Booker's vs Knob Creek

[Edward_call_me_Ed]

An interesting discussion has been taking place in the Newbie forum on whether Knob Creek and Booker's are basically the same whiskey, one uncut and the other cut. I suggest that you read the thread http://www.straightbourbon.com/forum...9736#post79736

So, what do you all think? Has anyone cut Booker's to Knob Creek strenght and done a head to head? I think I did months ago and I think I found them to be different. I need to do it again to be sure. If you haven't and you have both bottles how about giving it a go?

Ed

[Gillman]

I have had both these a few times in recent weeks and months.

They are similar, but Booker's seems "cleaner" and more concentrated in taste. Knob Creek seems more like a batch-made product to me by which I mean it is either made like a bonded product is or even from distillations of different seasons and years. It has a complexity, in a word, I don't find in Booker's.

As for age, Knob Creek seems older but not by that much.

Gary

[ggilbertva]

The only point I was trying to make in the other thread regarding Knob Creek is that when I tried it cask strength, I found it to be very very good, in fact, much better than what they bottle. I made the comment to our tour guide that he should suggest a barrel strength Knob to his management.

[Gillman]

Proof can make such a difference, a number of us sampled at proof strength a whiskey destined for Ridgemont Reserve 1792 and it was sensational.

Gary

[ILLfarmboy]

The only point I was trying to make in the other thread regarding Knob Creek is that when I tried it cask strength, I found it to be very very good, in fact, much better than what they bottle. I made the comment to our tour guide that he should suggest a barrel strength Knob to his management.

Now that is something I would support and by support I mean with my pocket book!

I like KC well enough but there is usualy something more interesting to spend my money on.