advertisement


Whisky II

This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
Try Glenfiddich 14 yo rich oak. Very smooth and great on the pallete. Hard to find at good price though. Used to get them for around £45 a bottle 8 years ago.
 
raysablade said:
I'm a little suspicious that everything, of late, seems to end up at around 52%.
Click to expand...
The Cree bottles were certainly dialled into 52% and that's around 104/105 proof which may have been in the slot back in the day for whisky strength, certainly Glenfarclas used to do a 105 bottle.
 
Finnegan said:
Why?
Click to expand...
Just that either it isn't cask strength or they keep their casks is a way that fails to minimise loss.

Not a deal breaker either way but i agree that the prices are creeping up and notice that the average age is falling. The latter is in line with the rest of the industry though.

I am a reasonably regular buyer and when they get it right they do produce some things that I enjoy a lot and still at a very fair price. There are misses though and with stocks running out before reviews are available online the value you are getting is undermined.
 
Guess they must be cut with water. 52% would be quite a loss for young whisky! Perhaps, as pawnshop says, they feel that’s the sweet spot, rather than a cynical tactic to improve margin.
On a slight tangent, I drink WT Rare Breed, which is proclaimed as barrel proof but is always a consistent abv. Presuming the rules are similar to cask strength and they can’t cut it they must have to blend varying barrels of whiskey at different abv levels until they hit 58.4%? Or are the rules different over there? Seems arse about face, why not blend on flavour and vary the abv? Or, like Uigeadail say, have a consistent abv but don’t proclaim as cask strength, so they can achieve the flavour profile and cut if necessary
 
jimbob75 said:
Guess they must be cut with water. 52% would be quite a loss for young whisky! Perhaps, as pawnshop says, they feel that’s the sweet spot, rather than a cynical tactic to improve margin.
On a slight tangent, I drink WT Rare Breed, which is proclaimed as barrel proof but is always a consistent abv. Presuming the rules are similar to cask strength and they can’t cut it they must have to blend varying barrels of whiskey at different abv levels until they hit 58.4%? Or are the rules different over there?
Click to expand...
Hmm… good question, I’m not sure. According to this site, bourbon must have a mash bill of 51% corn, aged for two years in a new oak barrel and bottled between 80 and 125 proof. The rest of the mash can be pretty much any grain- and does not have to be distilled in Kentucky. I’ve no idea what regulations govern US rye or single malt. I’ve got a bottle of George T. Stagg that’s 141 proof, so I’m confused.

The use of new barrels was part of Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal.’ They make noises every now and again about changing the law to allow the re-use of barrels, which would create quite a headache for the Scots whisky industry.

www.newriffdistilling.com

What Makes Bourbon, Bourbon? - New Riff

Have you ever wondered what truly makes Bourbon different from other dark spirits? If you think every liquor is the same, think again. Whiskey comes in many forms, each with […]
www.newriffdistilling.com www.newriffdistilling.com
 
jimbob75 said:
I have an old Bookers at 130.6 proof (empty sadly)… perhaps as they’re small batch production?
Click to expand...
I think the 125 proof limit is when put in barrel. Bottled can be higher. Guess the hotter climate can lead to more water then alcohol evaporating - presumably not a phenomenon common to Scotch!
 
Weekender said:
Re Whiskybroker - They don't claim their bottles are cask strength, unless they are, if you know what I mean.
Click to expand...
Weekender said:
E.g stated CS:

70cl, 12yo Distilled at Benriach Distillery

70cl, 12yo Distilled at Benriach Distillery
www.whiskybroker.co.uk
Not stated CS:

70cl, Distilled at an Orkney Distillery

70cl, Distilled at an Orkney Distillery
www.whiskybroker.co.uk
Click to expand...

Whist I agree and some basic arithmetic makes it obvious, I do think that

"This single malt scotch whisky was filled into an Oloroso Hogshead. This cask was then bottled by Whiskybroker.co.uk on the 27/03/2023 at a strength of 52.0%."

For their 8 year old Linkwood, is is less transparent than it could be.
 
raysablade said:
Whist I agree and some basic arithmetic makes it obvious, I do think that

"This single malt scotch whisky was filled into an Oloroso Hogshead. This cask was then bottled by Whiskybroker.co.uk on the 27/03/2023 at a strength of 52.0%."

For their 8 year old Linkwood, is is less transparent than it could be.
Click to expand...
I agree it could be more transparent...but at least now the Pfm whisky drinkers know :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top