St. Croix Maple Ale - St. Croix Brewing Company, LLC

jera1350

Minnesota

3.25/5  rDev +18.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Copper colored with a short, but dense head of light tan foam. Nice lacing.

A very light nose. Caramel malt, mild hops and just a faint hint of maple at the very end.

A balance of malt and hops with some light caramel sweetness and earthy bitterness. The maple comes in at the end and into the finish with a touch of butter to it. A malty pale ale with a twist.

The body is a touch light and undercarbonated with a drier finish.

A bit of false advertising with the "Maple Ale". I was hoping for more, but I guess subtle is better than nothing. Took a gamble picking this up as I've never seen it in any store before and judging by the reviews, I wasn't very hopeful. After trying it, I'm pleasantly surprised by this even with the lack of maple. It drinks just fine and has enough flavor to be interesting. Not too shabby a beer.

Serving type: bottle

11-11-2012 21:43:44 | More by jera1350

Mdog

Minnesota

2.75/5  rDev 0%

11-17-2012 21:04:45 | More by Mdog

NilocRellim

Minnesota

3.75/5  rDev +36.4%

09-29-2012 04:21:38 | More by NilocRellim

Duff27

Illinois

1.88/5  rDev -31.6%
look: 4 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 1.5

A- Pours a one inch off white head on a translucent dark copper bodied beer. A little above average head retention and pretty nice lacing.

S- Smells very grainy/adjuncty.

T- Grainy/grassy/biscuity/nasty...all these words come to mind. Just the slightest hint at sweetness but at no time did I ever think "hey, thats maple syrupy!". Where are the hops in this pale ale!?

M- Medium mouthfeel. Good carbonation.

D/O- Yuck, drain pour. Apparently St. Croix's gimmick is false advertising. While nice to look at, it was all downhill from there. Still wondering when the maple is going to come into play. Avoid.

Serving type: bottle

12-17-2011 02:22:25 | More by Duff27

FreshmanPour77

Minnesota

2/5  rDev -27.3%

12-09-2011 18:19:56 | More by FreshmanPour77

mwilbur

Minnesota

2.38/5  rDev -13.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

Poured from 12 oz bottle into shaker pint glass.
A: Pours a clear orange amber with high carbonation producing a thick 2+ inch pillowy head.
S: Herbal hop note with a hint of maple syrup.
T: Hmmmm...I appreciate experimentation, but this didn't come out right. Not very good. The maple syrup gets lost and the hops don't taste right.
M: Light body. Not much to it.
D: Is this beer drinkable, sure...but definitely below average. Tons of better beers out there. Intersting side note: this is the first review of this beer in a year and a half...does that say anything?

Serving type: bottle

01-10-2009 03:52:45 | More by mwilbur

drpimento

Wisconsin

2.68/5  rDev -2.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Had this sample at the Between the Bluffs Beer and Cheese Fest yesterday. Only a sample so with that in mind - Poured with a light head, no lace. Mild aroma of malt, beer, and a slight hint of maple and spice. Flavors about the same. Finish is short. Unremarkable.

Serving type: bottle

04-29-2007 19:03:23 | More by drpimento

supercolter

Minnesota

3.15/5  rDev +14.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Poured from a bottle into a pint glass.

Appearance is pretty flat. Looks a lot like a macro.
Smell is a bit better, again slightly macro, but the maple has me interested.
Taste is decent, not much of the maple I was counting on, and the mouthfeel was a bit weak.
Drinkability was average for the style

Serving type: bottle

04-11-2007 02:33:37 | More by supercolter

CharlesDarwin

Rhode Island

2.2/5  rDev -20%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 1 | overall: 2.5

Originally reviewed on September 17, 2005, from a bottle at the Big Lake Brewfest. Light dry malt aroma. Amber pour. Acetic gross malt flavor, with no maple flavor. Probably a mistake of the hybrid process. Grossly sticky and overwhelming. In need of some gentle herbal hop balance.

Serving type: bottle

11-26-2006 22:46:26 | More by CharlesDarwin

TastyTaste

Minnesota

3.25/5  rDev +18.2%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Poured a light orange color with gold highlights. Smalls bubbly white head with not much retention or lacing on the glass. Smell does have light traces of maplewith a light floral hops aroma. Taste is very much of a middle of the road APA, but with a maple tinge that adds something very different. An OK beer, nothing spectacular, but with all of the ways that you could make a horrid maple beer, this one avoids them all.

Serving type: bottle

08-31-2004 17:44:16 | More by TastyTaste

Gusler

Arizona

3.43/5  rDev +24.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

The color on the pour a limpid amber color with a mediocre sized head that is frothy in texture and a very light tan color with the lace a thin satiny sheet to cover the glass. Sweet maple aroma, crisp and clean, malt underlies the sweetness, with the front somewhat sweet, nice malt profile with the top moderate in feel. Finish is delightful in it’s a acidity, hops brisk in their bite, quite dry and long lasting aftertaste, a nice drinking beer, mild but flavorful.

Serving type: bottle

11-19-2003 23:47:25 | More by Gusler

feloniousmonk

Minnesota

3.35/5  rDev +21.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I come not to praise this beer, just not to damn it so much.
Color: clear and syrupy, head is good,off-white, well-retained.
Aroma: remarkably spare at first, with a shyly forthcoming sweet, maltiness, that doesn't develop into anything.
On first sip, very little. No hops, nice, tasty malt, minimal texture, scant body. There are hints of a maple flavor here, but they are very small. Perceptible, but not pronounced. Then again, does anyone really want a great deal of maple in their beer? Unless you want to pour it on you pancakes with breakfast?
A very drinkable ale, but altogether unremarkable in every way. It's an interesting idea, to make a beer with one of Minnesota's principal products, but I can't understand how they're still in business making only this and a pepper ale!

Serving type: bottle

08-09-2003 22:13:46 | More by feloniousmonk

ZAP

Minnesota

2.3/5  rDev -16.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1.5

Orangish in color..pretty cloudy....nose is of maple syrup (go figure)...taste is tart....some maple present but the mix of this is just not right....I loved the Point Maple Wheat...I thought that was an excellent, lighter style Maple beer...this one falls short....too much sourness on the finish...I expected this to be a little sweeter....I wouldn't recomend this..

Serving type: bottle

11-03-2002 18:24:22 | More by ZAP

ADR

Pennsylvania

2.53/5  rDev -8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Out of a bottle at Autumn Brew Review 2002, Minneapolis, MN...

Murky sub-amber color, decent head of 1/4 inch, small bubbled carbonation. Definite maple in the aroma set-up. Initial malt, slightly maple flavors but quickly cut by an astringent hoppiness. A little less than medium-bodied mouthfeel. According to the brewery, they use Saaz hops for dry hopping, and there is that impression. Too sour and uncontrolled at the finish, not very pleasant.

Serving type: bottle

09-09-2002 07:14:47 | More by ADR

garymuchow

Minnesota

2.35/5  rDev -14.5%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours with big, full, fizzy head, that is short-lived. Amber color and a little cloudy. Hop aroma with a sweetness not based in malt. Maybe this beer is a little old, but there is an oxidized quality to the flavor and aroma. Finishes dry, but fairly short. Not much maple flavor.
I'm more curious on the origin of this brewery, and what the motivation behind its existence.

Serving type: bottle

07-04-2002 15:20:50 | More by garymuchow