Bottled-In-Bond Archives - First Pour Cocktails

Old Tub Bourbon

Posted on October 4, 2023October 3, 2023 by Nick

Old Tub Bourbon is a tribute to one of Jim Beam’s original best selling bourbons (in the 1890’s). Named after the old tubs that used to be used for distillation, this unfiltered, bonded bourbon used to be a gift shop only offering in 375 ml vessels. A few years back, this changed, and Jim Beam began offering Old Tub as a regular offering in 750 ml. The price is reasonable, and as you might have noticed, this seems to have replaced Jim Beam Bonded. So is it a step-up over Jim Beam White Label?

Old Tub Bourbon

Distillery: James B. Beam
Proof: 50 (100% A.B.V.)
Age: Not Age Stated, Minimum of 4 Years
Filtration: Unfiltered
Bottled-In-Bond

Sight: A solid deep gold.

Smell: Unsurprisingly, the Jim Beam peanut funk comes out here loaded for bear. Around it there’s a nice amount of oak, spice, and caramelized sugar notes. The nose also has a bit of heat to it with a bit of vanilla like notes.

Sip: The mouthfeel starts moderately full. The first notes are peanut like with some oak, before there’s a turn toward hay, tobacco, and black tea. A little bit of caramel and spice flits at the edges, but it’s more on the grain and savory side.

Savor: The ending is oak and more hay-tobacco notes. The finish has a moderate tannic nature, but doesn’t last particularly long.

Old Tub Bourbon is average and not particularly exciting or deep. What it does deliver is a solid, dry, bottled-in-bond offering that gives some more oak forward flavors. The Beam funk is also prominent, but not long lasting. Overall, drinking it straight isn’t offensive, but not exciting either.

In Cocktails

In a Manhattan there’s a nice weight and textural component that makes the drink feel solid. Beyond the weight, the herbal notes in the vermouth tend to vibe with the oakier notes of the Old Tub. The subtle sweetness of the vermouth moves the peanut notes a little toward brittle, but ultimately it leans dry again. The ending brings in more herbal components and oak tannins.

In Review – Old Tub Bourbon

Old Tub Bourbon is unremarkable, and priced accordingly at around $20. It’s the kind of bourbon that gives a little more emphasis than standard Jim Beam White Label, but doesn’t quite expand it’s horizons in any meaningful way. While there’s a big jump in price, it probably is worth considering making the leap to Knob Creek if you’d like to go up in the Beam range, while for higher proof, Wild Turkey can deliver with more spice and less peanut funk. Finally, it isn’t immediately apparent that this is an upgrade over Jim Beam Bonded, but perhaps its dry, less exciting cousin.

1792 Bottled In Bond

Posted on January 18, 2023January 8, 2023 by Nick

We’re continuing on in our exploration of 1792’s bourbon with 1792 Bottled In Bond. Distilled in one season, this bourbon is bottled at 50% A.B.V. and has spent a minimum of four years in a government bonded warehouse. Age aside, the biggest step up from their Small Batch is the additional 6ish proof points. So is it worth hunting down for that slight extra?

1792 Bottled In Bond

Sight: Deep Copper

Smell: Caramel notes come through at the start but lean more into jammy raspberries and candied orange with plenty of spice. There’s a heat that gives way to spicy charred oak, cigar box, tobacco, and a slightly earthy green walnut note. Other touches of powder sugar remain but the nose is tight.

Sip: The bottled in bond starts of bready, with a bit of a yeasty character, and then goes full on into an unexpected melange of fruit. Everything from peaches to plums to candy apple runs through, and a honeyed sort of note kicks in for good measure. Oak and spice complement here, giving a nice background to the almost candied like character of the fruit.

Savor: The finish pulls back from the candied fruit tart character, and delivers a more balanced cigar box and char ending with just a bit of brown sugar.

1792 Bottled In Bond is completely unlike it’s nose and all of the place in the flavor profile. The bready start to the flavor profile giving way into fruit is particularly unexpected given that it doesn’t seem to have any sort of indication on the nose that it’s going to head in that direction. The flavors are on point, layered, and don’t suffer from the increase in proof. Overall, it’s an interesting expansion over the Small Batch.

Compared to 1792 Small Batch

Despite the significant increase in proof, the nose is almost tight, refusing to give up much. What it does show are slightly more leans into fruit, and a more earthy character than it’s sibling. Small Batch better captures some of the sweet and spice notes, but doesn’t deliver anywhere near the layering of fruit flavor or complexity. There’s a lot to like here in the increase that actually adds some value.

