Rare Breed distilled somewhere other than Wild Turkey?

[Virus_Of_Life]

While doing a little research today I came across a post by dougdog in which he stated an older edition of Wild Turkey Rare Breed that was not distilled at Wild Turkey. Seemed a bit unlikely to me, but really got me curious. Needless to say all my searching could not find any more info on this than his post that mentioned it. So I pose the question: Were some batches of WTRB distilled somewhere else? If so, Where? And which batches? See the quote below. Tim/Doug, you guys probably know something could you enlighten me please?

"I keep forgetting to post the picture of this Wild Turkey "Rare Breed". I found it on 7-18-05 soon after talking to Tim "TNbourbon" about Rare Breed. This might be one of those older editions that were not distilled at WT. The back label only states that it was bottled by Austin Nichols Distilling Co.. The date at the neck band says Batch No. W-T-02-94, 109.6 proof. The label on this bottle seems to be a bit different than the rest...I'm curious, does it look like yours?"

[barturtle]

The is a line in an older(mid-90s) book I have from Jim Murray, that states tha Ausin Nichols prefers to but stock from what is now Buffalo Trace...but the "prefers" leaves some doubt that it could be from somewhere else. It goes on to say they they would only sell stuff that was distilled elsewhere overseas.....but it wouldn't be the first time a distillery told a fib to an author (or an author was just plain wrong).

Thats all I know about it..maybe Tim or Doug know more.

[Hedmans Brorsa]

Timothy,

I assume it is "Jim Murray´s complete book of whisky" that you are referring to. If you read the next line in that section he specifically points out that WT:s premium bottlings are "the real McCoy".

My current bottle of RB also only states that it has been bottled by Austin Nichols, so I don´t see why that should be taken as a sign of "alien origins".

On the other hand, I am certainly no authority on this issue. I would love to hear what other people, especially Doug, has to say.

[Gillman]

I must say there is an unmistakeable taste connection though between bottlings of any WT-labelled bourbon, at least in recent years, and this includes the last bottling of Rare Breed.

Gary

[barturtle]

You are close to correct-it is his World Whiskey Guide-which takes almost its entire text from his Complete Guide to Whiskey. They may be identical-I'd have to borrow a copy from a friend of mine to confirm-but they're damn close anyway.

However, your reference was enough to make me actually look up the passage instead of working from memory. You are correct, that he states that the premium bottlings are genuine WT. However, it is the line in the paragraph before it that is even more interesting-he states that they also used to buy rye-recipe from Stizel Weller.

[ThomasH]

In Jim Murray's book, he also states that he has a bottle of Wild Turkey 86.8 that he mistook for Ancient age. My guess would be that some of the lower proof brands are the ones with the multiple distillery mixture in them. I have never had any 80 or 86.8 proof WT so I can't really vouch for it. In fact, I have never seen a 750 of the 86.8 around here, although I think I do have at least one mini of it in my collection. In my area, it is 101,Rare Breed, Kentucky Spirit, 80 proof and rye!

[Hedmans Brorsa]

However, it is the line in the paragraph before it that is even more interesting-he states that they also used to buy rye-recipe from Stizel Weller.

I agree that this sounds somewhat mysterious. In his whiskey bibles he reviews several Van Winkles where he throws out descriptions like "biting rye". I have no idea what these bottlings are.

[barturtle]

I have never had any 80 or 86.8 proof WT so I can't really vouch for it. In fact, I have never seen a 750 of the 86.8 around here, although I think I do have at least one mini of it in my collection. In my area, it is 101,Rare Breed, Kentucky Spirit, 80 proof and rye!

I'm not sure about in the past, but currently 86.8 seems to be export only-mainly to the land downunder, as 80 proof seems to go to much of the rest of the world.

[barturtle]

I agree that this sounds somewhat mysterious. In his whiskey bibles he reviews several Van Winkles where he throws out descriptions like "biting rye". I have no idea what these bottlings are.

It has become quite well-known that the first editions of both Pappy 20 and 23yo were rye recipe bourbons (and also the ones that got the outstanding scores in tastings)-but IIRC Julian has stated that they were not from SW, but he refuses to say where he did get them too.

[Hedmans Brorsa]

Yes, but these are much younger bottlings.

Take, for instance, the (at least to me) completely unknown 105 proof "Old Rip", 12yo, which, according to Murray, is partly characterized by "lots of rye spice".

???

[barturtle]

Gonna have to buy some newer books one of these days....

[dougdog]

A few things...

The "black label" that is previously discussed...is it really dark brown like the ones in the photo?...a small point, but specific.

The 80 and 86.8 proof were here in the US for sure, I've seen a few, and purchased a couple as shown...they are all metric bottles, the small one being 500ml. I've not found a 4/5qt or quart bottle of WT product, my only ever US standard bottles were a couple of 1/2 gallon containers, one of a 7yo and one of an 8yo. All the "Old #8" that I've seen and purchased has been metric bottlings.

