Tinkov Royal Russian Pilsner - Tinkoff

WesWes

New York

3.73/5  rDev +35.6%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

The beer pours a hazy pale gold color with a thick frothy white head that slowly fades to lacing. The aroma is good. It has a nice pale and bisquit malt aroma that is earthy and slightly sweet. The hop content is low. The taste is decent. It has a semi-sweet pale malt flavor with a dry bisquity finish. It's light with an earthy feel. The mouthfeel is fine. It is a low bodied beer with adequate carbonation. This is a good pilsner. I love the aroma as well as the taste. It's different from most in that there actually seems to be some malt complexity. This is a fine sessions beer.

Serving type: bottle

10-10-2005 21:42:36 | More by WesWes

Beerandraiderfan

Nevada

2.9/5  rDev +5.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 4

Very clear light yellow. Aroma nonexistant.

Its really similar to every other yellow beer in this style out there. Carbonation trying to pump up the hops, no malt, yeast gives just the slightest dallop of fruitiness. A 'refreshing' beer only because it really emphasizes the water.

I give it drinkability points because it is cheap and in a cool bottle.

Serving type: bottle

07-17-2010 22:27:11 | More by Beerandraiderfan

magictrokini

California

2.63/5  rDev -4.4%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

On sale at BevMo for a shamelessly low price. What the hell. Pours clear yeallow, weak white head. Corny, grainy aroma. Taste was sweeter, saaz-like sweet hops and light grain. Light and enjoyable. Good on a hot day. Every beer has its place. I would put this in the same category as a Dos Equis or Corona.

Serving type: bottle

12-16-2008 19:03:56 | More by magictrokini

sinstaineddemon

Connecticut

3.85/5  rDev +40%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 5

A - this pilsener pours a straw color, with a thin white head, moderate carbonation

S - sweet malty honey-like aroma, there's also a background of a ginger spiciness to it

T - weak-bodied, but nice flavor, a light sweetness and hoppiness

M - nice hoppiness vs. sweetness balance, highly impressed, body is weak, but other than that its very good

D - highly poundable, high drinkability, easy down brew

Serving type: bottle

05-09-2006 21:41:33 | More by sinstaineddemon

soulgrowl

United Kingdom (England)

3.23/5  rDev +17.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

First of all, I love the bottle this came in. The graphic design has a very communist propaganda look to it.

Appearance: Honey/apple juice yellow with a jasmine green tea tint. White, fizzy head with mediocre retention. Against the light, flaky/grainy floating bits and vibrant, hypnotic strings of carbonation can be seen.

Smell: Smells of honey, unrefined sugar, malts, chlorophyll, a touch of grassy hops and white wine, and a drop of maple. Has a bit of a musty character, as well.

Taste: A jumble of sweet flavors: honey, cotton candy, rum, and white grape juice. Very mild hop character reminds me a bit of iceberg lettuce. Sweet, sticky finish.

Mouthfeel: Thin and surprisingly flat.

Drinkability: This is too sweet for my tastes... I couldn't drink very many of these. But if you prefer a more saccharine lager, this might be for you.

Serving type: bottle

12-15-2005 16:44:53 | More by soulgrowl

Padron4KM

Arizona

2.23/5  rDev -18.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

11.2 oz bottle no freshness date, but a nifty painted on lable.

Hazy golden in color, fizzy white head. Lots of carbonation.

Grainy aroma.

Lightly sweet malty flavor with a tinny and slightly bitter aftertaste.

wasn't terrible, but this sample cost me $2.49. If it was more like $5 for a six pack I might consider purchasing again.

Serving type: bottle

11-16-2005 05:42:19 | More by Padron4KM

ikats

New Jersey

2.7/5  rDev -1.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Light yellow in color with minimal white head. Strong carbonation. Looks more like a soda than a beer. Low on appearance. Faint floral aroma with grainy malt background. Taste is really hurt by strong carbonation. Not a very pleasant mouthfeel. I had the pleasure to try Victory Prima Pils recently and Tinkov pilsner fails in comparison. This beer is like a very good version of macro beer, but a below average version of pilsner. I got a kick out of trying it (mostly because of cool bottle design), but I won't be searching this out again any time soon.

Serving type: bottle

11-10-2005 03:57:26 | More by ikats

Skidz

Wisconsin

3.3/5  rDev +20%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Pours out pale straw and sits a bright faint yellow in the glass with a large soapy white head fading to a faint skim, holding strong on the sides leaving a good coat of lacing on the glass.

