decide what it wanted to be when it grew up: an English ale? A pint of Yeungling? As other reviewers have noted, hop and malt characteristics are poorly matched, as if someone had blended a so-so lager with an ale. Although some of the characteristics might have been likeable in a more balanced beer, it's less than the sum of its parts. I did not enjoy it at all and would certainly not try it again.

 614 characters

Photo of pwoods
2.05/5  rDev -43.4%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 2.5

12oz. single from Jungle Jim's poured into a pint glass. Freshness label isn't clear. Notched on Jan but nothing on 2006 or 2007... so I assume it's best by Jan08. I've bought many singles from Jungle Jim's(this is my 3rd or 4th from Brooklyn) and never had an issue before.

A: 1/2 finger fizzy white head that runs away. Zero lacing. Pours a tangerine with a rusty tint.

S: Smells strongly of 100% Concord grape juice but oily. Smells more like a cider.

T/M: Sour apples and Sweet'n'Low. Reminds me of drinking a juice box from when I was younger. Thin viscosity and lacking carbonation(maybe it is old?). Just not doing it for me.

D: Goes down very easily but the taste just isn't there. I can't see myself getting another one of these... I may not finish this one.

 771 characters

Photo of wcintula
2.36/5  rDev -34.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Bottle stamped: Best Before Aug 2011 0311

Into a Duvel tulip with a clear copper body with very little, quickly dissipating head. Smell upfront is metallic, as the beer warms up, it becomes sweeter, with a floral hop quality. The taste isn't as sweet but has more of a bitter hop profile to it. It's got a slight dry biscuit-y taste to it. Prickly when it hits the tongue, but not I was hard pressed to pull a good experience from this.

 437 characters

Photo of lacqueredmouse
2.44/5  rDev -32.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Tried on tap at the brewery 12/09.

Pours a deep golden amber colour, with a decent head of white foam that leaves some good lacing. Lots of tiny carbonation. Looks a bit thin in the body. Overall, it's not bad; a bit generic, but done well.

Grainy sweetness on the nose. A little pencil-shaving hoppiness, and some yeasty funk that reminds me far to much of Pride of Ringworm, our most spurned and hated Australian hop. Not a fan.

Taste is similar. Some bready yeast character, wit a little grain sweetness. A little phenolic, almost chemical note on the back. Quite rank with bitterness on the back. Not a fan, really. Mouthfeel is spritzy and sparkling. Nice enough.

I'm not a big fan. It tastes very generic and bland, with its only characters being generall unpleasant. It's not undrinkable, but it's not particularly likeable. Brooklyn brews some far better beers.

 873 characters

Photo of praufs01
2.55/5  rDev -29.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Appearance – Clear copper with creamy off-white head and a good amount of lacing.

Aroma – Light malt and bread smell.

Palate – Moderate carbonation.

Flavor – Sweet malty and molasses taste with a very light hop and metallic aftertaste.

Final thoughts – It’s an OK beer. One is about it for me.

 305 characters

Photo of popery
2.56/5  rDev -29.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Ho hum beer. It pours mildly hazy and medium to light amber. The head is off-white and looks pretty good. The aroma is mild, floral-ish hops and generic biscuity malt. It's English enough, I guess, and might be a nice beer fresh served from a cask at the brewery, but from a bottle that's not too far from the "best by" date, it's nothing special or even notable. The taste is a bit sweet with a gently bitter finish. The mouthfeel is fine - normal carbonation, a bit slick.

 474 characters

Photo of Sammy
2.61/5  rDev -27.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

There is some taste here, it is clearly a British style pale, with some hops and well malted. Medium mouthfeel from nuttiness. Good carbonation. Tad of metallic aftertaste. Tad of bitterness. Decent attractive darker colour and head. Beer was Ok but not that drinkable.

 269 characters

Photo of Vendetta
2.66/5  rDev -26.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Original Rating Date:
June 1, 2008

Well rounded blend of malt and hops. Toasted chestnut flavor that tastes a little bit watery to me. I may have gotten a bad batch, I'll have to try this again down the road and re-review. As it stands... overall a decent beer, I actually enjoyed it better out of the bottle than the glass.

 325 characters

Photo of Naes
2.67/5  rDev -26.2%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Appearance is very deep amber with a small white head. There is little to no lacing and the retention is minimal.
The aroma is somewhat malty with trace amounts of hop presence.
The flavor is a bit watered down, but begins with some caramel malt and finishes with a moderate amount of floral hops. There is something about the aftertaste that just does not agree with me. It is similar to a metallic flavor, but is something else.
Mouth feel is light bodied and is actively carbonated.

 490 characters

Photo of zeledonia
2.72/5  rDev -24.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Best before September 2011. Bottle stamp says 0601, which I think means bottled March 1, 2011.

