Elijah Craig Barrel Proof Bourbon Batch C923

ELIJAH CRAIG BARREL PROOF SHOWDOWN ELIJAH CRAIG BARREL PROOF B517 ELIJAH CRAIG BARREL PROOF B520 ELIJAH CRAIG BARREL PROOF C923 I’ve been a big fan of Elijah Craig Barrel Proof (ECBP) for a long time. I own (or have consumed) most of the triannual releases for the past 6-7 years. I’ve reviewed them individually in addition to doing Showdown reviews comparing releases from the same year. This Showdown review compares three highly rated ECBP releases from different years: B517, which was Whisky Advocate’s Whisky of the Year; B520, which is thought by many to be one of the best ECBP releases; and the C923, which I recently rated 4.75 and has received a lot of fanfare from the bourbon community. How do these compare? Let’s find out. ELIJAH CRAIG BARREL PROOF B517 Deep orange mahogany color (Pantone 153). Complex nose reveals cocoa powder, pomander, oiled leather, caramel, vanilla, Luxardo cherries, charred oak, a Wild Turkey-like dust, grape jelly, and spearmint. The palate has a nice viscosity, with sweet oak and caramel. The alcohol is kept in check with the robust flavor profile, and the finish is long, with crème brûlée and lots of oaky vanilla. While whisk(e)y drinkers debate whether Whisky Advocate’s Whisky of the Year is a marketing merry-go-round or an objective assessment, the winner is typically very good, and the ECBP B517 is certainly that. There is plenty of complexity; a high, well-integrated proof; and a reasonable price, considering. Current releases of ECBP can be found for $85. Would I buy it again? Yes. This is one of the best values in bourbon. 4.5 on the Distiller scale (vs 4.25 on my last review). 124.2 proof. 12-year age statement. Non chill filtered. ELIJAH CRAIG BARREL PROOF B520 Deep mahogany color, a shade darker than the B517 (Pantone 160). Fantastic nose reveals chai tea, milk chocolate, strawberry preserves, cocoa, graham cracker, cappuccino, orange oil, cherry pie filling, mulled cider, spearmint and maple syrup—all of this without noticeable alcohol. On the palate, there is a light glycerin mouthfeel, and a sweetness Finish has plenty of cinnamon red hots and vanilla extract. The ECBP B520 nose is very complex. Nosing through each release in succession, and continuing to cycle through them all, I kept getting different olfactory elements from the B520. It is both powerful and refined. As stated previously, current releases of ECBP can be found for $85. Would I buy it again? Every time. 4.75 on the Distiller scale. 127.2 proof. 12-year age statement. Non chill filtered. ELIJAH CRAIG BARREL PROOF C923 Burnt orange meets mahogany; a half-shade lighter than the B520 (Pantone 153). Out of the glass, the C923 fills the nose with a pervasive warmth. Orange oil leads the way, followed by cedar, Chinese five spice, dust, apples, tangy BBQ sauce, soy sauce, and a whiff of menthol. Like the B520, there is no alcohol burn on the nose. The mouthfeel has a similar viscosity, though the palate isn’t quite as sweet as the B520. The high proof becomes noticeable on the back end, transitioning to a finish with brown sugar, oaky vanilla, drying leather, and a big Kentucky Hug. For the third time in this review: where else are you going to find a bourbon with high proof, high complexity, and such a robust flavor profile? There’s a reason why the bourbon community is raving about ECBP C923. It Would I buy? 4.75 on the Distiller scale. 133 proof. 13 year, 7 month age statement. Non chill filtered. METHODOLOGY High-proof bourbons need to be approached with a little trepidation—and I say that from the perspective of someone who loves hazmat whisk(e)y. The first sips start very hot, and it takes a few for the mouth to become acclimated. Only then can the actual tasting begin; and for me, that translates to a 10-12 minute warm-up. For this Showdown, I nosed each one in succession, occasionally taking a small sip, and then wrote a one-word descriptor or short phrase before moving to the next one. I continued this process until I’d ran out of differentiable identifiers. Then I sipped each one and recorded the taste and finish in the same way. Further, I passed through everything again. And finally, I repeated the process the next night, and only then began to craft each paragraph. CONCLUSION These three releases of ECBP, spanning six years, show a commitment to consistency. Each release shares similarities and overlapping descriptors. As @djangojohnson has mentioned elsewhere, separate releases of the same bourbon can be subtle. The biggest differences in this case aren’t in the flavor profiles themselves but rather their pervasiveness and intensity on the nose, palate, and finish, as well as the presence and integration of alcohol, regardless of the proof. Succinctly: power and balance. The B517 is very good, and I’m happy that I’ve got a couple more bottles in reserve; but despite its power and complexity, it is a notch below the B520 and C923. That is not an underhanded compliment, because the B520 and C923 are world-class. The B520 is exquisite: every time I come back to it—over the past two days I’ve logged dozens of sips amongst the three—I find something different. The C923 is the most powerful amongst the three. The proof is a little higher, and it is noticeable as it should be, and there is an effusiveness of flavor that floods your nose and coats your palate. It reminds me of the opulence that comes from a William Larue Weller or George T. Stagg. It is ostentatious, but not brash. It displays a sophisticated heaviness, like a fine shearling coat. It demands your attention unapologetically, and its big Kentucky hug reminds you that you’re in its house rather than the other way around. But the C923 is a bit out of balance. It’s robustness doesn’t quite stand up to the 133 proof. Were the alcohol a little more integrated, the C923 would be a 5.0. But in this Kentucky Derby, the B520 wins in a photo finish. All spirits tasted neat in a Glencairn glass. (N.B.: This review in its entirety is posted for each of the whiskies that are tasted, for the purpose of comparison and context; the reviews are in the same order that the whiskies are listed in at the top.)