My information about the WT Rare Breed bottlings, that suggested they were not distilled by Austin Nichols, came from Tim, as my post stated. The one shown in the picture is the bottle that has a different looking label. On my bottle shown here, the text "Rare Breed" is much fatter and bolder than other labels. I don't have another bottle of Rare Breed to show side-by-side for your comparison. I only collected this one because of the age...it is bottling #4, 109.6 proof.

I am not expert here about the Rare Breed bottlings, just passing along information that I received from others. I'm not in a position to be definitive about that specific issue; I'll have to defer to Tim on this one!

The 80 proof shown has a date of 7-30-97, the two 86.8 proof bottles have US strip stamps, but lacking the 9 digit federal number, dating them about 1983-4.

[FlashPuppy]

The "black label" that is previously discussed...is it really dark brown like the ones in the photo?...a small point, but specific.

Doug-

I have a black label like you are showing there. Mine is a liter size. Do you have any more information on that bottling?

[doubleblank]

When Austin Nichols first delved into the spirits business, it was all purchased whiskey and imported spirits. I have some Italian brandies imported and bottled by AN from the mid fifties. Only when they began focusing on spirits did they buy the distillery. It would come as no suprise to me that they continued using purchased whiskey for their bottlings even after the distillery purchase.

Regarding Julian's whiskies, he has provided info regarding the provenance of some of his bottlings. The first Pappy 20 was made by the Boone distillery. The Pappy 23 ...... well, he hasn't yet divulged the source.....though I have my own short list of suspects.

As Chuck and many others have told us before, these distilleries bought and sold a lot of each others stock or had someone make a product to their specs. So there will be many bottlings we can only taste and guess where it came from.

Randy

[ThomasH]

In Jim Murray's book of bourbon,Tennessee and Rye whiskey, he does mention that the 1st bottling of Pappy 20 came from whiskey that came from the Old Boone distillery. I think a lot of these brands are somewhat hard to trace as there was such a glut of whiskey in the US in the 1980's as well as mergers within the industry. Sometimes I think the companies don't always want consumers to know whose product went into a bottle!

Thomas

[Gillman]

The only true test is the taste test.

All WT product I have sampled in the last 10 years tastes "the same", even RB. They all have the tell-tale woodiness and slight coarseness which characterises the brand.

Of course each is different, some older, some younger, some a mingling or more concentrated, but they all have the WT signature.

Gary

[TNbourbon]

...Sometimes I think the companies don't always want consumers to know whose product went into a bottle!..

Good, too, to realize we're the exception instead of the norm -- most consumers don't care where the whiskey came from, just what it tastes like after coming out of the bottle.

I don't think, in most cases, the producers are trying to hide anything. They just don't offer what most of their customers don't want anyway.

[ThomasH]

What I think is peculiar about this whole thing is that sometimes people equate different as bad, and as everyone here knows, that is definitely not true. I remember when I first started accumulating bigger bottles, my dad's response was " why do you waste your money on those more expensive bottles, they all taste the same". His view changed drastically when I gave him a taste of some rock bottom shelf brand and say a 20.00-25.00 brand. The same thing with blended whiskey. I gave him a taste of some 3yr. old brand and then gave him some Canadian Club 6yr. old to try. He said the 3yr. old was terrible, then he nearly flipped when I showed him the terrible 3yr. old was his normal brand he had drank for years. Now every time he comes over, he wants to know what I have new. Being he is my dad, I let him pick what ever he wants to try. I'm glad I finally converted him before he spent the rest of his life thinking all was the same. Most of the fun for me is the differences that each brand has. I have just as much fun getting the 10.00 bottles I can't get locally as I do getting some of the bigger, sought after guns such as the BT Antique collection!

[dougdog]

Doug-

I have a black label like you are showing there. Mine is a liter size. Do you have any more information on that bottling?

Your bottle is bigger than mine...

But seriously,... what are you looking for that hasn't already been stated?

Tasting notes, when bottled, price paid, or what???

dp

I'm clueless, 'cause I have no clue....

[Hedmans Brorsa]

The original question of whether RB had been distilled elsewhere than WT, somehow got lost in the flood of other reflections.

Does anyone know for sure about this or is it just wild speculations based on a clumsily printed label?

Personally, I find it hard to believe that WT, as late as 1994, would have chosen to pick whiskey from another distillery for one of their most prestigious brands, but what do I know?

[Virus_Of_Life]

The original question of whether RB had been distilled elsewhere than WT, somehow got lost in the flood of other reflections.

Does anyone know for sure about this or is it just wild speculations based on a clumsily printed label?

Personally, I find it hard to believe that WT, as late as 1994, would have chosen to pick whiskey from another distillery for one of their most prestigious brands, but what do I know?

That was kind of my point and reason to inquire all along Lennart, thanks for pretty much seeing it the same.