Thomas Handy Sazerac Rye

[leebo]

Who has tried some of this new rye? My understanding is that it the saz. rye but at barrel strength, 132.7 proof. Have 2 bottles , opened one. Tastes great, taste results to follow

[FlashPuppy]

Who has tried some of this new rye? My understanding is that it the saz. rye but at barrel strength, 132.7 proof. Have 2 bottles , opened one. Tastes great, taste results to follow

Yes, it has been discussed here some. Try here.

Overall thought, I believe, is that it is quite nice. No, it is NOT a barrel proof Saz at all. The Handy is 8 year, and the Saz is a quite older whiskey.

[TNbourbon]

...No, it is NOT a barrel proof Saz at all. The Handy is 8 year, and the Saz is a quite older whiskey.

Actually, Jeremy, I believe it IS the younger, newer Sazerac at barrel-proof.

[FlashPuppy]

Actually, Jeremy, I believe it IS the younger, newer Sazerac at barrel-proof.

Ahh. I was not thinking about the Saz Jr. Thanks for pointing it out Tim.

[Ubertaster]

I think the new Handy is excellent. I haven't been this thrilled about a pour since George T. Stagg.

bj

[boss302]

Well, I just cracked this one open last night, and I do have to agree with the general opinion that this is, indeed, a truly excellent whiskey-- rye or otherwise.

Nose-- I detected mint and clove right off the bat, with a bit of caramel.

Taste-- The initial mouthfeel has been characterized by others as "oily", but I would go one step better, and, instead, characterize it as "buttery." While it is a powerful whiskey, the mouthfeel is nicely rounded-off. A very sweet, dark caramel taste dominates the palate. While not heavy in body, this is indeed a very rich whiskey. As for spice, I didn't pick up the mint that I found in the nose, though the clove was still there. I also detected a very warm spiciness, sort of like cinnamon and nutmeg. There was also a vague sort of nuttiness, like somewhere between walnut and pecan, for lack of a better description.

The finish does have a very brief burn to it-- this is a 132.7 Proof whiskey, after all! The finish is moderate in length. Not the longest or driest, to be sure.

Overall, I would recommend this whiskey to anyone who likes the occassional sweet and rich whiskey. It very neatly complements the Eagle Rare 17-year, which was drier and more earthy in comparison. If you are a religious collector of the Sazerac Antique Collection, YOU MUST GET THIS WHISKEY! It really is too good to pass up, even at $50 a bottle...

[bluesbassdad]

I tried this one last night. The bottle had been opened, but I had no recollection of tasting it.

The nose was mainly caramel and leather, and it remained so until I had added quite a bit of water. At that point floral notes (lilac?) appeared.

Sipped neat it was simply too overpowering for my palate in its current condition. As I continued to add water, a few drops at a time, I was able to relax and enjoy the flavor.

At first it showed a spicy character; then it followed the same progression as the nose had earlier.

I like this one a lot. I may make it my regular pour (about twice a week these days) for a while.

Yours truly,
Dave Morefield

[ILLfarmboy]

.... At that point floral notes (lilac?) appeared....

Yours truly,
Dave Morefield

I wasn't able to pin down the floral notes in Thomas Handy till I read your post which prompted me to stop and smell the lilac bush (now blooming) in my front yard. Good nose, Dave!

[nor02lei]

I am clause to the bottom of my only bottle of Handy. Good rye but not in the same division as Stagg and WLW 2006 to my personal taste.
In the middle age division its one of the better but quit a bit behind Rittenhouse 10.
Neat it’s very caramel dominated and bourbon like. I prefer it at my universal rye proof around 95. It’s very spicy with the BT trademark cinnamon dominating. However the spices come out very “sticking” and young like to me and I am sure this brand will improve for every year for a very long time following. The potential in the long run seem almost unlimited to me.

Leif

[Hedmans Brorsa]

Had to laugh a bit when I read your post, Leif. Simply because I disagree with almost everything you wrote.

I have not tried the WLW, so obviously I cannot comment on that but I find Handy to be much better than Stagg (and Sazerac 18yo). Nor did I find it to be very bourbon-like and unbelievably enough, I did not perceive it to be too young.

I can give you the benefit of the doubt about its status compared to the Rittenhouse 10yo. Have to sample them together a bit more before I pass the final verdict.

Well, that´s pluralism to you!