Pappy Van Winkle clarification

[TomH]

IIRC, when people posted about how the first Pappy 15 bottles were not as good as the last ORVW 15, Julian explained that during the change they used barrels that had aged a little longer (16 rather than 15) for the initial Pappy 15.

Tom

[OscarV]

I also recall many here commenting that the taste profile was slightly different (woodier/drier) in that first Pappy 15

[doubleblank]

Thankfully you're in the minority Oscar or Pappy 15 would be even harder to find. I don't like most older/woodier bourbons but this is one of my favorites. Better than the 20yo to me. And currently better than that original Pappy 15 release.

Randy

[OscarV]

Yeah, also not a big fan of Pappy 20, it's watered down so much I find it one dimensional.

[jinenjo]

Has there been a release of PVW 15 yet, this season? I'm wondering if it hit California shelves.

[SMOWK]

Has there been a release of PVW 15 yet, this season? I'm wondering if it hit California shelves.

I believe so. I've picked up quite a few.

[doubleblank]

Yes, the fall release of Van Winkle has come and gone here in Houston. Spec's sold out in days. Some of the better retailers got some, but I haven't seen anybody other than Spec's get any Pappy 15. Any Van Winkles you find in Houston right now are there for one reason. The store owners know they have something unique and have priced them accordingly. Pappy 20 is at least $150.

Randy

[RedVette]

Yes, the fall release of Van Winkle has come and gone here in Houston. Spec's sold out in days. Some of the better retailers got some, but I haven't seen anybody other than Spec's get any Pappy 15. Any Van Winkles you find in Houston right now are there for one reason. The store owners know they have something unique and have priced them accordingly. Pappy 20 is at least $150.

Randy

[Virus_Of_Life]

I also believed the Pappy 15 contained SW + other bourbons. I seem to remember that Preston came along and altered the taste profile upon the change to "Pappy". When we assume we make an "ass,etc".

I am too lazy to search for it at the moment, but know I've read a quote from Julian saying that for some years now it was not ONLY SW. I recall that change was sometime around late 06/early 07 as I marked the bottles I bought prior to that in my bunker, I know I didn't do this just because of my own crazy imagination.

[MissinER101]

Maybe we should get one of our Politician friends to repeal the law of supply and demand.

Naw......The politicians we have; the end result would be increased demand and reduced supply all the while they'll be telling us we just don't understand the complexities of the real world.

[birdman1099]

I was under that same impression......:skep:

I am too lazy to search for it at the moment, but know I've read a quote from Julian saying that for some years now it was not ONLY SW. I recall that change was sometime around late 06/early 07 as I marked the bottles I bought prior to that in my bunker, I know I didn't do this just because of my own crazy imagination.

[Bentrod]

Maybe we should get one of our Politician friends to repeal the law of supply and demand.

Isn't that what they are already trying to do?

[SMOWK]

Is anyone able to clarify how I ended up with two bottles of PVW23 that have the same bottle # on them?

[callmeox]

Is anyone able to clarify how I ended up with two bottles of PVW23 that have the same bottle # on them?

The bottle number is not unique like a serial number or a Bottle X of Y type of designation.

[SMOWK]

The bottle number is not unique like a serial number or a Bottle X of Y type of designation.

What is it for then?

[Gillman]

Do they taste the same?

Gary

[SMOWK]

Do they taste the same?

Gary

Good question. I don't think I'm going to find out anytime soon. They are both from the same release date, July 22, 2008.

[T Comp]

I am too lazy to search for it at the moment, but know I've read a quote from Julian saying that for some years now it was not ONLY SW. I recall that change was sometime around late 06/early 07 as I marked the bottles I bought prior to that in my bunker, I know I didn't do this just because of my own crazy imagination.

I was under that same impression......:skep:

I had time to do some searching and came up with this closed thread from 2007 particularly posts 21 and 22. http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6738&page=3&highlight=jvanwinkle

[Gillman]

Well, it's an intriguing question. Either the labeling is an error (it does happen), or as Scott suggested, numbers can be attributed to more than one bottle, representing given lots or quantities selected for bottling. Maybe different proportions of the barrels are combined and bottled for various reasons. Your taste notes would be of interest but I can understand of course that you want to keep them for a while.

Gary

[Gillman]

On the point of all-SW or not, I think the answer is in the posts T Comp found. It sounds to me from that like some BT bourbon made in 1991 was used to eke out the batch bottled then (some 4 years ago) but that the subsequent bottlings were all-SW, that's how I read the good news reference. One thing I know: all Pappy 15 is great. It's a must buy whenever located.

Gary

[callmeox]

Good question. I don't think I'm going to find out anytime soon. They are both from the same release date, July 22, 2008.

According to a Google search, the 2005 bottling of Pappy 23 was the A bottling, so following the VWFRR label method 2008 would be the D bottling.

1336 must be a batch number.

Perhaps Julian will pop back in and shed official light on this.

[SMOWK]

According to a Google search, the 2005 bottling of Pappy 23 was the A bottling, so following the VWFRR label method 2008 would be the D bottling.

1336 must be a batch number.

Perhaps Julian will pop back in and shed official light on this.

I bought 8 bottles From the July 22, 2008 release. The date was stamped on the front of the boxes they came in, which appeared to be unopened between the time the distillery packed them, and when I received them. Most bottles were in a row, except 2, which were doubled.

[Virus_Of_Life]

I am sure the duplicate number was just a mistake, not a big deal, it happens; otherwise they are typically all numbered sequentially.

As for the provenance, what Gary eludes to is not what I had been led to believe over the past few years, nor what my palette tells me. Of course it doesn't matter if you like it, but if you're bunkering it just because you think it is 100% SW bourbon you're likely mistaken. I just can't bring myself to believe 18 yo SW is being put into 15 yo labels, sure a few barrels probably are to maintain the profile.

[Gillman]

Well, I don't know, I take what I read at face value. Anyway, as I always suggest in different contexts, it would be great to see taste notes of Pappy 15 over this period. I invite readers who have the products to give taste notes (maybe in another thread), it is the only really meaningful data for me.

Gary

[Virus_Of_Life]

Gary, I definitely am not meaning to make an argument out of it, as we all know; if it is good it doesn't matter, but reading at face value what Julian said:

Originally Posted by jvanwinkle

Quote:

""Last year, we were short of SW barrels so we had to use some BT 1991 barrels. They were great & I could not tell the difference between them.

That's good news for down the road.

Julian""

Makes is sound to me like it was a mix from then and down the road, meaning since then. If there is something else you're seeing that I am not please feel free to point me to it.

Anyway, doesn't matter, as we all know Julian says things at different times and has himself acknowledged he doesn't always recall what was used for a certain bottling, so we'll likely never know. I was just trying to make the point that you shouldn't stockpile your bunker based on assumptions of provenance, buy based on what your pallette tells you.