Welcome to the Straightbourbon.com Forums.
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33
  1. #1
    Novice
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Posts
    15

    Just say no to H2O

    I've been scouring the old threads for a list of barrel proof bourbons, but I haven't found one. Can we pull something together?

    I can start with some easy ones:

    Wild Turkey 1855 Reserve BP
    Wild Turker Rare Bread BP
    George T. Stagg

    Is Old Grand-Dad 114 barrel proof as well?

    -Jeff

  2. #2
    Advanced Taster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Casper, Wyoming
    Posts
    175
    old grandad 114 IS a barrel proof whiskey, lets not forget booker's. another nice barrel proof offering from our buddies at beam.

  3. #3
    Bourbonian of the Year 2009 and Virtuoso
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Houston, Tx
    Posts
    1,798
    Don't forget W Larue Weller and this year's Hardy BP rye. Then there is also the BP rye some members here did that is also available at retail in CA. Blanton's does a BP for export that many here have tasted.

    Randy

  4. #4
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Bristol UK.
    Posts
    272
    I guess it depends how you define barrel proof. AFAIK the only ones that come straight from the cask are:

    GTS
    WT RB
    WLW 12yo
    Bookers
    Blanton's Straight From The Cask
    O. Potrero (some bottlings)

    Not nearly enough IMO.

    However as a 'half the time' Scotch drinker I tend to think of anything over 46% as 'barrel proof' and thankfully there are many American whiskies exceeding that limit.
    Cheers,

    Sion (AKA Bamber).

  5. #5
    Bourbonian of the Year 2002 and Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    12,616
    I don't believe Old Grand-Dad 114 is "barrel proof." Unless it says it is on the package, it probably is not. Re Bamber's list, there may be some differences between what is offered here in the U.S. and what you can get in the U.K. Here Weller 12 is 90 proof.

    I don't think there is any difficulty defining "barrel proof," as it simply means no water has been added to the dumped whiskey prior to bottling, i.e., "uncut." Some products are also unfiltered, but that's a whole different issue. A whiskey can be "uncut and unfiltered" (Stagg, Bookers) but it can also be "cut and unfiltered" (Rittenhouse 21) or "uncut and filtered" (WT Rare Breed).

    Remember, too, that "uncut" refers only to the addition of water prior to bottling. In most cases, water has been added to the new make spirit prior to barrel entry.

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West of the Rockies
    Posts
    2,586
    Quote Originally Posted by cowdery
    I don't believe Old Grand-Dad 114 is "barrel proof." Unless it says it is on the package, it probably is not. Re Bamber's list, there may be some differences between what is offered here in the U.S. and what you can get in the U.K. Here Weller 12 is 90 proof.

    I don't think there is any difficulty defining "barrel proof," as it simply means no water has been added to the dumped whiskey prior to bottling, i.e., "uncut." Some products are also unfiltered, but that's a whole different issue. A whiskey can be "uncut and unfiltered" (Stagg, Bookers) but it can also be "cut and unfiltered" (Rittenhouse 21) or "uncut and filtered" (WT Rare Breed).

    Remember, too, that "uncut" refers only to the addition of water prior to bottling. In most cases, water has been added to the new make spirit prior to barrel entry.
    Question about Bookers; if it is unfiltered why do I never see any charcoal sediment in it like I do in WLW and Stagg? I used to believe it was filtered, because of this until reading here otherwise... BUt then again I must also admit that since discovering Stagg and OGD 114 I have not owned a bottle of Bookers, but have drank it in a bar a few times.
    C

    "everybody defamates from miles away
    but face to face
    they haven't got a thing to say"

  7. #7
    Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Northwest Indiana
    Posts
    693
    Quote Originally Posted by Virus_Of_Life
    Question about Bookers; if it is unfiltered why do I never see any charcoal sediment in it like I do in WLW and Stagg? I used to believe it was filtered, because of this until reading here otherwise... BUt then again I must also admit that since discovering Stagg and OGD 114 I have not owned a bottle of Bookers, but have drank it in a bar a few times.
    I would really like an answer to this as well, any takers?

  8. #8
    Bourbonian of the Year 2010 and Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kentucky!
    Posts
    4,749
    I believe that it would depend on what your definition of "unfiltered" is. It could refer to just unchill-filtered, or it could mean no filters at all, but that would be a problematic definition as the nozzels on the filling machine themselves would be considered filters. Crack open the barrel and fill the bottle by immersion and the neck of the bottle is the filter.

    Each distillery has to decide for itself what its own standard for unfiltered is. That definition is likely to depend as much on how much flavor the lack of filtering departs, as the amount of sediment that the machinery can handle running through it and how much they feel comfortable leaving in the bottle as that may but seen as a flaw by the general public.
    2010 Bourbonian of the Year

    As long as you have good whiskey you're not "unemployed", you're "Funemployed!!!"

    I'm no Pappyophile

  9. #9
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West of the Rockies
    Posts
    2,586
    ... Hhmm, well, I think you know what I am getting at; tip a bottle of GTS or WLW upside down and back up right and you get a groovy little black cloud, do the same to Booker's and I believe you get nothing... So I guess that would be the filtering, how to define it I don't know, that I would be talking about, but it's obvious that there is no "chunks" that make it into GTS whereas there appears to be no "unfiltered" evidence to the naked eye whatsoever in Bookers. You get the point I think that I am referring to here.... I hope...
    C

    "everybody defamates from miles away
    but face to face
    they haven't got a thing to say"

  10. #10
    Bourbonian of the Year 2002 and Guru
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    12,616
    Chill filtering is the "culprit" that spawned the introduction of "unfiltered" whiskeys. Chill filtering is done to eliminate a haze that appears when the bottle gets cold. It's mostly cosmetic, but chill filtering does diminish flavor, which is why unfiltered whiskeys are desirable. Every distillery is a little different, but generally the whiskey is chilled to about 32 degrees F, at which temperature it thickens but does not freeze. Then it is forced through several layers of a very fine filtering medium.

    Sometimes, as a by-product of not chill filtering, there is some sediment, but not necessarily. I have seen sediment in Booker's, by the way, so I wouldn't take it as gospel that "Stagg has sediment but Booker's doesn't," although your results may vary.

    As Timothy says, there are lots of things that can be construed as "filters." The trough into which barrels are dumped contains a screen intended to catch the big chunks of charcoal that fall out of the barrel with the whiskey. The term "unfiltered" means not chill-filtered. It doesn't mean the whiskey was poured directly from the barrel into the bottle.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back to top