Pours a medium amber color, slight coppery hues, and very clear. One-finger off-white head that recedes rather quickly and leaves a bit of lacing.

Smells of bready, buttery, biscuity, mildly toasted malts, a lot like a french-style "petit beurre" butter cookie. It's a rather faint, warm fluffy smell, that's pleasant but doesn't have a whole lot to it. Touch of hops late, but bready malts are the main player.

Tastes rather bland. Malts are there, again pretty bready and buttery, and again pretty faint. I get a dose of bitterness in the middle that carries through the dry finish. In general, it's okay, not bad, but not really good either. Just not much to it.

Mouthfeel starts out tingly, lots of carbonation that burns up quickly, leaving a thin body that feels slightly sticky before it dries out. And does it ever dry out.

I drank this beer, and I took notes on it. But it's almost like I didn't drink it. There's that little to it. Nothing to latch onto, no notable subtlety or complexity to the smell or the flavor. Nothing specifically bad about it, but not much good about it either.

 1,196 characters

Photo of KarlHungus
2.75/5  rDev -24%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

The beer pours a clear bronze color. The head is half an inch in height, and recedes quickly into minimal lacing. The aroma is of floral and herbal hops with a hint of caramel. It is pleasant, but on the weak side. The taste has a hint of floral hops, but it vanishes quickly into nothing. The mouthfeel is light bodied with aggressive carbonation, and a watery texture. Overall, this is a bad beer that I will not be drinking again.

 433 characters

Photo of claspada
2.76/5  rDev -23.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Aromas are malty with some toasted caramel, cereal and biscuits. The hops are semi-fruity and even lightly herbal.

The taste is moderately sweet with an odd note that I just can't put my finer on. The hops are muted as well as the malt character. The odd taste maybe Brooklyn's house yeast which I have never been a big fan of. The mouthfeel is medium-light with a thin texture. Average effervescence.

Overall this is drinkable, but I wouldn't purchase another. I'm a fan of the Brooklyn Brewery but the Pennant Ale isn't anything to get too excited over.

 557 characters

Photo of TrevorGW
2.76/5  rDev -23.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Amber color, decent head.

Not much aroma. Malt is on the nose. Muted and dusty.

Taste is overly malty. Soft caramel and a bit of hot metal. This reminds me of some of the average pale ales that I have had on tap in the UK. Not quite enough bitterness and the finish is muddled. I am left unsatisfied after each sip, but not totally disappointed.

Decent mouthfeel ... creamy with soft carbonation.

Drinkability is low for a Pale Ale. Some cloying flavors. I would only be able to drink one of these.

Overall this beer is a slight letdown.

 544 characters

Photo of whisperjet
2.77/5  rDev -23.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

a: Pours a light amber. Had absolutely no head and very little lace. A high amount of visible carbonation

s: Very biscuity and malty. Like buttered bread. Strong smells of cereal grains and a light citrus. No real hop presence.

t: Very bready and buttery. Not well blended at all. I don't know how to describe it better than it tastes like buttered scallops. Not a fan. Freshness dated for December 2010

m: Medium bodied with biting carbonation

d: The taste is off putting and makes this a difficult beer to put back

 520 characters

Photo of rdilauro
2.83/5  rDev -21.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Sorry, but I did not like this one. Guess my nostalgic baseball days and thinking about the Brooklyn Dodges and Ebbets field made me excited about this ale.

The color was a tannish amber like many other domestic ales. There wasnt any particular aroma that I could detect. No hops that stood out and for a second, I almost picked up a whiff of what I remember almost 45 years ago, my first Ballentine Ale.

There was nothing actually wrong with this Ale, its just that I could not find specifics about it which I really wanted to positively comment on.

Its still a very drinkable ale and considering so many of the larger company brews, this one is still better.

 663 characters

Photo of Onenote81
2.83/5  rDev -21.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Pours a darker gold with a pretty small head that goes away as quick as it's poured. No lacing. Smells really good. This is the high point of this beer. I smell sweet malt, bread, and honey. It makes me want to drink this now!

Mouthfeel is crisp and clean, which I like. I'm not sure where the flavor went on this one. The taste and aftertaste is like I just ate some beef stew. Ick. I love me some stew, but I don't want to drink it. The honey that I smelled is absent as there isn't an ounce of sweetness that I can find. Just a weird bitter meaty flavor. This is weird. Avoid.

 580 characters

Photo of TheBear11D
2.83/5  rDev -21.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Pours a clear dark orange color with a small light head that did not last too long and left little behind to know it ever existed.

The nose is mostly malty with a slight citrus touch, however, it is rather weak and does not deliver any distinct aromas.