Smells big and crisp up front. Sharp grainy nose with boatloads of grassiness.

Crackery flavors build up the malt caracter, just think saltines and you're already there. Solid hop bitterness driven by mid-summer's grassy flavors, dry and sharp. Basic duality system here, well-played out.

Very light and sharp, crisp carbonation. A basic pils I guess, nothing real exciting.

Serving type: bottle

04-29-2005 20:13:01 | More by Skidz

yen157

New Jersey

2.65/5  rDev -3.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Nice white head, a little chill haze, and seemingly flow carbonation. Some lacing. Slightly muddy nose, some herbal hops and a good dose of malt. This is a malt driven pilsner. Not too much hop presence at all except for some grassiness up front and a VERY faint lingering bitterness. Malt is doughy, but with very little sweetness. Finish is quick but not crisp. There is very little aftertaste. I haven’t seen this little since my taste of Bud Select. Body is fine as is the carbonation. Not too much going on here.

I can’t blame the Russians for bringing in beer from England!

Serving type: bottle

04-25-2005 22:28:40 | More by yen157

beertaster13

Washington

1.9/5  rDev -30.9%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Pours a light yellow with a decent head. The smell is of grain and dewy grass, hints of yeast. The taste is funky, bits of grain and dough, not much doing. No real hops to speak of. Not the best pilsner I've had, isn't refreshing and clean, won't return to this beer.

Serving type: bottle

10-17-2004 21:17:02 | More by beertaster13

Zorro

California

3.55/5  rDev +29.1%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Pours a hazy golden brew with abundant carbonation.

Smell is sweet toasted grain and hay smells very malty.

Taste is sweet with a strong hop level to keep it in check. Mild smoky flavor and a floral hop flavor. Flavor goes sweet then floral and then smoke and ends with a mild bitterness.

Mouthfeel is OK.

Tasty drinkable brew, worth about $7 a sixer.

Serving type: bottle

09-12-2004 01:26:17 | More by Zorro

Andreji

Colombia

2.85/5  rDev +3.6%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

This beer makes part of what i like to call, nowadays, the "bogota airlift": i've been isolated from the beer world in colombia, and now all quality (apart from the bogota beer company, but that falls into another category) i get is from my family's travel abroad every month or so to the states or europe.

I guess i got the wrong beer, cos mine was actually cloudy, a tan, honeyish tonality with a medium white, sorta thick head which looked nice. I was fooled for a second there.

The smell pitched a combination of scents, ranging from a slight metallic feel of the pilsners to that malty background of some pale ales. still fooled by then. could it be the russians finally did *something* right?

Nope. taste proved me wrong. although it was not all that bad, mixing a certain sweetness into your regular sorta pilsner that rather enhanced it and made it more drinkable. still, this doesn't overcome the fact that it still holds many macro-like mediocre properties in taste and mouthfeel, as drinkability, and doesn't seem to be in the future repertoire of the Bogota Airlift (BA..errr...)

Serving type: bottle

08-26-2004 22:25:18 | More by Andreji

scottum

Vermont

2.13/5  rDev -22.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Pours out a golden clear liquid with a thin white fizz of a "heaad." Some light struck from the clear bottle. Fizzy mouthfeel with harsh grainy malt flavors coming through along with a strange bitter sensation. Worth skipping over this beer as it does not have many redeming qualities.

Serving type: bottle

06-22-2004 02:40:28 | More by scottum

rotsaruch

Pennsylvania

1.68/5  rDev -38.9%
look: 2 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

The only word to decribe this beer is disappointment. It pours, smells and taste like carbonated water. IMHO, the big three would reject this brew. Lots of fizzy, soft drink carbonation on the pour with a big bubble head that disappears in the blink of an eye. At best, the aroma had a faint fragrance of a grainy malt. The taste was a watery bland malt in the absence of hops. Drinkability for me was none existent; down the sink after half a glass. Pilsner is my favor style brew and this was poorest pilsner imitation I have had to date.

