Haven’t reviewed something like this in quite some time.
Buffalo Trace Distillery in Kentucky has been producing some of the finest bourbons around since 1857, and during Prohibition was one of only four distilleries in the country granted a permit to continue operations to produce spirits for “medicinal purposes” (show me the doctor that would prescribe this stuff!). The distillery is a virtual trophy case of whiskey accolades, winning more than 50 industry awards since 1990 including two-time distiller of the year from Whisky Magazine in 2005 and 2007, and a nod from Wine Enthusiast as distiller of the year in 2006. Clearly, these guys know what they’re doing.
But as any painfully honest stock broker will tell you (ha!), past performance does not guarantee future results. However, as this dedicated beer connoisseur will also tell you, a whiskey has to be pretty damn good to spur me to write a review on it.
Blended from up to 30 different barrels, Buffalo Trace pours with a butterscotch appearance, viscous legs streaking down the glass and a fairly spicy, peppery nose, I’m guessing an attribute of the rye used in the mash bill (which coincidentally comes from Minnesota, at least in part). Wonderful aromas of vanilla, honey, and maybe even some floral mint. I’m not an expert, but I thought bourbon couldn’t technically be higher than 80 proof, and this one comes in at 45% ABV. Regardless, you know you’re drinking a hefty whiskey when your eyelashes are lightly singed from the vapors each time you bury your nose in the glass. The taste is impressive, with flavors of sweet honey, caramel, lightly charred oak, and molasses. As beautiful as the legs are on this bourbon, the body is surprisingly thin with alcohol heat in the finish, lingering for quite some time into mellow notes of vanilla and oak.
Rating: A-
Where I Got It: Gift, but you can find it at Surdyk’s, Zipp’s or MGM Liquors, among others
Availability: Year-Round
Price: About $25 for a bottle
April 6, 2010 at 12:08 pm
On 4 May 1964, the United States Congress recognized Bourbon Whiskey as a “distinctive product of the United States.” The Federal Standards of Identity for Distilled Spirits (27 C.F.R. 5.22) state that bourbon must meet these requirements:
* Bourbon must be made of a grain mixture that is at least 51% corn.[1]
* Bourbon must be distilled to no more than 160 (U.S.) proof (80% alcohol by volume).
* Neither coloring nor flavoring may be added.
* Bourbon must be aged in new, charred oak barrels. [1]
* Bourbon must be entered into the barrel at no more than 125 proof (62.5% alcohol by volume).
* Bourbon, like other whiskeys, may not be bottled at less than 80 proof (40% alcohol by volume.)
* Bourbon which meets the above requirements and has been aged for a minimum of two years, may (but is not required to) be called Straight Bourbon.[2]
* Straight Bourbon aged for a period less than four years must be labeled with the duration of its aging.
* If an age is stated on the label, it must be the age of the youngest whiskey in the bottle.
April 6, 2010 at 12:29 pm
That makes more sense, thanks for the clarification Derek.
April 6, 2010 at 4:02 pm
I tried to tour buffalo trace when i was down in KY, but got there an hour late. What a great looking distillery though.
One thing that perplexes me.. why is Jim Beam Red Stag (Cherry flavored) considered bourbon?? If Jack Daniels can’t call itself bourbon (charcoal filtering), i would think Red Stag couldn’t either?
April 6, 2010 at 5:53 pm
Doesn’t the distillery overlook the Kentucky River? I’ve heard it’s beautiful.
Based on the criteria above, I’d agree with you that Red Stag isn’t technically bourbon.
April 6, 2010 at 10:09 pm
I don’t think Red Stag is technically even drinkable.
Best food pairing with Buffalo Trace (in my personal experience) — a really good aged cheddar, like a 12-year Hook’s. The cheese and the bourbon really pair up well… the sweetness of the bourbon asserts itself and the cheese tastes even sharper and more complex. Probably my favorite snack ever.
April 7, 2010 at 7:20 am
That is crazy you just mentioned that. I actually have a bit of 15 year Hooks cheddar in my fridge right now, and a bottle of Buffalo Trace in the cabinet. I’ll make sure i will try!
April 7, 2010 at 7:23 am
Great recommendation Jim, I will definitely give this a try! And I haven’t had the misfortune of trying Red Stag, so I’ll take your word for it.
April 7, 2010 at 12:35 pm
I lived within a hour of these guys for over 4 years, toured the distillery twice (it’s wonderful, free, and fun), and even got a 13 year rye barrel from them. They make, in my opinion, the best line-up of whiskey’s in the world. The make the Van Winkle series (15 Pappy is mind blowing), Hancocks, Blantons, Georger T. Stagg, Thomas Handy’s Sazrac, Eagle Rare, Weller’s and the list goes on and on. Great stuff and nice review. If you see their other stuff, especially Stagg of 15 year Pappy Van Winkle’s get them (you won’t be disappointed).
April 7, 2010 at 12:43 pm
Thanks for the recommendation Michael. And nice work on the barrel, what homebrews have you aged in there? I’ve heard of Pappy Van Winkle, should give that a try as well.
April 8, 2010 at 10:52 am
I actually didn’t use it for that and have moved since then (to 340 square feet). I also found it hard to come to a point where I could get 50 gallons of volume to age in the barrel. However, I did get some Jim Beam barrels for $10 each and got about 1/2 gallon from each and put that whiskey in the the Buffalo Trace Barrel. The result was amazing. Then I sold all the barrels for $10 each and ended up with a ton of free whiskey.
Before I got rid of the barrels, I added a gallon or two of water and got the remaining bourbon water out…made some awesome lemonaid. When I leave Cali, I’ll be back at Buffalo Trace and grab a barrel which I will definitely fill with beer…I’ll have the volume then.
April 12, 2010 at 10:28 am
Funny. Jeff from Craft Beer Radio was talking aobut how much he liked BT at a whiskey fest he went to. I found it at Surdyks for $17.99. If I ever drink whisky (not too often) it is usually from my Scotch collection. So while I’m not that familiar with bourbon this stuff is decent. It seems to be a decent value for the money, but again, I’m used to buying Scotch.
April 13, 2010 at 3:09 pm
It pours? No it doesn’t pour. You pour it. It has color.
April 13, 2010 at 7:03 pm
I was an English major with a concentration in linguistics, so I truly appreciate your grammatical expertise on the matter. However, our language is a very flexible instrument. And if we all wrote like third graders learning how to conjugate verbs, writing would be incredibly boring…much like your life, which apparently consists of trolling local beer related websites leaving shitty, anonymous comments. You’re obviously very passionate about beer and homebrewing, but not passionate enough to stand by your commentary with your real name. Your shtick is getting old.
http://mnbeer.com/2010/04/05/abrasive-ale-release/
April 14, 2010 at 6:33 am
rs:
Based on the pictures of you that come up when I google image search you…I’m guessing you (and your Tevas) make for a very lonely man.
July 15, 2010 at 10:28 pm
@Derrick Thanks for the clarification!