Bourbon & Straight Bourbon

[mrt]

As far as I know,at least two years of maturation is a requirement for a whiskey to be called "straight bourbon". But, in many articles I read on the web and also in many translations in Turkey, it's stated as a requirement to be called "bourbon". So;

1. Am I right about the definition above?

2. Is there a min. maturation period requirement (less than 2 years, ok) also for "bourbon (not staright bourbon)"?

3. Are there any bourbons which aren't straight bourbon?

[bluesbassdad]

mrt,

I won't try to answer your questions directly.

However, a search on keyword "regs" and userid "Cowdery" (Chuck is among our most knowledgeable members in this area) yielded several relevant posts. You may find this thread especially informative.

Also this link to the regs may be informative if you feel like wading through it.

Yours truly,

Dave Morefield

[Gillman]

Chuck is indeed an expert and maybe he will want to answer again (indeed there is much on past threads on this, from Chuck and others) but I can tell you that a whiskey does not have to be aged 2 years to be called "bourbon". To be a "bourbon" it needs to be "whiskey" first. Whiskey is distilled from a cereal mash at under 190 proof. To be "bourbon" it needs to be distilled at under 160 proof, made from a mash in which at least 51% is corn, and aged in new charred barrels. The regs don't say for how long. The assumption is, for a time, say 6 months. If it meets these requirements but is aged for at least two years, it can be called straight bourbon (there may be one or two other requirements in terms of the source of the whiskey but this is the essential). Most bourbon is at least 4 years old for reasons which maybe go beyond the scope of this answer. Therefore, the question of which brands are sold as bourbon but not straight bourbon is largely unimportant. However, there are I believe one or two of those brands around.

Gary

[cowdery]

The point probably should be made that the "standards of identity" really only apply in the United States. There is some protection provided by treaty with Canada, Mexico and the European Union, but those basically protect the word "bourbon" and may not extend to the details. Point is, it's hard for me to know how something might be labeled in Turkey or anywhere outside the U.S.

That said, while it is possible to make, label and sell a "bourbon whiskey" that is not "straight bourbon whiskey," it hasn't been done in living memory. In the U.S., at least, the omission of "straight" on the label doesn't mean anything, except that the marketer chose not to use it. One assurance would be to scour the label for an explicit age statement. If you can't find one, then that means (by law) that the whiskey is at least four years old so, considering that the requirement for "straight bourbon" is just two, that would be straight bourbon, even if it doesn't say so.

[BourbonJoe]

If you can't find one, then that means (by law) that the whiskey is at least four years old so, considering that the requirement for "straight bourbon" is just two, that would be straight bourbon, even if it doesn't say so.

This is all very confusing. I read this to mean that a product called "straight bourbon" only needs to be aged 2 years but a product called "bourbon" needs to be aged 4 years. Is that correct?

Joe :usflag:

[TNbourbon]

Joe, it needs to be aged 4 years to dispense with an age statement, 2 years to be 'straight'. Thus, if it is bourbon with no age statement, it is at least 4 years old, thus 'straight'.

[cowdery]

This is all very confusing. I read this to mean that a product called "straight bourbon" only needs to be aged 2 years but a product called "bourbon" needs to be aged 4 years. Is that correct?

Joe :usflag:

Sorry. Any bourbon aged for less than four years must, by law, state its age on the label. If there is no age statement, then it is four years old and, by definition, also meets the 2-year-old requirement for "straight."

By the way, the rules for "straight" and the rule about age statements also applies to straight rye whiskey, straight wheat whiskey, etc. The rules are slightly different for straight corn whiskey.

[BourbonJoe]

If it's "straight bourbon" with no age statement does it only have to be 2 years old?

Joe

[TNbourbon]

If it's "straight bourbon" with no age statement does it only have to be 2 years old?

Joe

If it's only 2 years old, it must carry an age statement. If there is no age statement, it is at least 4 years old.

Thus, there can be no 2yo straight bourbon without an age statement.

Look at it this way: Just as you don't have to say 'whiskey' on the bottle if it says 'bourbon', because ALL bourbon IS whiskey, you don't have to say 'straight' on the bottle if there is no age statement, because ALL 4yo bourbon (which is has to be to delete the statement) IS 'straight' (or at least 2 years in barrel).

[Frodo]

That said, while it is possible to make, label and sell a "bourbon whiskey" that is not "straight bourbon whiskey," it hasn't been done in living memory.

What about bourbons blended from different distilleries? Can I bottle a bourbon which has 60% from distillery X, 40% from distillery Y, and still call it "straight bourbon"?

[Edward_call_me_Ed]

What about bourbons blended from different distilleries? Can I bottle a bourbon which has 60% from distillery X, 40% from distillery Y, and still call it "straight bourbon"?

I think it would be. Here is a quote from the regs.

"``Straight whisky''

includes mixtures of straight whiskies of the same type produced in the

same State."

So, as long as the two whiskies are straight bourbon and the distilleries are in the same state it should be straight bourbon.

Ed

[cowdery]

What about bourbons blended from different distilleries? Can I bottle a bourbon which has 60% from distillery X, 40% from distillery Y, and still call it "straight bourbon"?

Yes. a mixture of straight bourbons made at different distilleries is still straight bourbon. Why they have to be made in the same state I can't explain, but that is the case.

[Sijan]

I suspect the "same state" rule, although universally applicable, is really just a rule written for Kentucky. I imagine there was some concern that someone would make up a bunch of cheap whiskey elsewhere and mix it with Kentucky bourbon, and the resulting product might tarnish the image of Kentucky bourbon.

[mrt]

Thank you, that's all very informative. As for the legal definitions in Turkey, I think it isn't possible to make alternative legislations since a whiskey must be produced in the US to be called "bourbon", first. But, just to inform the consumers, I see some definitions about what bourbon is-with reference to the legal definition in the US. However, at least for the translations I read, they make a shortcut for the age condition (!) and just write that "...must be aged at least for two years to be called bourbon". This was the starting point of my confusion, but then I saw the same statement at "whiskyguide.com", and decided to write here. I had read the law on the SB main site, though, at the very beginning of my SB escapes Thank you all