What is it that I'm tasting

[DreamTheater]

So my collection of bourbon in 2011 went from 3 bottles to around 88. Call me a happier man. Having collected all these bottles, I have landed on a handful that I find most delicious above the others.

I'm not an expert on recipes and mash bills but my favorite bourbons are WL Weller 107 -> Old Rip Van Winkle 10 yr 107 proof -> William Larue Weller from the antiques collection. I loosely understand that I am drinking the same exact thing in all three, but that each one is a step up in quality. Am I correct on this count? They certainly all taste the same if not increasingly better quality.

But to the point of my post, what I find so utterly wonderful about these bourbons is their cloying sweetness, that stick-to-your-gums flavor that is almost reminiscent of brown sugar. I get this in ONLY these bourbons.

Contrast this against some of my other favorites like Knob Creek or Jefferson's Very Old - both of which are fantastic, but lack those qualities.

Can someone explain to me what it is that makes my favorites so unique in their mouth feel, taste profile, etc? Are there any other bourbons out there that are essentially a spot-on match for them?

Thanks!

[RyanL]

U like wheaters.

[White Dog]

You like Buffalo Trace Wheaters. So do most of us.

[soad]

Try the Weller 12 and Weller Special Reserve if you haven't already. Then for the heck of it throw in some Makers Mark just to see how much better the BT wheaters are.

[JayMonster]

Try the Weller 12 and Weller Special Reserve if you haven't already. Then for the heck of it throw in some Makers Mark just to see how much better the BT wheaters are.

Awwww... Was the pot shot at Maker's really necessary? I know it is cool to bash it around here, but it is still a good wheater in its own right., and another example of a good bourbon with that great "brown sugar" taste.

[RyanL]

Awwww... Was the pot shot at Maker's really necessary? I know it is cool to bash it around here, but it is still a good wheater in its own right., and another example of a good bourbon with that great "brown sugar" taste.

It's good in its own right....at marketing and mass producing drinkable yet mediocre bourbon when compared to any BT wheater.

[soad]

Awwww... Was the pot shot at Maker's really necessary? I know it is cool to bash it around here, but it is still a good wheater in its own right., and another example of a good bourbon with that great "brown sugar" taste.

Makers got me into bourbon, and as my "first" it will always hold a special place in my heart. I still drink it on hiking trips religiously, but it can hold no candle to the Wellers.

[JayMonster]

It's good in its own right....at marketing and mass producing drinkable yet mediocre bourbon when compared to any BT wheater.

What you call mediocre, I call consistent. True, the highs are not as great, but the lows and unpleasant surprises are far less frequent as well.

Makers got me into bourbon, and as my "first" it will always hold a special place in my heart. I still drink it on hiking trips religiously, but it can hold no candle to the Wellers.

I don't disagree with anything you said... The Weller products are seemingly superior, but like you it still holds a special place in my heart (which is why I tend to defend it) as a good and consistent drink, which is why I just don't understand why (and I don't mean you specifically) it is such a whipping boy on these (and other similar) boards.

[DreamTheater]

Ha - yes, I thought that they were indeed wheat whiskeys. I have had the WL Weller Special Reserve and...it is nice. Out of ANY whiskey (including scotch) I can buy in a "handle" (it has no handle, but i digress), the WLW SR is the best...for me.

More specifically though, why are the BT wheaters so much more pleasant for mouth feel that other wheat bourbons?

I find myself moving more away from corn based and rye based bourbons. There is not a thing in the world wrong with them, but I find myself getting more and more narrow in what I want to drink. But...to be fair, I obviously dedicated myself to trying them ALL (within reason) and it seems reasonable that I'm not landing on a handful only.

[White Dog]

Ha - yes, I thought that they were indeed wheat whiskeys. I have had the WL Weller Special Reserve and...it is nice. Out of ANY whiskey (including scotch) I can buy in a "handle" (it has no handle, but i digress), the WLW SR is the best...for me.

More specifically though, why are the BT wheaters so much more pleasant for mouth feel that other wheat bourbons?

I find myself moving more away from corn based and rye based bourbons. There is not a thing in the world wrong with them, but I find myself getting more and more narrow in what I want to drink. But...to be fair, I obviously dedicated myself to trying them ALL (within reason) and it seems reasonable that I'm not landing on a handful only.

PHC 2010 aside, I often wonder why current Old Fitz BIB is so lacking. Only Parker and Craig can answer that.

[Bourbon Boiler]

Even though Makers gets bashed here, I'll bet it served as the gateway whiskey for a plurality of members. Mine was Canadian Club, but most of my friends got started with MM.

[T Comp]

PHC 2010 aside, I often wonder why current Old Fitz BIB is so lacking. Only Parker and Craig can answer that.

White Dog, In a prior thread titled "Why isn't Old Fitzgerald better?" I'd say that Chuck probably has the answer which Parker and Craig will never give.

Back to the original question and without conceding the premise, the reality is that Heaven Hill doesn't care about Old Fitzgerald. Let me explain what I mean by that. Producers have different priorities for different brands. Old Fitzgerald has a standing market and Heaven Hill is satisfied with that. They aren't investing marketing dollars to build the brand up. Now plenty of companies do spend marketing dollars and don't necessarily try to make the whiskey the best it can be, but you can bet that a company that is basically harvesting a brand, not investing in it, probably has a "good enough" attitude about the quality too.

[the Duff]

White Dog, In a prior thread titled "Why isn't Old Fitzgerald better?" I'd say that Chuck probably has the answer which Parker and Craig will never give.

Chuck's answer is good enough for the Old Fitz brand, but where are the mid-shelf wheaters?

At last year's Whiskey Fest in Chicago, Max Shapira (I think that was him) and Craig Beam were talking about releasing a line of wheaters under a new label. This was at their small grains class. Maybe they're building up stocks for that. Maybe my vein attempts at finding more PHC 10 will be rewarded by waiting for this new label. Here's hoping its over 90 proof.

[p_elliott]

Ha - yes, I thought that they were indeed wheat whiskeys. I have had the WL Weller Special Reserve and...it is nice. Out of ANY whiskey (including scotch) I can buy in a "handle" (it has no handle, but i digress), the WLW SR is the best...for me.

More specifically though, why are the BT wheaters so much more pleasant for mouth feel that other wheat bourbons?

I find myself moving more away from corn based and rye based bourbons. There is not a thing in the world wrong with them, but I find myself getting more and more narrow in what I want to drink. But...to be fair, I obviously dedicated myself to trying them ALL (within reason) and it seems reasonable that I'm not landing on a handful only.

Your not moving away from corn based bourbon that what bourbon is, it must be at least 51% corn. In Bourbon when you have a wheated bourbon the Wheat which is referred to the favoring grain is actually more neutral in flavor than rye. The the flavors your tasting that you like is the corn. Try this go buy a bottle of Bernheim it's wheat whiskey and compare it to a wheated bourbon. I think you will find no similarities.