Old Overholt Rye

[Jono]

Had my first taste of Old Overhold Straight Rye Whiskey...80 proof..no age statement..last night and now tonight....very nice.

Nose...typical rye spice, sweetness.

Taste...light, sweet, a mingling of spiciness..but very gentle.

I have not had the Ritt 80 for comparison...the BIB offers more complexity...but this rye is a nice, smooth drinking whiskey.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Overholt

Aged 4 years...."It has a richer flavor than Jim Beam rye, and a tinge of sweetness which contrasts with the heat of the Wild Turkey rye."

I agree with that....it is a little smoother than the WT Rye.

http://www.whiskymag.com/whisky/brand/old_overholt/whisky319.html

Not sure why they titled it Old Overholt "Canadian" Rye....must be an error.

[cowdery]

I write for WHISKY Magazine and I love them, but they can be clueless about anything that isn't scotch. An editor there once wrote a subhead for an article I did about Forty Creek and referred to it as a "small batch bourbon."

[Dramiel McHinson]

I recently layed to rest a bottle of Old Overholt rye. It is young and light which perfectly fits the bill when that's what you have your taster set for. The $14 price tag made it simply lovely. When I found out that Beam makes it I did a head to head comparison with the Beam straight rye. To me, there were differences although they weren't significant. That made me wonder if it's the same juice from the same barrels in the same warehouse or not. The Beam Straight rye cost a bit more here so that helped me make my mind up on which one I'd restock. Sooooo..I guess my question is, are the the main differences between Old Overhold and Beam Straight Rye the label and price?

[Jono]

Can't say about the juice origin...but here is a "noisy" website (mute it) on Overholt history:

http://www.ellenjaye.com/hist_mono3overholt.htm

(The same people who have a similar website for Kinsey.)

One site discussion states 1987 as the cutoff year between the original Old Overholt /National Distillers and the Jim Beam distillate

http://www.whiskymag.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2583

SB - partial -thread: http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8445

[funknik]

Old Overholt is one of my favorites and it seems to get very little notice. I also have noticed its similarity to Beam Rye and wonder if it's the same stuff...however, I think the Beam may be a little smoother and the Overholt has a slightly more complex flavor. I tend to prefer the Overholt, maybe just because it has a little more character both inside and outside of the bottle....I like the fact that it was originally distilled on the East Coast...there's some interesting history there.

I like most of my whisk(e)y neat, and although I tend to prefer bourbon of a higher proof, I find that rye is perfect for sipping at 80. I've only had the two mentioned above along with Russell's Reserve Rye (which I find a little dull and I think the high proof covers up the rye until the finish) and Sazerac Jr. Rye which I thought tasted like rotting wood. Old Overholt is great sippin' whiskey IMO.

[Slob]

Old Overholt is great. The price is right. I always keep a bottle on hand. I've found that first timers are nearly universal in their praise for it.

[Jono]

Slob, glad to agree with you on something! Cheers!

[cowdery]

1987 was the year of the National acquisition by Beam and the immediate shuttering of National's distilleries. Thereafter all new distillate was made at Clermont or Boston. However, the Old Overholt made in Frankfort was hardly original. I'm not sure off the top of my head when the original Overholt distillery in Pennsylvania produced its last, but it was long ago, possibly pre-pro. While rye whiskey was still being produced in Pennsylvania, Overholt was produced there by various distilleries, probably including Michter's. When the Pennsylvania industry, except for Michters, shut down in the 70s, National started to make its ryes at Old Grand-Dad in Frankfort.

[polyamnesia]

yes, glad i made a stab at it last year...now, i can just stab myself for not grabbing the superior WT rye this summer when it was going for $15.99 all summer. ugh. but i admit, the Overholt is a great drink and it helped me appreciate OGDad's heavy rye taste. i nibble dark chocolate with it and that got me deeper into ryes.

glad to know that i can still pick it up across the state line in Delaware for $10.99 a bottle. same price for JB rye....(which i haven't tried yet...i assume they are both quite similar.....)