Serving type: bottle

06-11-2004 01:13:18 | More by rotsaruch

NeroFiddled

Pennsylvania

2.63/5  rDev -4.4%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

The Tinkov brewery is a modern company with sexy television ads and the bottles to go with it. The silk-screened, retro-looking Lenin-esqe label in primary red, blue and grey with a twist-off cap gives the impression that this is a hip, throwback beer, whereas it's really just a bottle full of average Russian lager aimed at the export markets. That said, it pours a clear golden body beneath a short head of thin, bright-white froth that fades shortly to an average collar and leaves only minor, transient lace about the glass. The nose is fairly basic with a combination of spicy, herbal and slightly floral hops over a subtly sweet and grainy malt. There are some mild, dialkyl sulfides (cooked vegetable, tomato juice) and some dimethyl sulfide (canned sweet corn) but they're somewhat limited. The body is light-medium and its fine-bubbled, moderate carbonation leaves it smooth across the palate. The flavor reitereates what the nose suggests with dms apparent at the start amidst it's slightly husky graininess. Grassy, spicy and herbal hops appear at the swallow, and its firm bitterness helps to dry the finish although some sticky malt lingers. However, some mild cooked vegetable and a touch of dms, linger as well; thankfully balanced after a few moments by the longer lingering herbal hops. Beautifully made bottle - poorly made beer.

Serving type: bottle

03-12-2004 15:38:11 | More by NeroFiddled

RoyalT

Ohio

2.25/5  rDev -18.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

Appearance – Light orange in color with a decent head that went down quickly.

Smell – The floral hopping is strong and I can pick up some light fruiting, but that’s about it.

Taste – The sour malt overtakes this one, giving it an overpowering tangy flavor.

Mouthfeel – Flat and thin and very sour in the mouth. This one will pucker you up.

Sinkability – If it wasn’t spicy Mexican night, this one would be in the sink for sure.

Serving type: bottle

12-04-2003 01:47:11 | More by RoyalT

Gusler

Arizona

2.05/5  rDev -25.5%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

A golden yellow color with a decent white head that is creamy in texture, the lace a somewhat thin sheet to almost cover the glass. All malt nose sweet as is the start, thin to medium feel at the top. Finish is nicely carbonated, but lacks ant real hop spiciness, and the aftertaste dry as a desert bone, nothing to write home about, actually sub-par in my book of lagers/pils.

Serving type: bottle

10-12-2003 20:46:30 | More by Gusler

beerguy101

California

2.13/5  rDev -22.5%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

I'm going to assume that this is the same beer as the Tinkiv Lager. I don't think it is, but the line between lagers and Pilsners fron Russia is a little nebulous. Light gold color, small head. Light tasting, slightly maltly, not very hoppy. Not a lot of taste. Mouthfeel is neutral. Finish is clean. Aftertaste is neutral. Not much to this beer. Etched beer bottle.

Serving type: bottle

09-29-2003 01:41:47 | More by beerguy101

UnionMade

Colorado

2.8/5  rDev +1.8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

I honestly bought this for the bottle. Very cool design.
The beer poured a pale amber, much darker than i expected, with a thick, frothy white head.
Aroma is maltier than i anticipated, with more weight on the hops. A bit of toasty malt, fairly clean, and a moderate spicy herbal hoppiness.
The flavor itself reminded me of a helles or export style, not a pilsener. Heavier that I expected. Malty, with moderate hops coming through in the end, but not too much. A light spicy peppery flavor. I drank this with sushi hand rolls, and it complimented it well.
I'm happy with my purchase, but I doubt I'll make a habit of this stuff. There's hundreds of better beers out there.

Serving type: bottle

09-19-2003 22:23:28 | More by UnionMade

ADR

Pennsylvania

2.5/5  rDev -9.1%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 3

Hey, a screw off cap, must be a "going concern".... But, with mass production sign comes a crummy and washed out head of no duration and little lacing. just a tad paler than straight clear yellow color. Little aroma, slight brown sugar. Light and sweet, body falls out mid mouth and flavor wavers little. Balance of green tea hops. OK, as a throw 'em back beer but not worth it at an import price, possibly the most bland of the former Soviet beers I've had this week.

Serving type: bottle

08-21-2003 14:36:22 | More by ADR

Globetrotter

Virginia

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

Comes in a transparent colorless 1/3 liter bottle with a label only on the tapered neck. The body of the bottle includes the Tinkoff name and trademark in raised figures off the glass. More raised letters at the bottom front of the bottle state "Private Brewery" on one said the "Tinkoff.ru" on the other. The company clearly spent a lot of money on these little bottles.

The beer itself pours a decent clear gold, but the head is way to small, fizzy and short-lived to deserve the pilsner label. The nose is too sweet, like soda pop. The mouth is bubbly, but too sweet. The taste starts bland, then moves into slightly sour, finishing with a touch of hops not nearly deserving of the pilsner label. I drink this brew at the brewpub, but I won't buy another bottle.

The label on my bottle, by the way, says 4.7% abv. I wonder if the export version really is stronger. Not that I think that would help much.

Serving type: bottle

07-09-2003 10:44:34 | More by Globetrotter

ORM1

Russian Federation

3.48/5  rDev +26.5%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

The name of the beer, which is used in Russia is "Tinkoff Platinovoye" (i.e. Platinum) written in Russian and just "Tinkoff Pilsner" written in English on a neck label of a 11,2 oz (330 ml) transparent glass bottle.
Avb is 4,7%, gravity is 14%.
And I think that this is the most expensive pilsner in Russia. Small bottle costs ~ 30 rubles (Current exchange rate is 30 RUB = $ 1).

As TheLongBeachBum wrote already: " It also proudly states that it is brewed according to the 1759 recipe of Porphyry Vassilievich Tinkov. This of course, is somewhat strange when you consider that the original Pilsner was brewed in 1842..."
I'd like to add that there is also a phrase that Porphyry Tinkov was a supplier of tzar Peter the Great. The only thing is that Peter the Great had already died on 1725, i.e. more than 25 years prior the receipe was carried out :) This is more strange for the producer from St.Petersburg - the city founded by Peter the Great.

Colour is pale yellow. Very thick but very fast ending head, lemonade like carbonation while pouring.
Beer has typical pils smell but with grain, grass and some tropical fruits tones.
Taste is in German pils style, so-called classic: hops and malt are harmonically ballanced. However, 14% of gravity turn flavours to some grassy and floral tones. There is also a presence of yeasts.
It's not bad, but I don't feel any ultra premium, like they say on a bottle (see www.ultrapremium.ru).
...
Now this beer is also produced on the new Tinkoff Brewery in Tzarskoye selo (Pushkin). Address: Sapernaya ul. # 7/1, Pushkin, St.Petersburg.

Serving type: bottle

06-17-2003 06:13:37 | More by ORM1

BigHead

Arizona

2.53/5  rDev -8%
look: 3 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Take into consideration that I am not a huge pilsner drinker, but I was disappointed by this Russian effort. The aroma has a nice banana smell at first but then I detected a beeswax type of odor to it. The flavor of this beer is different, can't quite put my finger on it, but it had a slight buttery flavor and consistency to it. The pilsner flavor has a citrus undertone. I won't be in a rush to try this one again.

Serving type: bottle

04-29-2003 16:38:57 | More by BigHead

TheLongBeachBum

California

3.45/5  rDev +25.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Presentation: A brown glass bottle with a funky red, white and blue screen printed label. 11.2 oz (330ml) size. Has ‘Tinkov ПИВО’ written in white on the bottle neck. Lots of blurb on the bottle, the most important of which clearly states that this offering is the product of the Russian Federation. It also proudly states that it is brewed according to the 1759 recipe of Porphyry Vassilievich Tinkov. This of course, is somewhat strange when you consider that the original Pilsner was brewed in 1842, but hey, never let facts get in the way of good marketing.

Appearance: A pale golden straw color. Clear fresh looking body. It pours with plenty of dissolved carbon dioxide which quickly dissociates. A large white frothy head that looked great at first – very quickly disappears before your eyes and just leaves a thin whispy scum of a head. Some lacing left at the highest point the head reached.

Smell: Has quite a familiar Pilsner aroma. Grainy Malt with string whiffs of hop-oil.

Taste: An average mouthfeel at first that soon fades. Can be thin at times. Malt and Hops are balanced and evident, but the strongest flavor is that of ‘hop-perfume’ in the finish, which is quite strange.

Drinkability: Above average, but the hop perfume may annoy you a little after a while.

Overall: Not bad, but by no means a classic. A reasonable effort for a Pilsner though. Worth trying, well at least once.

Serving type: bottle

03-29-2003 20:14:29 | More by TheLongBeachBum

mzwolinski

California

3.53/5  rDev +28.4%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

Starts off promisingly, with a clear, pale straw appearance, decent finger thick head and nice even carbonation throughout. The aroma is grainy/husky, with not much support in the way of hops. Flavor is not at all what I'd expected. This beer is very sweet, almost bock-like, though the sweetness seems more sugary than malty. Nevertheless, as soon as I started thinking of it as a bock, rather than as a pilsner, it was fairly enjoyable. Hop flavor and bitterness are very understated, leaving the finish almost sweet, in with more grainy/bread-like notes. This beer is perhaps mislabeled, but I didn't detect any obvious "off" flavors, and it was pleasant enough to drink.

Serving type: bottle

11-30-2002 15:31:20 | More by mzwolinski