Port Charlotte 10 Year

Burnt fruit is its main uniqueness. Just ok.

Hadn’t been a scotch drinker in a long time but I got this and got hooked again. Smoky, bacon and BBQ notes but some bright salinity and some subtle fruit too. Been more of a Bourbon drinker for a bit but have to explore some single malts again - great dram

Very balanced with an enphasis on peaty. Peaty kinda refreshing.

great flavor front tough burn, just not the best flavor) Neat

Tastes like an Islay. Which means, I love it, but I’m also not sure whether I prefer it to Ardbeg 10 or Laphroaig 10. Truth be told, I’d take either of those or this and be satisfied. I’m not terribly picky, except those other two are about $10 cheaper, and cost is always a factor for someone who buys their own whisky. So let’s see, what sets this apart? It says Heavily Peated on the bottle, but the level of peat here doesn’t feel too different from those other two. This is 100 Proof so it’s stronger, which maybe leads to a greater intensity of flavor, and I’d say yes, that’s true. There’s smoke and peat on the palate and it’s less medicinal than Laphroaig. A bit more rubbery. It’s got a sweetness, a sort of butterscotch sweetness, that reminds me of the Ardbeg Wee Beastie if the Beast were a little tamer, a little subtler. The nose has peat and smoke and some of that band aid thing going on that Laphroaig has, but it’s less band aid than rubber. Actually, this reminds me a bit on the nose of a better version of the Dark Silkie, in that it’s got that Pep Boys aroma of new floor mats and car tires. There’s also something like asparagus going on in the nose that I like. Like freshly picked asparagus, just cut, before you start cooking it. The finish is long and nice and spicy at 100 Proof with a lot of sea salt and smoke continued. Amusingly enough, this is the third Bruichladdich I’ve had and the first that’s actually peated (I had the 2013 Barley and the Classic Laddie) and because it’s peated, it’s my favorite of those three. I’d buy this again, though like Ardbeg or Laphroaig, I generally go with whichever 10 year is on sale. I had Laphroaig 10 Cask Strength Batch 16 last night, which blows this out of the water, but it should given it’s Cask Strength. I also had the Ardbeg BizarreBQ, which I also prefer to this, but again, those are supposed to be better pours than this. Actually, not to end this review on an endorsement for Ardbeg, but I’ve read here that a lot of the Ardbeg special editions are shit lately but that the BizarreBQ was decent, and that’s the truth. The Laphroaig Cask Strength 16 is also better by a long shot than the 15, so if you can picked up a bottle, I recommend you do. As for this, I’m glad it’s readily available. I think Bruichladdich is doing us all a lot of favors by bottling at 100 proof. I don’t have the sentimental attachment to this that I do with Ardbeg 10 or Laphroaig 10, so I’m probably always going to prefer those for reasons that have less to do with what’s in the bottle than memories. But yeah, don’t sleep on this one. It’s in the running. With that, I leave with a question: almost all other regions that produce scotch start their standard bottlings at 12 year, why does Islay seem to say, 10 is our standard? 10 is good enough? I’m sure I could Google that, but I was curious as to whether anyone here has that answer readily available?