Tastes

I'll cut to the chase: this is tasty, has a good bit more alcohol punch than expected for 91 proof, and at $42 there are bottles much better. But is it bad? No, just not a recommended buy. Nose: Light, gentle sweetness with a little corn and floral notes. Hint of the ethanol to come is present and makes you recoil a little. Palate: a whole lot of barrel spice that really bites and dries. Decent mouth feel, but the ethanol sting really prevents you from being able to enjoy it. Sweetness of the corn and caramel is definitely there, but not balanced enough with the spice to really enjoy neat. Finish: start of the finish is ethanol heat and heavy spice, followed by a good dose of caramel and a really quite nice oaky finish. I just can't get over how hot it drinks for the proof, tasted blind I would call it closer to 105 proof range. If it tasted like this at 105, it would get that extra half star, but alas it seems Blade and Bow is too happy to rest on the laurels of the Stitzel-Weller name than just make their juice a little better/older. Instead of this, reach for a FAR cheaper Early Times BIB (same sweet flavor profile and ethanol bite, just less oak on the finish), or for the same price and much better juice and instead get 4 Roses Single Barrel or Wild Turkey Rare breed. The 4R SiB really captures the same barrel spice and aged oak, but executes it much better overall, and especially on the nose. Heck, even reach for a cheaper Russel's Reserve 10 year for a similar profile at a cheaper price; the two are very similar.

I don't know where to start with this one. For those unfamiliar apparently this is straight bourbon (2 years old at least) which they then filter and use some sort of light/sound/pressure/vibration system that they claim 'rapid ages the spirit' making it taste years older than it actually is. The entire Winchester line is pushed hard by Total Wine so I gave in and sampled it one day, the $80 straight single barrel offering. Frankly I am flabbergasted. How they can get away with selling this swill for $80 and can do so in good conscious is really disturbing. This is atrocious. Nose: Heavy, sweet, and sticky corn. Tiny hint of caramel, but really more reminiscent of canola oil or corn syrup. Palate: Tastes like Dickel sourced. Sweet corn and caramel, with a slight tang on the end. Palate is hot from alcohol, at only 90 proof. I have had 120's that drink better, for about half the asking price (Knob Creek SiB). Finish: Sweet corn, but with heavy mineral taste. No oak, no smoke, no burnt sugars. To close, I would never pay for this, and I really hope you never do either. I shiver to think how bad the standard Winchester offerings are but will never try them. If you like corn, just buy Mellow Corn. It is significantly better.

$30 for 90 proof, 10 year bourbon? Sounds familiar, like they're competing with someone... For me, the only part of this that can compete with Eagle Rare is the nose. The nose on Russell's is amazing - it pours on the sweet and complex burnt barrel sugars with a hint of cinnamon spice. No hardware store oaky-ness that I would expect from a 10 year old product. After the nose, the palate can't deliver - I get the classic Turkey bitterness, with lots of drying spice and no sweet. The wood also just seems off to my desired palate - not deep and complex, but rather hot and bitter. Finish is spicy, both cinnamon and pepper and other nondescript 'baking spices'. Fades to a little bit of oak, and just a hint of sweetness shows it's head and a surprising amount of smoke comes through too. But this is not a sweet and caramel profile. I'd say spicy, dry, and bitter. Frankly, to be honest, I'm not the biggest fan of anything Turkey. I'm not sure if it's the lower entry proof, the yeast strain, or that little bit of added rye to the mashbill. Is Russell's Reserve a fine bourbon? Sure. Would I be incredibly disappointed if this was handed to me at a bar, or showed up in a blind taste testing? Not at all. Will I personally reach for it in the stores to spend my money on? No, and that's why it falls short of the 3.75 'buy' endorsement.

10 year old Buffalo Trace, that is more well rounded, and has a better finish, for *checks notes* $6 more?!?! I love Buffalo Trace mashbill #1. Eagle rare brings all the same sweet vanilla/honey/caramel goodness to the table that regular BT brings. ER also brings the same “deep” leather, clove, and barrel spice flavors to the table. What really separates the two is the fruit, I get lots of sweet raisin and apple. No cherry (often a turn off for me). Also separating the two is the finish. Not as sweet, but so much more depth from oak and cream cheese frosting and delicious light barrel spice. Truly an amazing bargain, and a “must buy” at MSRP. Anything over $45 is reaching, but would still be a recommended by up to $50.

This is one of the most expensive bottles I’ve ever bought. So, as there should be, I had high expectations heading in. $43 for 375mL??? I appreciate the small size to sample without committing too much to, but still very pricey. With that said, the nose is inviting with lots of sweet caramel and brown sugar/burnt sugar. Palate follows that up, slight velvety sweet cream cheese frosting/cinnamon taste/sweet pecans. Lots of cinnamon on the finish with a little spicier pepper, but the finish is unfortunately short. Not too drying or sharp, especially for the unique 107 proof. It is obviously sourced from Wild Turkey, and the back end of the palate and the finish scream of slightly watered down and smoother Rare Breed. Just a tad sweeter. It has that trademark Wild Turkey slight bitterness, and to be completely transparent, I’m not the biggest fan of any Wild Turkey offerings. With that being said, I appreciate the proof, the nose, and the sweetness. I don’t appreciate the short finish and thin mouth feel, especially for the proof. And I REALLY don’t appreciate the price tag. Wouldn’t buy again, but would likely drink over many things if everything was free.

