PDA

View Full Version : Eagle Rare 17 - Worth it?



heatmiser
12-08-2006, 10:29
I have had the Eagle Rare 10 SB and it is one of my favorite american whiskey's. Has anyone had the Eagle Rare 17? If so, how does it compare to the 10? Is it worth the extra price? Is it to woody due to the 17 years?

dougdog
12-08-2006, 11:26
I have had the Eagle Rare 10 SB and it is one of my favorite american whiskey's. Has anyone had the Eagle Rare 17? If so, how does it compare to the 10? Is it worth the extra price? Is it to woody due to the 17 years?


1. Has anyone had the Eagle Rare 17? ...there might be one or two on this forum that have tasted ER 17

2. If so, how does it compare to the 10?...the old ten rocks in my world, (Old Prentice version) but you ask ten different people, you'll get 8 different answers...(someone's bound to agree)

3. Is it worth the extra price? If you like the 17 better than the ten...then yes!

4. Is it to woody due to the 17...I don't think so, but then sometimes I enjoy a well aged whiskey...

jburlowski
12-08-2006, 12:13
I used to like ER 17 but the most recent releases (particularly the 2005) are too woody for my taste. Unless you like (or don't mind) oakiness, I'd suggest you stay with the ER SB 10. It is a very good pour and a excellent value.

dougdog
12-08-2006, 13:23
I used to like ER 17 but the most recent releases (particularly the 2005) are too woody for my taste. Unless you like (or don't mind) oakiness, I'd suggest you stay with the ER SB 10. It is a very good pour and a excellent value.


John, you mention the ER 10yo SB...I couldn't agree more...

From my memory, I'd say that when I did a vertical tasting of as many ER's as I could get my hands on, the 10yo SB and the ER Old prentice 101 proof were probably the closest in profile. (BT gets high marks here for finding current day whiskies that match the flavor profiles of yesterday's bourbons)

In recent conversations with other friends, the tasting notes for this years ER are not as favorable as in years past. I have not opened my 2006 bottling until I find another, so I cannot comment directly on that position. Over woodiness could be the concern, I'll check into it further...maybe a study group subject for the future.

IIRC, Jim Butler (THE BOSS) likes the ER 17 too...I wonder what his take on this years' edition might be?

TNbourbon
12-08-2006, 15:12
...the most recent releases (particularly the 2005) are too woody for my taste...

I agree regarding the 2005 -- though I've found that letting it aerate in the glass for a few minutes after pouring reduces that. I find the 2006, however, much less so.

Nebraska
12-08-2006, 17:10
Haven't had the 2005, but I think the 2006 hasn't got it's due yet because of all the fuss over the other offerings in the BTAC. I think the ER 17 2006 is an outstanding pour. Definitely worthy of being in the collection.

CrispyCritter
12-08-2006, 18:07
Count me in as another fan of ER17, at least the 2006 version - I haven't had any of the earlier ER17s.

CrispyCritter
12-08-2006, 19:10
Inspired by this thread, I poured some '06 ER17 after having some Pappy 15.

Mmmmmmm. (for both pours!)

The Pappy 15 seemed to have a bit more spice to it, while the ER17 is a bit sweeter. As for woodiness, the ER17 has a bit less wood than the Pappy 15, but the Pappy is not excessively woody. Both have long, satisfying finishes.

It's kind of ironic, though, that the Pappy (a wheater) seems spicier than the rye-recipe ER17. Higher proof (107 vs. 90)? Barrel selection? Warehouse location? Luck of the draw?

ER17 is a gentle giant in the BTAC series... and worth every penny.

jspero
12-11-2006, 09:17
I have had the Eagle Rare 10 SB and it is one of my favorite american whiskey's. Has anyone had the Eagle Rare 17? If so, how does it compare to the 10? Is it worth the extra price? Is it to woody due to the 17 years?

I like ER 10/101 and ER 10 SB a LOT, but I don't find ER 17 to be worth the price by comparison. It's good bourbon, but it is not special enough to be twice the price. When you can get PVW 15 or ORVW 15 for less money, I can't justify ER 17.

As far as woodiness goes, I didn't find it to be excessive. I found the flavor close enough to ER 10 that I started wondering how old the 10 really is.

Jay

doubleblank
12-11-2006, 09:31
The standard ER 10 SB has been running about 14yo on average. Most of the hand selected ER 10 SB's have added an age statement of 13 to 14yo that I have seen. So that may explain the taste similarity to the 17yo.

Randy

TnSquire
12-11-2006, 17:35
The 06 ER is a very good bourbon. The other bourbons in the Antique Collection are excellent. Course that is just my opinion!

ggilbertva
12-13-2006, 07:47
I agree! I just recently tried the ER 17 and found it much to my liking. I have the other Antinque bourbons and each one is a treat. All these are the 2006 offering.

TimmyBoston
12-14-2006, 05:16
IMO the 17 is not worth it's hefty price tag. Good stuff, yes, but not good enough when you can get the 10 SB for about $20. Just my 2 cents.

TnSquire
12-14-2006, 06:36
That was kinda my point but I think it was lost in the post. The others in the collection are outstanding. When I tasted them I was underwhelmed by the ER 17. I would drink it over some other stuff out there though! If you LIKE it and alot do, its worth the price to you.

You had better watch out....they might bump up the price of the 10SB to the 40 buck range! lol

smokinjoe
12-14-2006, 09:05
I find the ER17, particularly the 2004, to be a very nice pour. But, of the entire BTAC Collection, it would be the one I could do without. Not worthy of it's high price IMHO. The Stagg, WLW, Saz, and Handy are "WOW!!" drinks. You know you are sampling something special with them, but ER17 is just kinda average to me. I would just rather have 2 or 3 of the ER10's for the price of 1 ER17...except for the 2004.

JOE