Which Grand-dad do you prefer?

[Enoch]

I seem to be in a minority but I do not care for any of the Beam OGD offerings. I love the ND OGD and have several bottles of each. Even though it is claimed that they use the same mashbill and yeast strain it seems clearly different to me. The ND (with the big tops and paper seal (1986) is much more mellow. I have done several blind taste test with several friends comparing Beam OGD (86 proof), ND OGD (86 proof), and Beam White Label (80 proof). I ask them to tell me which two were made by the same distillery. They always put the two Beams together. I then ask them which they like best and they always pick the ND. I also ask them to compare OGD 114 ND and Beam and they always pick the ND. Never tried the Beam BIB so I can compare them. It may be that ND let it age longer, I don't know. But I do know I love one and can't drink the other. As a result I always pick up the ND whenever I find it. Funny thing is that I like Beam's BH. Maybe it is aged longer. JMHO

[harshest]

I have only had the 86 and 114. I forget how good the 114 is compared to a lot of what I have open.

[ratcheer]

The 86 proof is one of my favorite everyday pours. I have the BiB and the 114. The BiB is very, very good, but I think the 114 is something special.

OGD = Good Stuff

Tim

[jburlowski]

Always have a bottle of 114 open on my bar.

[squire]

Enich, Beam may use the same mashbill but I doubt the same yeast strain. That and a few other slight differences may make for the changes you notice.

[Guest wripvanwrinkle]

I adore the 114. Burnt corner of the brownie pan...<clip>

Darn you Joe, this post snapped my resolve. I have impulsively snagged a bottle and am eager to give it a try.

[squire]

I may get some of this as well, just cause I can.

[Enoch]

Enich, Beam may use the same mashbill but I doubt the same yeast strain. That and a few other slight differences may make for the changes you notice.

It just seems to me to be much harsher than the stuff I have from the mid 80's. And realizing that the 80's stuff is limited I stop at every hole-in-the-wall liquor store I pass.

[squire]

Good rule Enoch, those old two land State highways offer more than scenery.

[cowdery]

Beam told me back in the late 1980s that they had retained the OGD yeast and mash bill. Among others, I was told this by Booker Noe. I have not, however, asked them to renew the pledge annually.

In that case, the only difference would be the distillery, which is a big difference. I don't know this for sure but it's possible OGD is still aged at the Frankfort plant that was called Old Grand-Dad before Beam bought it.

[squire]

The same but not the same. Oh well, differences keep things interesting.

[Gillman]

Enoch stated it as I see it, except BH to me has the Beam profile all over it too.

Gary

[smokinjoe]

Hey Joe how about a comparative, one of those ND 114s to today's?

Gary

[Guest wripvanwrinkle]

Darn you Joe, this post snapped my resolve. I have impulsively snagged a bottle and am eager to give it a try.

[Gillman]

Very good comparative notes, thanks for that!

Gary

[Josh]

Just my two cents...

I actually like the current 114 better than the ND 114s I've had. There's just too much butterscotch and fruit. To tweek Joe's famous description, to me the current 114 is more like a slightly burnt pan of blondies.

I don't think we need to jump to the conclusion that the conclusion that the yeast or mashbill have changed. Most of the color and flavor of a whiskey is from aging, so it stands to reason that a change in the aging enviroment or barrel specifications could have a dramtic impact on the whiskey. Also, if I had to guess, I would say the current 114 is several years younger than it was 20 years ago. Most of the ND 114s we are tasting now are "glut whiskey" and probably contain a lot of fairly old "juice" as Joe also likes to say.

[smokinjoe]

Ok, smokinjoe was dead on with the "burnt brownie corner" description. It is there in the undiluted nose, and then again in the diluted finish.

I fully realize that I've probably been tricked by the power of suggestion...but for 20 USD a bottle I'm happy for the spell to last. Now I hope that Joe continues to use his powers for good, and doesn't trick me into thinking that I am a crowing rooster! :eek:

Ha! I'm sure you're safe, Rip! I can't even get my daughter's sheltie to sit.

[SMOWK]

If anyone has an ND OGD 114 please PM me.

[StraightBoston]

ND (at any proof) > Beam 114 > Beam BIB > Beam 86.

To Chuck's point, Basil Hayden slots in ahead of the current 114, but only if someone else is buying... (Why oh why couldn't they have bottled that at 90+?)

[SBOmarc]

The BH at 80 proof was not made for us. The bartenders that I have spoken to call it "chick whiskey". That is there term, not mine.

Beam is using it and Ri 1 to promote cocktails made from whiskey to compete with the vodka drinkers that spend big bucks on martini variants and shooters.

I have not seen this as successful on either coast, for either pour.

As for this thread, count me in for OGD 114 and the BiB.

[Brisko]

Not having ever tasted the ND product, I can't speak to the differences or similarities there. Although I be curious to know if the early Beam product was more or less comparable to the ND product than today's.

One thing that I get every time I try the 114 is oats, lots of them, straight from the feed bag. With water, it develops more into honeyed oat cakes.

Shaken with ice and a touch of orange bitters, and garnished with an orange slice and a cherry, is a nice change of pace to drinking it neat, btw.

[MTBottle]

114 was one of my favorites in the $20 price range. I bought about 10 bottles of it when PA discontinued it about 3 years ago. I was on the PLCB website a couple of weeks ago and was glad and to see they brought it back to the PA state stores again, even though it's now $25. With all the talk lately about our new governor privatizing the liquor stores maybe they thought it was time to actually improve their bourbon selection and add some bourbons to their shelves rather than continually shrinking our tiny selection.

And it couldn't have come at a better time...I was down to my last bottle!

Mark

[SMOWK]

Not having ever tasted the ND product, I can't speak to the differences or similarities there. Although I be curious to know if the early Beam product was more or less comparable to the ND product than today's.

One thing that I get every time I try the 114 is oats, lots of them, straight from the feed bag. With water, it develops more into honeyed oat cakes.

I have found that early Beam products are more comparable to ND OGD than any current OGD or Beam products. They both have a thick, sweet, syrupy, buttery goodness.

I totally agree on the current 114. Always lots of grain and oats all the way through. Quite unique when compared to other high-proof Beam products.

[Rughi]

I have found that early Beam products are more comparable to ND OGD than any current OGD or Beam products. They both have a thick, sweet, syrupy, buttery goodness.

I agree on that. Beam considerably changed to that grassier, lighter-bodied character sometime in the late '80s, I think.

Funny, if I were to compare it, I would have said that '70s Beam reminded me of '70s Forester: the heavier body, the brown sugars and especially the rummy sweetness.

Come to think of it, it seems to me that Beam and Forester both changed from similar profiles - at about the same time - to similarly lightened and less perfumy house styles. Maybe it was the raising of still/barrel proofs in the mid-80s that changed both of them, as Mike Veach has suggested of Forester.

Roger

[cigarnv]

I am huge fan of the older 114 yet still enjoy the current 114 offering on occasion.