Jump to content

Parkers Heritage 2012

doubleblank

By doubleblank
in Premium Bourbons/Specialty Bottlings

 Share
This topic has been inactive for at least 365 days, and is now closed. Please feel free to start a new thread on the subject! 

Recommended Posts

humchan2k Enthusiast

humchan2k

Posted
Posted
Is your bottle a flat 132.0 proof? If so, looks like you have the 3rd and final batch of the three dumps. Please confirm. Thanks!

Man...if you wanna get SUPER technical, no, it's not 132 flat, it's 131.6, which I'm pretty sure is the 2nd go around. Whatever it is, it's goddamn delicious. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smokinjoe Deity

smokinjoe

Posted
Posted
Man...if you wanna get SUPER technical, no, it's not 132 flat, it's 131.6, which I'm pretty sure is the 2nd go around. Whatever it is, it's goddamn delicious. :)

131.6 was the proof of the 1st release. It's possible that the 3rd could be the same, but at this point, I would say it is the 1st.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HP12 Connoisseur

HP12

Posted
Posted
Man...if you wanna get SUPER technical, no, it's not 132 flat, it's 131.6, which I'm pretty sure is the 2nd go around. Whatever it is, it's goddamn delicious. :)

If you want to call it being "SUPER technical", then you're entitled to that view. But keep this in mind as you wonder down the whiskey journey...when multiple batches are being released (whether seasonally or annually) of a particular expression, the only way to differentiate between them from batch to batch or year to year is by the exact proof.

Examples include annual releases of GTS, WLW. PHC is a great example where 2-3 batches have been released during their annual release and each have their own "fingerprint" (aka proof) that identifies the batch. If that is being "technical"...guilty as charged.

131.6 was the proof of the 1st release. It's possible that the 3rd could be the same, but at this point, I would say it is the 1st.

Yes, PHC 6th batch#1 is the 131.6 proof. Batch #1 is also under the 127.0 proof label which was a misprint. Some bottles with the 127.0 label were recalled and the proper 131.6 proof label affixed over the wrong label.

PHC batch #2 is 133.2 proof. We are still waiting to learn what batch #3's proof is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cowdery Deity

cowdery

Posted
Posted

I was thinking about this recently, not specifically about PHC, and I don't say it pejoratively, but comparing different releases within a limited edition is just about the epitome of whiskey geekdom. I don't see how you can get any geekier than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trey Manthey Connoisseur

Trey Manthey

Posted
Posted
I was thinking about this recently, not specifically about PHC, and I don't say it pejoratively, but comparing different releases within a limited edition is just about the epitome of whiskey geekdom. I don't see how you can get any geekier than that.

Perhaps by comparing two limited edition releases from the same batch, except one bottle has been at half fill for six months to test the effects of oxidation? Then you'll know if that particular bottle needs "air time" or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChainWhip Guru

ChainWhip

Posted
Posted
I was thinking about this recently, not specifically about PHC, and I don't say it pejoratively, but comparing different releases within a limited edition is just about the epitome of whiskey geekdom. I don't see how you can get any geekier than that.

/me geeking out

=]b

(not taking it in a negative way)

;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oke&coke Connoisseur

oke&coke

Posted
Posted
Perhaps by comparing two limited edition releases from the same batch, except one bottle has been at half fill for six months to test the effects of oxidation? Then you'll know if that particular bottle needs "air time" or not.

That not geeky, that's called common sense:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lazer Enthusiast

Lazer

Posted
Posted
I was thinking about this recently, not specifically about PHC, and I don't say it pejoratively, but comparing different releases within a limited edition is just about the epitome of whiskey geekdom. I don't see how you can get any geekier than that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Old Lamplighter Virtuoso

Old Lamplighter

Posted
Posted

The one I saw today was 137.9 if that helps. Sounds like it could be the third release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWBadley Connoisseur

RWBadley

Posted
Posted

Must be, now go get it and compare to the two previous, both with airtime and fresh bottle... :grin: then let us know what you think

Link to comment
Share on other sites
awachatz Enthusiast

awachatz

Posted
Posted

Still no luck finding a 133.2 proof here in Michigan. Passed up both a 131.6 and 137.9 yesterday.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
DPPSmoker Enthusiast

DPPSmoker

Posted
Posted
Still no luck finding a 133.2 proof here in Michigan. Passed up both a 131.6 and 137.9 yesterday.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
squire Deity

squire

Posted
Posted

Well I nearly worried myself into a frazzle over this until I realized my palate is not sufficiently tuned to distinguish between a few percentage points of alcohol by volume. Whew . . . one less thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yeti Disciple

Yeti

Posted
Posted

My two bottles of 137.9 came today. I should have plenty to celebrate during this month and I don't think one will stay sealed very long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony Virtuoso

Tony

Posted
Posted
Has anyone seen the 133.2 proof devil's batch in Michigan? I am looking for a bottle.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

Still have not seen this, but the Feb. price book lists a 132 proof as new.

Best regards, Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites
awachatz Enthusiast

awachatz

Posted
Posted
Still have not seen this, but the Feb. price book lists a 132 proof as new.

Best regards, Tony

Cool. Will have to pick one up. Have a mess of the 131.6 double labeled version. I would like to sample at least one of each dump. On the PHC wheater there is a noticeable difference based on which proof it was. Want to see if the same difference is noticeable on the 2012.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HP12 Connoisseur

HP12

Posted
Posted
Still have not seen this, but the Feb. price book lists a 132 proof as new.

Best regards, Tony

I believe the 132 proof is only a general approximation of proof prior to release. The actual proofs of the three batches released were posted earlier in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
MauiSon Connoisseur

MauiSon

Posted
Posted

Still waiting for a release comparison [while my 2 bottles are in transit] . . .

Hope I get the devil's batch, just because.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony Virtuoso

Tony

Posted
Posted

Do not have a release comparison but did have some last night against the 4RSmB2012 and for me the 4R has it beat. With that said it is still a great bourbon.

Best regards, Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jersey12 Advanced Taster

jersey12

Posted
Posted

Just opened my bottle of the 66.6 and can honestly say that I loved it. The mouthfeel was wonderful and with more flavor coming the longer I let it sit on my tongue. Amazingly easy it sip at 133.2 and I found the moderate finish to be enjoyable and not overly short at all. Anybody else have thoughts on this particular batch?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChainWhip Guru

ChainWhip

Posted
Posted

I've had both the 1st & 2nd batch (not side by side & over 2wks apart), but I seem to like the 66.6% better.

Granted, I'd been drinking Scotch all weekend before that pour of PHC12 but I felt I was sipping liquid pecan pie / buttered brown-sugar strudel at the time. Really enjoyed it (& both batches are excellent IME).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept