bobbyc Posted July 20, 2002 Share Posted July 20, 2002 My brother called last nite , he had a bushhogging job to do but his tractor was tied up so he dropped it over to me. I went and did it this morning . I had to drive passed Jim Beam's other Plant at Boston, Ky.Actually the very spot on the road it is on is Beam,Ky and Boston is the closest town. They distil and age over there and have a dump room where they load a semi tanker and bring it to Clermont to be bottled. Sam Cecil says this plant was built and named Churchill Downs Distillery but the race track ( Ky Derby) objected so they dropped the downs part of it . My grandfather always referred to it as Churchill. Barton owned it for a while and Beam bought it in the 1950s . They can produce a mere 1000 barrels a day there. The point of all this......... They have a large tank out front and on that tank is the Jim Beam logo as it appears on the bottles, over that is written........Home of Booker's........America's only True Barrel Bourbon . Any thoughts on what a true Barrel Bourbon is. Is Booker's the only one? WIll Blanton's have to go in at Barrel proof to make this cut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesbassdad Posted July 20, 2002 Share Posted July 20, 2002 What a coincidence!I was thinking along these lines earlier this afternoon as I sipped some Wild Turkey Rare Breed. I was trying to think of other bourbons that are allegedly bottled at barrel proof. Booker's was the only one I could think of.Now I wonder why JB claims that Booker's is unique in that regard.Is there something about Rare Breed that keeps it from qualifiying?Yours truly,Dave Morefield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyc Posted July 20, 2002 Author Share Posted July 20, 2002 Yeah , I'm not going to quibble with them about it. It stuck me as odd I've never seen anything in the advertisements about it , and I just checked the little hanging thing about Small Batch a few minutes ago. So I'm thinking the only place to be subjected to this marketing point is to do what I did earlier today and ride by their plant. By the way they don't have a similiar thing at Clermont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdery Posted July 21, 2002 Share Posted July 21, 2002 Booker's when it was introduced was the only barrel proof bourbon on the market. I guess there are others now. Part of the point of true "barrel proof" is that the proof fluctuates, albeit within a fairly narrow range. I believes Booker's is the only brand that states a proof range on the label. Furthermore, Booker's is unfiltered. "True" barrel proof and no filtering is what makes it "true barrel bourbon," at least arguably, and still unique. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitzg Posted July 25, 2002 Share Posted July 25, 2002 I believe in some of their materials I've seen them refer to Booker's being barrel proof but those may have been materials for on-premise use (bar, etc.)-- Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyc Posted July 25, 2002 Author Share Posted July 25, 2002 Yes Booker's is Barrel proof I have a bottle and I think it is 126.6 proof. Beam barrels in at 125 proof and some evaporation causes it to creep up a bit. I've seen elsewhere in this forum that a barrel placed in a wet or humid condition would lose proof over time, don't know about that one and I never heard my grandfather speak of it. What about it BettyJo could you ask Parker or Craig about that and if it is a problem at all? It gets very humid here in Ky in the summer time, around 90% from late May till September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdery Posted July 25, 2002 Share Posted July 25, 2002 The consumer materials refer to it as "the only bourbon bottled straight-from-the-barrel -- uncut and unfiltered." Don't criticize it, because I think I wrote it. (I used to do work for them.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcheer Posted July 26, 2002 Share Posted July 26, 2002 I don't know anything about the distilling business, but I used to be a top notch chemistry and chemical engineering student. I would think that any evaporation from an alcohol and water mixture would be more alcohol than water, because alcohol is (much) more volatile. Therefore, I would also think that evaporation would reduce the proof of such a mixture.Also, high humidity would reduce the amount of evaporation, rather than increase it.Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyc Posted July 26, 2002 Author Share Posted July 26, 2002 I was at Rite Aid today, Maker's 16.99 . Right there on the plastic cover on the box that Booker's comes in was True Barrel Bourbon! I felt like Duh. Never saw it before and I have a bottle of it . I read somewhere that that was the explaination for the proof of Booker's being above 125. They can only put it in the barrel at 125 and still call it Bourbon. I wonder if they have a fudge factor or if it's 125 period and 125.1 is the drop dead point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boone Posted July 26, 2002 Share Posted July 26, 2002 I asked Mike Sonne, Quatlity Control Manager for Heaven Hill Distilleries, your question.....This is what he said to me;Whiskey goes in at 125 proof....(there is that 125 number you were talking about) the one's that are stored at the bottom will come out maybe 118....the one's at the top will be 5 over and the one's on the 7 floor will not change....He was talking on his walkie when I asked him this question....we were interupted several times with people asking him questions on the walkie...I hope I understood him....cause I would think that it would be just the opposite...but what do I know...I just ask the questions to find out the answers.....I will ask him again on Monday.....Just ta make sure.....Bettye Jo P.S. I asked (tonight at work) to make sure I heard him right.....I did get the story correct.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesbassdad Posted July 26, 2002 Share Posted July 26, 2002 Yes, but you seem to be assuming that the mixture has direct, unimpeded contact with the atmoshpere. The barrel modifies that condition. Is it possible that evaporation is dependent upon the vapor passing through the tiny gaps between barrel staves? If so, would the size of those gaps vary due to ambient humidity variations? If so, would the changes in size favor the passage of either water or alcohol? Is it possible that alcohol and water are absorbed into the barrel at different rates, leaving behind a mixture of alcohol and water in a different ratio? If so, how might the differing rates of absorption be influenced by external humidity? (I haven't a clue.) Damn, I love bullshitting about a subject that I know absolutely nothing about. (A by-product of my undergraduate degree in engineering, I fear.) Yours truly, Dave Morefield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornsqueezins Posted July 26, 2002 Share Posted July 26, 2002 "Is it possible that alcohol and water are absorbed into the barrel at different rates, leaving behind a mixture of alcohol and water in a different ratio?"I remember reading somewhere that water evaporates more readily from the barrel than the alcohol. Some alcohol does evaporate but not at the rate of the water. Something to do with the molecular structure of all the components involved.What's weird to me is that apparently the opposite is true with Scotch. A barrel of aged scotch will actually have a lower proof than it did at the start. I've heard this is due to the cooler, wet climate in Scotland but I'm still not exactly sure how this works unless there's some critical temperature/humidity level at which alcohol starts to evaporate through the wood faster than the water.Anybody got any details or insight into this? Sorry to bring up the S-word. -Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest **DONOTDELETE** Posted July 26, 2002 Share Posted July 26, 2002 Troy you are right! You've only made three posts and two of them have the 's-word' in them. The name of this forum is 'StraightBourbon.Com'. Our motto is 'All sc**ch sucks! All the time! We don't allow Trolls here. Either talk Bourbon or be gone! The wrath of Mr. Moderator is upon you now boy so listen up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowdery Posted July 26, 2002 Share Posted July 26, 2002 Linn's just kidding. Scotch can be mentioned as long as it is in a derogatory context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornsqueezins Posted July 26, 2002 Share Posted July 26, 2002 Actually I think only one of my posts mentioned the dreaded sc**ch, but I should've know better. After lurking on this forum for quite a while I learned real quick about certain people's aversions to the bagpipe beverage! So I should've been more careful. Forgive me O great Moderator! But don't worry about me. This ol' boy was raised right, else my username would be barleysqueezins instead of cornsqueezins. Y'all have a great weekend! -Troy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurphyDawg Posted July 27, 2002 Share Posted July 27, 2002 S***ch: ALMOST AS GOOD AS MURPHY'S PISS. . . . .Tom (I Think I'll Start My Own Campaign) C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesbassdad Posted July 27, 2002 Share Posted July 27, 2002 How about this one:We age it in used bourbon barrels. Of course it tastes like used bourbon!Yours truly,Dave Morefield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcheer Posted July 27, 2002 Share Posted July 27, 2002 That is correct, I have no idea how the barrel would affect the course of events.Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcheer Posted July 27, 2002 Share Posted July 27, 2002 Well, remember that the chemists have a lot of control in the actual processing (although I believe/hope that the master distillers have the final word), and I assure you that they could put it in at 124.95, 125.00, or 125.05 if they wanted. They could probably get it even closer than that. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurphyDawg Posted July 28, 2002 Share Posted July 28, 2002 BLEEEEE!!!! TomC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest **DONOTDELETE** Posted July 28, 2002 Share Posted July 28, 2002 Tim there are at least two chemists that I know of that are also master distillers. Gary Gayheart of Buffalo Trace and Jerry Dalton of Jim Beam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackkeno Posted July 28, 2002 Share Posted July 28, 2002 I think humidity is the biggest factor in how the proof changes. Both the alcohol and water evaporate. The big factor that is not equal is that there is already water in the air (humidiy) which slows the rate of the evaporation of water. Kentucky humidity doesn't slow the rate of water evaporation enough for the rate of alcohol evaporation to catch up to it... so the whisky gets stonger. Scotland's humidity does slow the rate of water evaporation enough for the alcohol to evaporate faster... so the whisky gets weaker.I'm not sure what the effects are of wood, changes in humidity (vs average), or very high versus very low proofs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teacher Posted August 9, 2002 Share Posted August 9, 2002 I am new to this board, but not new to bourbon. SO, Hello and I hope I can help. Booker's is the only single barrel bourbon bottled at barrel proof. Rare breed is bottled at barrel proof but is not a single barrel. Booker's is similar to what kentucky spirit would be if it were to be bottled at barrel proof. Booker's is wonderful stuff. I am working on my third bottle, but like many of you I like Rare Breed the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesbassdad Posted August 9, 2002 Share Posted August 9, 2002 ... about Rare Breed. Now that you mention it, I remember someone here commenting that it consists of bourbon of different ages, hence, of necessity, different barrels.Re: Booker's -- Do you drink it neat, as Booker Noe suggests? I've had only one 50 ml. bottle, which I found to be too much of too much for me. I'll try it again one of these days to see if the last several months of more frequent drinking have affected my ability to appreciate it.Yours truly,Dave Morefield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teacher Posted August 9, 2002 Share Posted August 9, 2002 Yes I drink Booker's neat as i do all of the highend bourbons. It is a very powerful bourbon but that is what makes it so appealing to me. I ussually only have about two or three fingers of it at a time. I do like bourbon and coke or with ice but if I am going to mix anything with bourbon even ice I will not use Bookers or rare breed, I will use WT 101. I am not a snob that is just the way I like it. I bet it would make a good bourbon and coke, but then again so does WT 101 - and it is cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts