Subsidiaries
3.1/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 3
Flavor 3
Texture 4
Overall 2.5
The word "Sleeman" just sounds dirty for some reason. Pours a clear light gold color with a thin white head that was gone quickly. Very little lacing. The aroma is lightly skunky and sweet at the same time. Light-bodied and kind of fizzy with a nondescript flavor. Bland hops and vague sweetness here and there is about it. The finish is clean, bubbly and faintly sweet. Doesn’t do much for me.
Tried
on 02 Mar 2005
at 12:15
1.8/10
—
Appearance 2
Aroma 2
Flavor 2
Texture 2
Overall 1
Well one thing is for sure: The beer is definitely clear. Light yellow-gold color with a thin and immediately gone white head. No lacing at all. The aroma is corny and a tad skunked. Soda-water body without much going on flavor-wise except some corn and off-flavored hops. The finish is clean and flavorless. I hope the other Sleeman beers are better than this.
Tried
on 26 Feb 2005
at 15:25
2.9/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 3
Flavor 3
Texture 2
Overall 2.5
Bottle: Poured a clear light dark beer with no head and minimal carbonation. Aroma is quite weak with some roasted malt being noticeable. Taste is also sub par with a watery feeling ruining the whole thing.
Tried
from Bottle
on 23 Feb 2005
at 10:52
6.4/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 6
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 6.5
Nice brown ale with a light off-white head. Sweet caramel aroma without character. In mouth, nice sweet malt with lots of nuttyness, and decent hops . Light coffee notes, not bad overall. Medium bodied.
Tried
on 19 Feb 2005
at 13:28
5.6/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 6
Flavor 6
Texture 4
Overall 5.5
Very dark chestnut brown colour. Not much head. Aroma is light, a little dusty, with notes of nuts, cheap coffee, and multigrain toast. Flavour has some roasty astringency, lots of toast and nut. Body is a little thin, not uncommon in old-school porters. What I miss, though, as old-school porter seems to be what they’re aiming for, is a little bit of fruitiness that the best examples display. This is lager-clean. I could also do with a chewier finish - this beer’s finish is roasty dry.
Tried
on 16 Dec 2004
at 03:03
6.1/10
—
Appearance 6
Aroma 5
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 6.5
Dark brown ale with bubbly off-white head. Lightly skunky lager aroma. Surprise! Their is actually a decent nuttyness to the malt, lightly roasted with nice bitterness in finish. Medium bodied, light for a porter, rich for a sleeman! Oh well...I tried it.
Tried
on 23 Nov 2004
at 18:27
3.9/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 4
Flavor 3
Texture 6
Overall 3.5
The rep told me they make this with "dark crystals." I asked what a dark crystal, and she didn’t know either. Some malt in the aroma. Taste of a low end bock. An ok, smooth beer.
Tried
on 20 Nov 2004
at 17:13
6.2/10
—
Appearance 8
Aroma 5
Flavor 7
Texture 6
Overall 6
This porter pours a extremely dark red with a light tan head. There is scents of grape citrus, molasass and spice. First sip had a burnt taste to it. Slightly sweet with low carbonation. Very small citrus taste in the flavour. The finish is burnt with some smoke and spice.
Tried
on 06 Nov 2004
at 18:51
2.6/10
—
Appearance 4
Aroma 2
Flavor 3
Texture 4
Overall 1.5
2004 bottle. Pours a urine-like yellow with a small fizzy white head. Aroma of sour corn and light alcohol notes. Some paint thinner and some sharp notes of something. Extra light body and vigorous overcarbonation. Flavor of corn and some bitter something (perhaps hops?) Not much to speak about.
Tried
from Bottle
on 07 Oct 2004
at 10:37
1.4/10
—
Appearance 2
Aroma 1
Flavor 2
Texture 2
Overall 0.5
2004 bottle. YES finally I find and try this beer. I was enthralled by the bottle, clear, no label and a faint faint tint of yellow to the beer. The fact that they are highlighting this clearness is just ridiculous. Aroma. Nothing, maybe some light minerals, or something? Flavor. Still nothing. Body. sparkling water. Appearance. Do I have to say it? My friend and I agreed, in all seriousness, that if you put a lemon in this beer, you could serve it unknowingly to someone, as a perrier.
Tried
from Bottle
on 07 Oct 2004
at 10:26