Batch 2, winter 2019. 12 year aged TN sourced whiskey (obviously Dickel). Sherry finished. 90 proof, one of 1436 bottles from the batch. 75% corn, 21% rye mashbill. I'm shocked they don't display the age statement proudly on the bottle - I had to research it on their website to find it. I'm struck with how obviously similar this is to Dickel BIB 13 year release, and clearly they should be. Nose is almost identical, trade a little of the peanut nose for some vanilla and sweet corn. Palate really has some great citrus going on, and is bright despite the heavy dose of corn and nutty-ness. End of the palate is met with the classic Dickel tart/mineral fuzz, but it is less brazen than other sourced juices out there. Finish is nothing too special, but lingers well with a drier vanilla closing it out. I am a sucker for citrus and sweet flavors, but this may be too sweet and 'high' for some. I'm surprised at the lack of oak throughout, given the age. Comparing side by side with Dickel BIB 13 year, it is very hard to call one 'better' than the other. They are different, and deliciously so. This is what finished, and sourced whiskey should do. Be clear in their details, and be different than the source juice. Hats off for that. I came in to this not knowing what to think of it. It is tasty, sure. Worth the price of admission? Ehhhh, that's really the only complaint here. A bottle apparently goes for over $55, when a Dickel BIB can be found for ~$40.

I will start this out by stating that this is not a typical bourbon. The use of blue corn (probably over 70% of the mashbill, with little rye), short 2-3 year aging, and pot still distillation method all make this taste different than any bourbon I've had before. The nose is supremely inviting - gentle and smoky, with sweet corn and creamy fruit character - tart apricots, almost citrus like. Corn almost completely dominates the palate - sweet, and dusty with a wonderfully viscous and oily mouthfeel from the proof and use of a old school pot still. Leather and graham cracker come in a little at the end. The finish redeems the monotone taste some, with dark chocolate and smokey barrel char lasting a good while, and the oily, not dried mouth feel hanging around too. Just as Dickel has a distinctive mineral aftertaste, Balcones has a one as well, resulting from the blue corn and pot still. It is a rich, almost overwhelming corn that is just plain different from anything you have tasted before. If you come in with expectations of a Wild Turkey or Heaven Hill brand bourbon, you will most certainly be turned off. But this is not Kentucky bourbon, this is Texas bourbon, and well done at that. Not the biggest fan of the price point, if it was $7 less, it would earn that last quarter star to be a recommended 'buy'.

I struggle with this, it had a lot of hype to live up to. Considered a low 'allocated' it is basically not sitting on shelves commonly and is considered a 'find', a little less so than Eagle Rare. So those are the expectations, along with a $42 price tag. Frankly, it did not live up to expectations. Nose - promising, lots of corn, with a tinny bit of sweet sugars and musty oak. Not a vanilla bomb like Elijah Craig. Palate - Lots of cinnamon and dry nuts (not super strong peanuts). Nothing special about the mouth feel. A dry, astringent oak comes in, with not a lot of sweet to round it out. The oak feels 'green' ie young, and there's a light honey flavor that is overpowered by the barrel. Finish leans a little more towards the subtle sweet, but fades moderately fast. Save your money- buy Elijah Craig. $15 cheaper, and a much more well-rounded palate. Normal EC is also probably older (even though they dropped the age statement), and has a lot more of the sweet and vanilla I love in bourbon, compared to the corn and spice present in this over priced, over hyped bottle. If it was $32 dollars I still would probably pick EC over it... There are bottles you pay over MSRP for, but this absolutely not one of them.

133.7 Proof beast. Had to drink with a rock. Tasty. Much less sweet and less fruity than the regular Single Barrel. Very strong cinnamon - spicy, but not from the alcohol. Drying, with the oak, toasty barrel, and tannin finishing it out with a dusty vanilla final kick. Not disappointed with this at the price - just wish it was a little sweeter with more classic banana bread. Good value, but not quite as good as the 94 proof single barrel.

Damn good. Price point is very hard to beat. As others have echoed, while I wouldn't agree with this being whiskey of the year, I can understand why it was selected. It represents older times when well aged bourbon was cheap and accessible, and shows a shift in the Dickel mindset which I am certainly excited about. Vanilla and dusty peanuts on the nose with a hint of alcohol and classic Dickel mineral. Approachable and reels you in. Palate delivers more of the same - very nutty, with sweet vanilla and even a little cherry fruitiness. A lingering wood, dust, and a tiny bit of spice on the nicely long finish. Surprised by the mouthfeel at the proof, in a good way. Once again, approachable, non-offensive, and tasty. Not mind blowing, but a well executed bourbon to sip neat, and is pleasantly distinctive. Got this at Total Wine for MSRP before it won whiskey of the year, so you won't find it at this price. MSRP is now $42, which I still think is a fair price. I am a fan of the Evan Williams Vintage series that changes year by year, and I think that this will be the same, a bottle I'll try every year and leave a few pours in to compare year to year. If the MSRP was still $32, this would get another half star. But $42 is still more than reasonable, and gets the 'buy' green light.