Old Weller Antique - Bottle Details Over The Years

[gblick]

Here is a nice set of siblings from '95.

-750ml Gold Veined.

-Louisville, KY.

-Hand-written numbers are: WL6387, WL6390, WL6391, and WL6393.

-95 molded into bottom of all four bottles.

-The same etched code on all four bottles: GE280874.

-UPC code is 88076-24230.

A closer pic of the one of them:

Same rear label on all four:

95 molded into bottom of all four:

Same etched code on all four:

[JVande]

Gus, how do these mid 90's Louisville bottling's compare to the early 2000's Frankfort?

[gblick]

Here is a 750 from '97 (or could that code suggest '98?).

-750ml Gold Veined.

-Louisville, KY.

-Hand-written number is WL129465 (I think).

-97 molded into bottom of bottle.

-Code is 2-line in ink rather than 1-line etched like the others so far:

D2798 (I think)

0695

-UPC code is 88076-24230.

This code is a different format (2-line inked) rather than 1-line etched like the other gold veined bottles posted so far. Interesting.

Edited December 28, 2013 by gblick

[smknjoe]

I can answer that question, thanks to Gus' generosity, they are different. The older ones are sweeter, have more flavor, and not as harsh as some OWA's can be. Plus, they have that great viscosity that few bottlings today have. Then again, that statement can be applied to many older offerings from several distilleries.

[gblick]

Gus, how do these mid 90's Louisville bottling's compare to the early 2000's Frankfort?

I had a '98 Liter once that tasted different and perhaps a little off (but still not bad), but the others I've had seemed to be all SW and very good (but I'm no expert). Most Frankforts from the early 2000's I've had were all very good, except for maybe one handle from 2000 that tasted a bit off but improved with more air time. Keep in mind that I don't have a very discerning palet like some folks here, but I know when I like it. There's a reason that the Stitzel-Weller distillery is so highly regarded though.

Edited December 28, 2013 by gblick

[JVande]

An observation that I believe has been brought up before in another thread - My 98 and 02 bottles both have some white flaky pieces floating around. Could this be because the bourbon was not filtered before bottling? All previous research points to the flakes being harmless and not negatively affecting the flavor of the bourbon.

Is is this a common occurrence with this era OWA?

[gblick]

Here is a bottle from '98.

-750ml Gold Veined.

-Louisville, KY.

-Hand-written number is WL139884.

-98 molded into bottom of bottle.

-No printed or etched codes can be found anywhere on the sides of this bottle.

-UPC code is 88076-24230.

The 98 on the bottom was hard to photograph on that one, but easier to see with the eyes.

Thanks for participating, Randy. I once found a GV Liter bottle in a black BHC bag like yours, and also a GV 750ml in a purpleish (or faded red?) bag.

Edited December 28, 2013 by gblick

[gblick]

Josh, I can't answer your question about the whiteish flakes. I've seen them in a few bottles (not only OWA either), but can't recall what years the bottles were. When I see that I just give it a good shake before pouring and never look back.

[smknjoe]

An observation that I believe has been brought up before in another thread - My 98 and 02 bottles both have some white flaky pieces floating around. Could this be because the bourbon was not filtered before bottling? All previous research points to the flakes being harmless and not negatively affecting the flavor of the bourbon.

Is is this a common occurrence with this era OWA?

I've seen this is many, many bottles of various brands. Usually, ones that have been sitting for years. Squire pointed out that they are some type of fatty deposits that are harmless and normal. I have several bottles of OWA, EWSB, WT, and ETL that all have these white "floaties."

[brettckeen]

I've seen this is many, many bottles of various brands. Usually, ones that have been sitting for years. Squire pointed out that they are some type of fatty deposits that are harmless and normal. I have several bottles of OWA, EWSB, WT, and ETL that all have these white "floaties."

Usually bottles with the floaties in my experience have a heavier mouthfeel, and I prefer it. Adjust temperature and see if they go away when the bottle is in a warmer place.

[Paddy]

I've seen this is many, many bottles of various brands. Usually, ones that have been sitting for years. Squire pointed out that they are some type of fatty deposits that are harmless and normal. I have several bottles of OWA, EWSB, WT, and ETL that all have these white "floaties."

Bourbon marbling?

[Paddy]

I've seen this is many, many bottles of various brands. Usually, ones that have been sitting for years. Squire pointed out that they are some type of fatty deposits that are harmless and normal. I have several bottles of OWA, EWSB, WT, and ETL that all have these white "floaties."

Hmmm....floating fatty deposits = bourbon marbling? It sure never seemed to hurt anything I've tasted either.

[WsmataU]

This thread is coming along nicely, I wish I had as may examples to share as Gus!

Thanks for posting Randy!

I may start a second to cover WSR differences

[Hobie7]

I believe this was the release after the OWA with the red wax stamp and Weller/Pappy pictures. It has the 4/5 Quart statement on the top right and number 17761 (no letter).

Edit: added photos of the bottom. "75" I believe, with a different layout than Soonami's.

Edited December 29, 2013 by Hobie7

[JVande]

This thread is coming along nicely, I wish I had as may examples to share as Gus!

Thanks for posting Randy!

I may start a second to cover WSR differences

I would contribute.

[gblick]

Nice bottle, Hobie7, thanks for posting it!

What's on the hang tag?

[michaelturtle1]

I have 5 paper labels, 3 Frankfort and 2 Louisville, the Frankforts are '03 and '05 with the '05 having a noticeable amount of fats floating around. The Louisville are both '92 with faux strips and have bottle numbers

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[squire]

You guys are seriously serious about this label.

[gblick]

Thanks for participating, michaelturtle1. Are there any printed or etched codes on the back/sides of any of those bottles? The 200ml 85's that I posted did not have any codes, but the GV 750ml 95's I posted had GE280874 etched into the glass below the rear label, so I was curious about whether your GV 92's had any. Also, I would expect the ones from 03 and 05 to have those 'julian' style date codes etched or printed somewhere on the back or sides.

Squire, it's fun looking at the evolution of these bottlings and trying to pinpoint when they were released, mostly because the whiskey tastes so good. And in the process we are documenting the history for future bourbon lovers to look at.

[JVande]

Mike,

Interesting how the neck and front labels on your 92's appear to be faded quite a bit. Really gives it an "Antique" look.

[WsmataU]

You guys are seriously serious about this label.

I just wanted a single topic to be able to have a quick reference when I come across bottles in the wild. Gus turned it into a thesis But I think it is a worthwhile endeavor. I'm learning more and more with every contribution.

[doubleblank]

Here's a pic on how the exact name of the bottle changed over time. Roughly a '70's, '80's, '90's and a current label. Notice the word "Antique" is a relatively recent addition to the label.

[WsmataU]

Was OWA ever age stated in the "new" bottles (The way WSR was)?

[smknjoe]

Was OWA ever age stated in the "new" bottles (The way WSR was)?

I've wondered the same, but have seen no evidence that it was ever stated on the new bottles.

[Hobie7]

Here you go gblick. It also has a clear, plastic box.