New Maker's Mark Expression in 2010

[BourbonJoe]

Do you think it might make it's way down to us here in Oz?

If I know Makers Mark, you might even find it on the moon.

Joe :usflag:

[GOCOUGS2002]

Maker's Mark is what got me started on this journey, I at least owe it to them to try out their new product.

[sailor22]

I'll give it a try for sure. In the meantime I'll be mixing a little Seasoned Oak juice in with some Makers for a poor mans preview. I am curious how close to the new product a vatting of those two current product will be.

[Gillman]

What I find interesting is the additional aging but in toasted barrels. This approach makes the company's argument over the years consistent: further aging (i.e., in the usual barrels for bourbon) would not add anything, and might take away, from the qualities of the product. What they are saying is, we will try another, non-traditional approach, and maybe people will like it.

I am not opposed to such variations in a company's product line, the new WR, which I haven't tried, is another example. In the end the palate is all that counts.

Gary

[unclebunk]

I'm down to my last pour on my only bottle of MM and planned on purchasing another but maybe I'll wait and see when this new expression comes out before grabbing a new bottle. I like MM just the way it is, but something new from them sounds interesting. Here's hoping they come out with an even bolder expression in the future!

[StraightBoston]

John Hansell just blogged it over at his site (but we heard it here first!)

[OscarV]

Cool, SB.com got the scoop first!

[pepcycle]

The new name will be Jack's Mark.

Putting wood in a barrel of whiskey.

C'mon. What kind of PR crap is that. Its not really changing anything.

OK. Maybe its baby steps for them.

At least its not Charred Maple

[marco246]

As far as I know, MM is the only wheated bourbon sold here in Hawaii. Whenever I go the the Mainland, a major priority is finding some Van Winkle and/or Weller to bring back in my luggage. So a new wheater, even if it is a variation on an old theme, is most welcome.

I wonder if this is a Beam initiative?

[fishnbowljoe]

For what it's worth, I e-mailed MM to try and get more info. Haven't heard a thing yet. I thought it was at least worth a try. Joe

[jburlowski]

Drum roll .....Kuthud what a let down. We're going to raise the proof a whooping 4 points and I'm not sold on this toasted barrel thing.

The re-barreling thing can work... see WSRMC SO, BTEC, etc.

Anybody know where MM gets their barrels? The B-F cooperage claims they may been making toasted barrels for some time.

[CorvallisCracker]

The re-barreling thing can work... see WSRMC SO, BTEC, etc.

Anybody know where MM gets their barrels? The B-F cooperage claims they may been making toasted barrels for some time.

Any number of places. Barrels meant for aging wine are almost all made from oak seasoned for three years (and four years seasoned are available, but cost more). Most of these manufacturers offer the barrels in various toast levels.

I've been researching this lately because I may be buying two or three 15 gallon barrels in the near future.

[NeoTexan]

For what it's worth, I e-mailed MM to try and get more info. Haven't heard a thing yet. I thought it was at least worth a try. Joe

I heard back ...... "No comment,... yet"

[arrScott]

I participated in a marketing focus group on the packaging for the new Maker's expression on Wednesday. We weren't sworn to secrecy (though no photos allowed), so I can offer these details from the packaging we saw and reviewed:

1. All were labeled 94 proof.

2. "Toasted Oak Staves" were prominently mentioned on all labels.

3. The bottle was a very elegant decanter-like cross between a Maker's bottle and a Bulleit bottle. Sort of rounded oval, smaller on the bottom than at the shoulders. Very thick glass bottom, with the inside forming a smoothly rounded teardrop of whiskey. Gave it the illusion of fine crystal.

4. Red wax on all bottle tops. Some also had a paper seal impressed over the top of the wax.

5. Three of the six packages had a product name that was a variation on "51". Maker's 51, Maker's Mark 51, and just plain 51. Two of the "51" bottles had a legend on the label or a hang-tag explaining that this was the 51st of a series of experiments.

6. The other product names were "Limited", "noted." (all lower-case with a period), and "Landmark". The "Landmark" bottle was clearly trying to separate the new product from Maker's Mark; it was very slick and corporate looking, in a generic way, but it was also one of only two bottles for which they had variations to show us after almost everyone rated it their least-favorite design. The variation was even more generic.

7. Two of the bottles had paper labels; the other four were screen printed directly on the glass.

8. The marketing guy leading the discussion seemed very concerned with what packaging designs led us to consider the new product to be significantly higher-quality or higher-price than Maker's. From a few little things he said, I'm guessing they're hoping it will work at a $40 price point for 750 ml.

No samples to taste, though they did let us all choose a bottle from the lineup of existing premium brands with us when we left.

[HighTower]

nice info arrScott, and welcome aboard!

I hope this makes it to Australia!

Scott

[Bourbon Geek]

Maybe I misunderstood, but I'm pretty sure Dave said MM was a higher proof 20+ years ago.

MM has been 90 proof ... with relatively few exceptions ... from the very beginning .... (exceptions are: 86 proof in Australia ... 101 proof in the US and Japan for a while ... 95 proof in Japan and duty free for a while ... 95 proof "vintage" in the US for a year or two ... mint julep ... that's about it) ... remarkably consistant throughout the years at 90 proof.

[dgonano]

I didn't mean to confuse SMOWK. I was referring to the 101proof that Mike V always talks about.

[SMOWK]

I would love to try some of the 101 stuff! Anyone...???

Dave, you overwhelmed me with information. In a good way. Luckily it was early afternoon and we didn't dip into the EWSB they had behind the bar.

I've always thought MM was pretty good, and readily available. I'm not a big buyer of things under 90 proof, so MM has always been on the cusp of "to buy, or not to buy".

Obviously this next release will be purchased, as it heads towards 100+ proof, which is what I always prefer.

[Ruby K]

,...how about an uncut, unfiltered, single barrel?

I think Oscar's got this right. I might try this new iteration, depending on the price point, but I'd rather a single barrel barrel proof.

[jburlowski]

I think Oscar's got this right. I might try this new iteration, depending on the price point, but I'd rather a single barrel barrel proof.

And I'd rather be good-looking and talented... and thus a movie star.

[Cmurfs73]

I was in Kentucky at MM with a group of co-workers and we got the vip tour and we were able to have a personal tasting by Kevin Smith MM Master Disitiller. He had us try some so called "over aged, over proofed" MM and now upon reading this, I have a feeling this was it. It tasted great and Kevin at the time even said they expirement with different proofs and ages all the time but have stuck to the current recipe and proof. Very interesting...

[NeoTexan]

MM has been 90 proof ... with relatively few exceptions ... from the very beginning .... (exceptions are: 86 proof in Australia ... 101 proof in the US and Japan for a while ... 95 proof in Japan and duty free for a while ... 95 proof "vintage" in the US for a year or two ... mint julep ... that's about it) ... remarkably consistant throughout the years at 90 proof.

One other exception......

[Ruby K]

And I'd rather be good-looking and talented... and thus a movie star.

you mean you're not?

[cowdery]

Where are the people who are going to rail that "it isn't bourbon!" because they did something to it after the fact?

The nice thing about something like this is that it's an experiment that doesn't take ten years to play itself out.

[pepcycle]

My Jack reference and sticking wood in bourbon was a troll for just such an argument.