[Old Lamplighter]

Had my first pours of Overholt earlier this evening. It is definitely one I will keep around at all times in the future. I did not expect the smoothness.....not something found in ryes of this age - which I think I read somewhere is 4-6 years old.

[spun_cookie]

I picked up a couple of these from 1979 (bottle date on teh bottom) and the 500 ml I opened was very nice... I might have to give this new expression a shot...

Did Beam keep the same formula for this?

[Rughi]

Did Beam keep the same formula for this?

No, no, no, no no

You may find a tasting by some of us did a while back interesting, posts 22-26

Roger

PS - In another thread, some newbies were attacking Jeff Mozilla for recommending searching the archives. I believe you'll find these archive posts add to the discussion.

[Lost Pollito]

Thanks Roger. That vertical must have been a blast.

[spun_cookie]

No, no, no, no no

You may find a tasting by some of us did a while back interesting, posts 22-26

Roger

PS - In another thread, some newbies were attacking Jeff Mozilla for recommending searching the archives. I believe you'll find these archive posts add to the discussion.

Roger,

First, thank you sir and that did look like a blast... And to your point, I am all for searching the old threads and support some looking before asking questions that have been pounded into the ground before referencing "I saw in this thread linked xxxx that everyone in general believes yyyy, but based on what I have believe zzzz, what am I missing".

The one issue I often have is finding what I am looking for because a lot of threads go off track (sort of like what I am doing here) and never get into the real meet of what I was looking for. I have been around long enough to add posters names, like mozilla’s, barrel_proofs, Veach (of course) and a few others, when I search because I know their personalities and affinity for historical (accurate at that) information, but I do understand some of the newbies issues that do not know us from atom and find the search function lacking at times (extra down select features within search would be great (secondary and tertiary once the main search has located the 900 threads that is).

Another issue is some of the best info is deep into a thread that went off topic from the title of the threads and is 20 plus pages long of stuff that I am not looking for.

This example is a good one to compare because if I was on the site when this came up I probably could have found it based on memory, but "West Coast Study Group" from 1996 did not ring true to me, that and its 7 pages, the 3rd having a few posts on the topic, but the rest having no relevance to the topic of Old Overholt, or Old Overholt receipt.

Now (back on topic), as far as the info on that thread, that I had read in the past, the info is great and I know that the distiller changed many times, but I could not find is the actual receipt the same and the changes in taste are due to process, distillation equipment, time and location in the cask, etc…

This part of the thread

http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showpost.php?p=69413&postcount=25

does suggest that it may have been blended, but does not really say of the receipt is the same.

An example would be, I believe the Old Fitz formula is the same, but it will never be the same purely due to process. They might get close one day, but until someone puts a fortune into building the older style distillation process for it, the bourbons will never be the same….

You thoughts?

[Rughi]

...I know that the distiller changed many times, but I could not find is the actual receipt the same and the changes in taste are due to process, distillation equipment, time and location in the cask, etc…

This part of the thread

http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showpost.php?p=69413&postcount=25

does suggest that it may have been blended, but does not really say of the receipt is the same.

[spun_cookie]

Roger,

Thank you sir. I did not take you comment in any ill manor. My comments were in general. I think once you have been on the site for a while (a year or so activly) it gets easy to forget how much info that you have gained and how well you can navigate through the site based on finding stuff, being refered to it or living through it.

I do not think Moz was being cruel, and he went out of his way not to be, but I have seen some wicked replys to newbies. We just have to remember to let them get this fresh birthing juice off before we thump them.

I have found that diggin up an old topic brings out new information as well. Going through the posts looking for info I have seen that to be the case dozens of times... so as long as the thread is not active, I never mind the reserection of an old topic (hopeing that the one asking the question has dome a little looking to help focus the new thread).

(anyhow, back to topic again)

I thought that may be the case based on other info I had read. I am going to have to look up the barely legal threads to get up to speed.

There is never a shortage of info on the site. It would be nice to have some linkable timelines on some if these markee bourbons and rys though. I cannot even imagine how much work that would be.... so I am not volenteering, but maybe Moz would enhoy the task (I'm kidding Jeff and your 50ml of 1979 OO is in the mail)