PDA

View Full Version : Fighting Cock vs. Old Ezra



mbanu
01-17-2012, 21:25
Has anyone tried comparing Fighting Cock with Old Ezra? At least on a superficial level they seem pretty similar... Both Wild Turkey competitors, both (I believe) Heaven Hill products, approximately the same proof, approximately the same age... do you think they have different flavor profiles? Are there technical differences (mashbill, barreling proof, etc.) or is one just a year older than the other?

Any thoughts appreciated.

T Comp
01-18-2012, 06:08
Has anyone tried comparing Fighting Cock with Old Ezra? At least on a superficial level they seem pretty similar... Both Wild Turkey competitors, both (I believe) Heaven Hill products, approximately the same proof, approximately the same age... do you think they have different flavor profiles? Are there technical differences (mashbill, barreling proof, etc.) or is one just a year older than the other?

Any thoughts appreciated.

Good questions mbanu and something that has been discussed before about FC in the whiskey three thread as Heaven Hill only has one mash bill for rye recipe but subjectively have product labels of different taste profiles (OE is a Luxco product but distilled by HH). http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15005&page=8&highlight=bourbon+mash+bills

So it comes down to barrel selection to meet a certain taste profile. I don't have enough taste experience with FC and OE to comment on those profiles but the one year of age difference between FC and OE will make a difference too. I asked the same question in another thread about taste profile differences on all the 4 year old rye finished HH labels. Here's another one too...FC and the 6 year old HH BIB...how different do they taste?

Parkersback
01-18-2012, 07:07
One very subjective and vague thought based just one bottle of each in the last year: Ezra struck me as sweeter, a little less burn in the finish; the Fighting Cock as a little spicier, a little rougher (in a pretty good way).

ethangsmith
01-19-2012, 17:26
I echo Parkersback in my tastings as well. Ezra is sweet and smooth, FC is spicy and much more powerful.

cas
03-10-2012, 04:47
Zingerman's Roadhouse here in Ann Arbor features a fairly decent bourbon selection and Thursday is 2 bucks off bourbon pours. My wife had a business function there this past Thursday so I took it as an opportunity to sit at the bar for a little over an hour and try a couple that I hadn't had before. My first glass was Hancock's Reserve and it was pleasant but not super interesting. Probably not something I'd pay about $50 for a bottle. After that I tried a glass of the Fighting Cock - I don't think I've ever seen it in a bar before, and I had avoided buying a bottle for a long time - the label and name just gives the impression of being sorta cheesy. But I was surprised, this was good. Up-front, spicy, and a lot of different flavors rumbling around. Not a mellow, dilute, flavorless pour like I had anticipated. I preferred it to the Hancock's - there was a lot more going on in each mouthful in the FC. I'm not sure I would always want it neat, it was a little bit hot, but I bet it would be a good summer mixer in coke or ginger ale - the bourbon flavor wouldn't be lost in the soda.
Craig

bad_scientist
03-10-2012, 06:27
Here's another one too...FC and the 6 year old HH BIB...how different do they taste?

The HH BiB is nice, I guess, but I got really sick of the young wood notes after a while. It opens up after a few months, bringing some cherries and banana, so it wasn't a total loss. I bought a 200 ml of Ezra Brooks 90 last night and it tastes exactly the same, so no need to purchase both.

I think FC is more interesting in most every way, with a real rye kick and thicker mouthfeel (so I suppose you could say the Cock is thicker in the mouth... god, I hate that name).