Rating: 19/23 I've heard amazing things about this for a while, but I've also heard that it's a bit overpriced. I'm looking forward to making that call myself. N: Not super in my face. A hint of roast chicken. There's some surprising tangerine in there as well. Maybe a bit of grain. Not a ton is happening here though and it's not that enjoyable. P: There is some interesting stuff going on here! It's sweet, with some nice lightish caramel with sweet corn and hints of apricot - that last bit being a real surprise. This is very approachable and quite an easy sipper. I'm not tasting any weird notes from the alcohol and even though it burns a little bit, it certainly isn't harsh. Some vanilla is coming through now. A bit of kind of generic spice, but it does make me think a tad of cayenne or ancho. A touch of minerality, but it just adds complexity, unlike many bourbons, which the minerality makes seem lighter. It's not über complex, but it's surprisingly elegant. Not at all what I would expect from something with the name "Smoke Wagon". F: Clean with lingering light caramel and sweet corn, as well as a controlled burn. Not the longest finish or the most complex, but it's pretty nice while it's there. - Conclusion - I really appreciate how restrained this is. They didn't push their luck and leave it in the barrel too long. It's an easy sipper. Is it amazing me? Not really. I'm still enjoying it quite a bit though. Old Forester 1920 (18/23) is bolder and brasher, with more or a burn and more aggressive banana and wood that borders on being over-oaked. I like that the Old Forester is bolder, but I also find it to be less nuanced. Overall, I think that this is better. Wild Turkey Rare Breed (18-19/23) has more peanut and funk, but it shows its alcohol more and is more challenging. They complexity is similar, but the Wild Turkey is both richer and more challenging. This seems like a closer match-up than the Old Forester. This one seems like it might be a touch better because it's more refined and elegant, but it's not a massive improvement. 1792 Full Proof (19/23) is bolder than this and it has a bigger punch, but it also burns more and is less complex. I'm not convinced that the 1792 beats this at all. I get some Blanton's vibes, so I pulled down my bottle of Blanton's. The Blanton's has more sweetness and minerality and it just tastes more muddled and slightly off-putting. Maybe a bit too much maple and vanilla. This is the clear winner. It's been so long since I rated Blanton's that I don't think I can narrow down my rating range based on that, but suffice it to say that Blanton's is not as good as this. So, I'm pulling down my current bottle of Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof (21/23) as well. The problem here is that this bottle tasted a bit like gasoline last time I tried it and I did not enjoy it nearly as much as the decadent oily banana profile of prior bottles. Comparing the two, I'm now getting more bitter herbal notes from the Jack Daniel's I do still get a hint of gasoline, but it tastes much better than it did before. It's rich and full and surprisingly complex. My inclination is to favor the Jack Daniel's over the Smoke Wagon, which really indicates to me that the Smoke Wagon is not a 20, seeing as this is clearly the worst bottle of Jack Daniel's Single Barrel Barrel Proof that I've tried. I mean, this might be competitive with the Jack, but how good is the Jack exactly? Side by side, I'm inclined to take the Jack over the 1792, but not by a large margin. I think that this is clearly not lower than a 19. Could it be higher? Maybe. I could believe a 20 and be persuaded of a 21, but I don't see it being better than that. I don't know. The more I taste this, the more I think that it's a 20. It's very nicely executed, being fairly interesting and also very easy to drink. I think with that side-by-side of the bad Jack and the 1792, I'm really looking at a 19 here. That's a great score, but I would have been delighted to go up to a 20 here. Thanks @jdriip for sharing this one with me!