Rating: 15/23 N: The nose is fairly pungeant with sour richness that initially reminds me of vomit and Copper Fox Rye. There's prominent peat, sour brine, and smoke. There's a bit of sweetness on the nose too that reminds me of Talisker and Caol Ila when combined with the smoke and strong iodine. The nose is somehow sour and smokey without being particularly herbal or having something else going on. It's fairly intriguing though and I'm looking forward to tasting it despite the apparent lack of balance. As is common with Islay Scotch, it smells savory and there is a decent amount going on. P: The palate is immediately both sweet and smokey with that briny flavor from before holding it together along with a weird jalapeno spiciness coming from the peat. There's quite a bit of iodine adding some richness and bitterness. There's actually a fair amount happening here. It is surprisingly sweet, a bit like sugar water was added to it, and it's kind of light for an Islay Scotch, but that can all be written off as elegance I guess. That vomit element is still a bit of a problem, but sort of like the Laphroaig 10 Band-Aids, it isn't insurmountable. There's a bit of grain coming through here too to really sell the profile. The balance is surprisingly good, actually, despite its brashness. There's some menthol in with the iodine too, though they're blended well to form the peat. It certainly doesn't taste old, but it also doesn't taste hacked together either. F: The peat and smoke linger along with that sugar water sweetness, the brine, and the jalapeno spiciness. It's a lasting finish that is actually pretty soild. For a cheap Islay Scotch, this seems like a great choice. It's definitely at least a 12 and could be a 15. Talisker 10 is undoubtably richer and more harmonious with more sweetness and malt, as well as smoothness. This tastes young in comparison for sure and it's definitely harsh, though Islay whiskeys can actually get away with that. Between the two, I think the Talisker wins, but not by a tremendous margin. Caol Ila 12 is also richer, but with more chocolate to its flavor that makes it quite hedonistic before letting the fruity notes on it. The Caol Ila is also very well balanced. In direct comparison, the Smokey Joe comes across as harsh and young with a thin body. The Caol Ila is definitely better despite perhaps not having as much complexity. Clynelish 14 is also richer with some sweet fruitiness despite the waxiness given way to a less full and rich finish. Of course, this isn't a totally reasonable comparison since Clynelish isn't peated, but it feels warranted somehow. I still like the Clynelish better, though I think the Caol Ila is the best. What's apparent from all of this though is that Smokey Joe is harsh and young in comparison with a thin palate. I think I like the others better, though Smokey Joe is honestly not bad. Clynelish does have a weird long finish, so maybe I'm not as big of a fan of that one. Although light and young, Smokey Joe tastes more like it is filling a niche than like it is an underaged wreck. It isn't bad, frankly. Yeah, there's a lot of weird stuff here that's quite in-your-face, but I keep coming back to this being a fairly drinkable whiskey. This is far from the subtlety and elegance of Lagavulin 16, but it's still not awful. This may have more aggressive nature, but it's still a tad less rich. Yet not awful. It has none of the sweet chocolate richness of Ardbeg Corryvreckan in direct comparison, though that leaves me wondering since when Ardbeg Corryvreckan had those characteristics. In comparison, Smokey Joe unfortunately has a vomit foulness, though it still isn't enough to provide a really disgusting, jarring experience a la Clan MacGregor. Port Charlotte 10 is richer and certainly smokier, but also not super well balanced with some added fruitiness and malty sweetness, but not as much complexity. This isn't as good, but I keep coming back to how surprisingly good this is. Yeah, it's light and young and all that, but it's actually fairly drinkable. Now that I've had it side-by-side with several other drams, I'm giving it at least a 13. I think a 14 is warranted. I could see a 15 as well. Not sure about a 16. This would be easy whiskey to dismiss, but it's actually fairly good. The price is higher than I expected, but so is the quality. I think it might earn that 15 since it was right up there with Talisker and Caol Ila, but I'll give that another try on a clean palate with my last sip. If this were $30 instead of $40, it would be an easy buy. I think the 46% ABV works out here too since it would otherwise be a bit insubstantial. Actually, I think I'm going to up it to 15 right now. In direct comparison, this definitely does not have the sour brashness and sugar water sweetness of Copper Fox Rye, though it does have more complexity. Wow! It's kind of in the style of Copper Fox Rye mixed with Ardbeg and Laphroaig. Given its name, I never suspected that this might be a good whisky.