I've had this before and remember liking this, but now have a bottle for my birthday for a proper rating. I think having a standard 80 proof entry, barrel strength entry, and now a 101 bottle is a huge, obvious copy from Wild Turkey, and ultimately unnecessary in the end anyway. The flavor profiles are different enough, sure, but just experimenting with the amount of water you add to your flagship bourbon seems like a noticeable cash grab. The color is pretty moderate, and even somewhat darker than the typical 80 proof version, where I wasn't expecting to see such a difference. The scent has quite a bit of citrus and some lesser florality to it, but is not bright due to the oak also playing in. Chocolate covered orange peels is a specific note I'm getting, with great vanilla and a little less caramel from the respectable barrels. Upon first taste, it's much more evident that this is a wheated bourbon, much more so than the original. The high sweetness is the initial flavor, but it's not sugary like concentrated corn can be. The oak comes through next, both with the deeper notes from the char, but also a good baseline wood essence. There's a small amount of citrus here, but not as much as was on the nose. The finish is mild to medium, with the oak leading the charge. For talking shit on the choice of 101 proof, this is honestly a perfect proof to represent Maker's Mark. As with most iterations of higher proof flagship whiskeys, I believe this should be the typical purchase if you wanted Maker's Mark, because the flavors come through so much better than the watery 80 proof, but is still very approachable for novices. In the end, it's not very unique, but is tasty; as a gift, there's no argument here, but to purchase for myself, I can see me having a pretty hard line on how it should be priced.