dhsilv2
Wild Turkey Bourbon 101
Bourbon — Kentucky, USA
Reviewed
January 10, 2023 (edited January 31, 2023)
So what do you do when you have what's widely seen as one of the best daily drinking, can mix, and be loved by geeks and novices alike bottles of bourbon? Well duh silly, you make a new label, put in vastly inferior juice, and hope nobody cares.
Nose - mostly just vanilla. Some ethanol, some light oak, bit of toast. Perhaps some toffee, cream, cherries, vanilla. Look it's classic bourbon, just lacking any real depth, nuance, or well hint of age.
Taste - this is where things go south fast. Where's the turkey character? Where's the funk? Where's the hints of at least some 6 year bourbon? What once was a catch all do all kind of entry level bottle now noses and tastes like a high quality mixer. You seriously will struggle tasting this to think wild turkey.
All and all a travesty, but I can't say this is terrible bourbon. It's easy drinking for the proof and has a nice vanilla profile that'll mix well and isn't offensive. This seems like both a push to save money with youger bourbon and an attempt to repurpose this brand as a bar mixer vs dive bar safe sipper.
An interesting, and decent entry level bottle, but for the love of Eddie Russel, don't call this wild turkey 101.
Create Account
or
Sign in
to comment on this review
@BDanner I’ve not tried this 101, but I had a small pour of the old 12 yr “cheesy gold foil” 101. That blew my mind—-was probably the best bourbon I’ve had. I should get this one, just to see the gap between then and now
@dhsilv2 about 10 or 12 years ago I think. Went up once, and a couple years later went up again.
@BDanner didn't know they'd change the entry proof. That would make a LOT of sense.
@dhsilv2 @angstrom @tonyberg12 @jdriip @Ctrexman @Scott_E @ghill40509 @PBMichiganWolverine I picked up a bottle last week out of curiosity and I definitely can tell a difference. I don't think it has to do with the new bottle (more a coincidence). Definitely don't get near the amount of Oaky Barnyard Funk that I used to on the nose or palate. Definitely more Ethanol on the nose and a Licorice note on the noticeably thinner feeling palate. I'm chalking this up to the change in Entry Proof that was made a few years back (cost reduction move by Campari I'm sure). It's been long enough now that older stocks with the lower entry proof are exhausted and have become less of a percentage of the blend. I noticed the same change in the Longbranch as well (which I recently re-reviewed and commented that it wasn't as good as I remember). The Russells' were always adamant that the lower entry proof led to more flavor due to less water being needed to bring it to 101 proof.
I concur. I have no idea what has happened,I get significantly more ethanol in the nose than I have had in previous bottles. Something is up.
@jdriip I think we all agree
@dhsilv2 I have followed this discussion with interest. I decided to do a side-by-side taste of the new label and the old label. My nose and taste buds agreed with you, the new label 101 pales in comparison to the old label 101. Dang, wish I’d known about this sooner, I would’ve bought up as many bottles of old label as I could.
@Ctrexman it is still value, but read my notes more directly. It feels they wanted to not just save money but shift this to a more mixer, new drinker with a focus kn sweet and moving away from traditional turkey. my view is this isn't just a money grab, but a change in direction for the 101 brand.
@PBMichiganWolverine @devil32 I agree with @Ctrexman that this is still a good bang for the Buck. The quality may have slipped from previous years, but that is still somewhat subjective. For now, for a quick hit with some punch, I will keep buying. These polarizing reviews are welcomed. I like seeing one negative reviews as much as a positive.
This fits my bias. New bottle = beware, something has changed.
@Ctrexman @dhsilv2 i think that’s the way it is now, with higher labor cost, lower quality materials.
I do agree last bottle of 101 I had was not as good as couple years prior but I think thats where we are now
I get this is probably not as good as the 101 back in the day. I understand WT may have a shortage of older stock for this offering. That said this is still a great bang for buck bourbon with what it competes with price-wise. We are living in a new world that will never return to days past . Longbranch is terrible compared to this for more $$. The only bourbon that beats it in price range is OGD114. I think the indictment is more across the industry than exclusive to 101
@ghill40509 THere's truth to that, though keep in mind Turkey has been backwards. They created the russell's reserve brand because they had excess old stock and nowhere to put it years ago. And that celebrity long branch stuff they made, it sold so well they actually had to put older whisky in 101, rare bread, and kentucky spirit when it first came out because it used up all the young stock. We might actually be seeing a lack of older bourbon for this due to the sales of their bottom shelf longbranch as crazy as that sounds.
I've been expecting something like this for a while. They can't continually add new high end products and not have it affect the low to mid. As yet, I have not run across this problem but that good juice has to come from somewhere.s
Maybe? If so, what a shame.
@BDanner interesting, was chatting with Jason over at Mash and Drum this weekend, he noted the same loss of quality and turkey character. Perhaps they have been slowly bringing in the new profile with these bottles.
This is how the world ends. Not with a bang, but a gobble.
I haven't experienced the drop-off in quality yet. Maybe I've just gotten lucky so far.