In Cocktails

In a Manhattan 1792 Bottled In Bond pulls in more of that crazy fruit forward character with a little yeasty bread characteristics. There’s a bit of appearance of banana, but then tons of plums, peaches, and honeyed orange come forward combining with the berried and vanilla notes of the vermouth. The oak and vanilla come out to play as things carry on, and the finish has a slight tropical fruit character laced with a good tinge of oak notes. As Manhattan’s go, it’s very solid, but a little muddled due to the sheer number of fruit notes.

In Review – 1792 Bottled In Bond

1792 Bottled In Bond is a bit inconsistent, but generally quite good. As a straight sipper goes, it’s got some depth, but gets a bit confused on the palate. The nose is incredibly inviting, and in a cocktail it makes a nice mix of yeasty and fruity notes to invite one in. The challenge with 1792 is that you have to go out of your way to find it. While it does a lot of great things, the challenge to find a bottle might not be worth the squeeze. The end result is a bottle that you should try if you can find it at MSRP on the shelf, but not one you need to hunt. Instead, you can purchase a bottle of Four Roses Single Barrel and get amazing depth without the hunt.

Henry McKenna Single Barrel

Posted on November 9, 2022November 8, 2022 by Nick

Perhaps few bottles suffer so greatly from both hype and barrel variation as Henry McKenna Single Barrel. Amongst the bourbon lovers, Mckenna is notorious for consumers greatly enjoying one bottle, and then being disappointed in the next. While there are a variety of possible reasons for this, including actual differences in production and what the consumer immediately ate prior to enjoying it, it doesn’t change that this bottle has won some significant awards and has a strong hype train surrounding it.

Henry McKenna Single Barrel

Henry McKenna Single Barrel is a Bottled-In-Bond whiskey aged ten years from Heaven Hill. This age statement makes it among the older available Bottled-In-Bond offerings.

Sight: A rich tawny.

Smell: Rich caramel and nuts float out of the opening salvo. Zesty spice, tobacco, and notes of oranges and peach pits join in. There’s a slightly fruity character that comes in, a bit of heat, and a pops of toasted oak and a cereal like note. Something akin to peanut brittle in a fudge shop occasionally comes through as well.

Sip: The flavors are complex and layered, starting with caramel and spice it evolves into peach pits, tobacco, charred oak, cigar box, and nuts. The flavors are somewhat random in their progression, but consistently show up. There’s a fair amount of stone fruit, from peach to plum that comes around the edges. There’s very little burn despite the 100 proof, and the texture is rich. A very occasional oversteeped black tea note also appears.

Savor: The ending maintains a stone fruit and toasted oak character with a moderate amount of oak. The flavor lingers in a balanced and inviting way.

Henry McKenna Single Barrel is quite nice as a sipper, displaying a good amount of complexity and depth. The continuing evolution of the flavors in the glass makes it inviting to come back to. The texture also helps in adding to the appeal. Overall, it’s far from a disappointing sipper.

In Cocktails

In a Manhattan the wonderful texture and proof helps to create the lanolin texture of a great Manhattan. Caramels, brown sugar, toasted oak, and stone fruit pastry notes all explode forth. There are pleasant baking spices throughout. The finish ends up carrying forward some of the spice, stone fruit, and caramel with just a bit of oak. It’s a phenomenal Manhattan.

Single Barrel Side By Side

A friend happened to have a bottle of Henry McKenna Single Barrel, leading us having the bottles in a side by side. The bottle my friend had was 2 years newer than my bottle. The other bottle was significantly stronger in the vanilla realm, but added a dustiness and reduced the spice. There were also fruity notes, but a bit more orange marmalade sort of notes. The palate is significantly lighter, still maintaining the vanilla notes, but also bringing in more floral elements with subtle spice. The oak notes are also still prevalent, but it doesn’t achieve significant oak or fruit. The weight of both is also different, with the newer bottle feeling significantly lighter.

The comparison feels shocking given both are bottled in bond products with 10 year age statements. While some variation is to be expected, these almost stuck me like two different distilleries due to the spread of flavors and textures.

In Review – Henry McKenna Single Barrel

Henry McKenna’s hype has been real on driving it’s cost up. When this bottle was purchased, the cost per bottle was $10 less than it is today. Pushing $60, the flavor is quite good, but the availability and bottle variation remain problematic. While it’s amazing in cocktails and neat, these factors might be reasons to shy away and instead choice a lower cost single barrel such as Four Roses or Wild Turkey Rare Breed.