PDA

View Full Version : Shot Glass Question



Vision
07-04-2004, 08:32
I've got this OF shot glass from the 50's. It's a proof selector jigger and can be used for measuring shots from different proofs. There are markings for 1, 1 1/2, 2 oz shots of 90, 100, 86 proof. What I don't understand is one oz of 86 is a touch less than 90, which is less then 100.

Why would the shot size go up when the proof increases? The opposite makes sense to me.

Thanks

Vision
07-04-2004, 08:33

bobbyc
07-04-2004, 10:51
Why would the shot size go up when the proof increases? The opposite makes sense to me.





That's the correct assumption, you pour the lower proof bourbon to the higher proof marks to get the equivalent.

dgonano
07-04-2004, 11:59
It could be an assumption your pouring Old Fitz 100 BIB. If you want to reduce it to an equivalent of 90 or 86 proof, you pour to the appropriate mark.

Vision
07-04-2004, 19:16
Thanks guys, that seems obvious now. I'm suprised there is such a need for that, that they would design a glass around it.

ratcheer
07-05-2004, 08:04
Me, too. That sounds like trying to measure a precise medicine dose. I just measure 50 ml, no matter the proof.

Tim

dgonano
07-05-2004, 09:47
Back in the fifties 100 proof bourbon was obviously more expensive than 86 or 90 proof whiskies. Since most whiskey was used for mixing drinks ( look at the old ads on ebay ) the intent of the shotglass measurements was probably a marketing gimmick which allowed consumers to pour a little less 100 proof bourbon when mixing highballs, manhattans, sours and old fashioneds.

Vision
07-05-2004, 18:05
That sounds right to me.

Hey, I'm having trouble finding a store with a good selection of bourbons. Can you recommend any? I do get into Montgomery county sometimes.

cowdery
07-05-2004, 18:41
Before, during and immediately after Prohibition, 100 proof was the standard. Consumer demand prompted many distillers to offer lower proof expressions, down to the legal minimum of 80 proof, but some distillers resisted and tried to call attention to what they considered a lowering of standards. I don't know this for sure, but knowing the history of Stitzel-Weller, I assume they were one of the hold outs and this was a way of demonstrating that lowering proofs was a negative, that you had to use more of a lower proof product to make a "standard" drink. This assumes people didn't really understand proofs, which may be valid. It also ignores that people were actually seeking a lighter taste, which is why the lower proof brands caught on in the first place.

mike1
07-05-2004, 19:04
Thirty years ago when I worked in restaurants,while vodka was 80proof, and just becoming popular,brown whiskies except for the BIB's were 86 or 86.8 proof. The 80 proof brown whiskies started to come in and were obviously cheaper to buy. They were pretty much the 'well' whiskies because they were considered an inferior or alduterated product. vodka also was considered a cheap product because it was 80 proof. No matter what the proof bartenders poured by sight and every drink got the same amount of product.

bourbonv
07-06-2004, 08:25
While Pappy Van Winkle was alive, Old Fitzgerald was sold only as a Bottled in Bond product. The shot glass is from the mid 1960's.
Mike Veach

ratcheer
07-06-2004, 18:24
While Pappy Van Winkle was alive, Old Fitzgerald was sold only as a Bottled in Bond product....
Mike Veach



And Pappy was right, too!

Tim

Vision
07-06-2004, 19:20
It says 1956 if you care