The flavor is also a little on the weak side, but I can pick up a few fruit notes along with a bit of malty sweetness. There is little aftertaste.

Has a medium body and a little sharp carbonation.

The beer is alright, but fell a little short.

 499 characters

Photo of marcpal
2.85/5  rDev -21.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

On tap into pint glass - Court Jester, Freehold NJ

A: Bronze colored ale similar to what you would expect as if drinking a seasonal. Very slight head and not much lacing.

S: Biscuity malts with a little bit of hops in the back of the nose. Roasted nuts but not much else in the background that I was able to pick up.

T: Some hops there, not much. The bittering came through later on and the recognition may have been dulled by the previous hop devil and Stone AB. The malt was nice and the biscuity flavors were pleasant. The caramel really came through and was its best attribute.

M: Not much here, lack of hop depth.

D: Very drinkable, almost to the point of a watered down hoppy beer. Flavors were there but the type of beer that would be more appropriate for a grilled burger on a summer day. Not a favorite though.

Honestly not fan of Brooklyn brews so went in not expecting to like all that much and not blown away. Asked bartender what this one was all about and described as hoppy- just didnt see it.

 1,016 characters

Photo of Utica_Brew_Review
2.85/5  rDev -21.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.75 | taste: 2.75 | feel: 2.75 | overall: 3

Copper color with mild carbonation and decent head. Fruit and vegetable notes with a bit of sweetness in the aroma. Tastes similar to how it smells with a bit more complexity, spiciness and a hint of malt. Unfortunately this beer has a bit too many vegetable notes for us.

 272 characters

Photo of bditty187
2.86/5  rDev -21%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Reddish-bronze hue, translucent, small off-white head that quickly fades to a soapy residue, no lace of note. Very faint and hollow nose, some earthiness… weak biscuit, spice hints. Not very inviting really. Rather malty, earthy palate, some hints of hops… faint bitterness, spiciness. I find the palate to be odd and not very pleasing. The mouthfeel is thin and watery… funky aftertaste. I didn’t really care for this one… maybe a bad bottle? Maybe I’ll give it another shot? Maybe not.

Best by June/2003

Thanks Stegmakk for the sample...

 552 characters

Photo of smibroncos
2.86/5  rDev -21%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

A. Poured a cloudy amber, with a finger and a half of reddish brown head, in a standard pint glass. Not much lacing on the glass.

S. Carmel, oats, malted barley.

T. Slightly sour, medium after bitterness from the hops. The label said toasty biscuit flavor. I couldn't find the flavors.

M. Medium bodied, slightly gritty on the toungue. Small bubbles could have been carbonated alittle more.

D. A decent APA, not the greatest definately not the worst. Could have used some more hops and flavor.

 498 characters

Photo of granger10
2.87/5  rDev -20.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

Rusted amber color with a medium foamy tan head that dissipates quickly. After a minute not too much remains of the head and the lacing is weak. The aroma is floral and bright with a grainy edge to it. Taste is a bit thick with tons of a biscuit flavor in there. A bit of diacetyl comes along with the huge biscuity taste. Finish is a bit sweet as well as a bit grassy and also a bit metallic. The body is super rich, which could be good for some beers but its way too much for this simplistic offering, esp with the lack of carbonation. It gets cloying fairly early. Not really too drinkable. Disappointing.

 608 characters

Photo of Shiloh
2.9/5  rDev -19.9%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Deep copper in colour, very short head leading to an even thinner lace. Very limited glass cling. The carbonation is medium with active large bubbles.
Aroma is a little grainy.
The taste is also grainy, straw like and thin with a minor hop like character to rein in the sweetness. Some after taste.
The mouthfeel watery, one of these is my limit.

 349 characters

2.91/5  rDev -19.6%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3.5

Bottle to pint glass. Best before date of 9/2010. Review from months upon months of a backlog of notes.

A: Pours with a large 3 finger off-white head, foamy and frothy. Excellent retention. The body is a clear amber color with red hints throughout.

S: Average malt intensity of toasted caramel, cereal and biscuits. The hops are semi-fruity and even lightly herbal.

T: Moderately sweet with an out of place iced tea flavor note. Short flavor duration.

M: Medium-light body with a thin texture. Average effervescence.

D: Drinkable, yes, but I wouldn't purchase another. I'm a fan of the Brooklyn Brewery but the Pennant Ale comes across as more of a placeholder in their portfolio than anything else.

 705 characters

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Brooklyn Pennant Ale '55 from Brooklyn Brewery
3.62 out of 5 based on 1,512 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.
  • BeerAdvocate Microbrew Invitational

    Join us June 2-3, 2017 in Boston, Mass. for beer, cider, mead, kombucha and sake from over 70 small producers.

    Learn More
  • Subscribe to BeerAdvocate Magazine

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