Monday, February 6, 2017

They Don't Make Them Like They Used To, Part 1: 1986 National Distillers Bourbon deLuxe and 1989 National Distillers Old Grand-Dad Red Shield

They don't make them like they used to.

I hate to be cliché but at this point in my bourbon adventures I've come to realize there is a lot of truth to that. That isn't to stay that bourbon made today isn't great, because a lot of it is. The more I branch out into vintage bourbons though the more I am fascinated by the taste profiles that while not necessarily better than stuff I can buy today, they can be vastly different and/or more interesting.
I'm not really sure why vintage stuff tastes the way it does but bourbon historian Michael Veach lays out some good theories in Old Bottle Bourbon Flavor. I think the answer is everything he's mentioned, including the bottle conditioning part. With a lot of these old bourbons there is a familiarity to them - some combination of lush mouthfeel, older richer oak, and other notes that I can't really describe so I just end up calling it a dusty note. I don't literally mean it tastes like dust, just that familiar combo and that's what I find that makes them so interesting.
Further down the unique profiles rabbit hole, some dusties have an even more specific calling card which brings us to National Distillers. Up until the late 80s when they were acquired by Jim Beam, National Distillers put out Old Taylor, Old Grand-Dad, Old Crow, and a few other bourbons. Before Beam took over and ruined them, those brands are well known for a very sweet, butterscotch forward profile. Up until recently I've only had the NAS 80 proof and NAS 86 proof expressions of National Distillers and while I agree they were butterscotch bombs, I felt they were all mostly one-trick ponies and rather boring. But what about higher proofs? Older vintages? Higher ages? Let's take a walk through 6 different bottlings to find out if ND dusties are really worth all the hype. The full lineup:
  • 1986 National Distillers Bourbon deLuxe, NAS, 40%
  • 1989 National Distillers Old Grand-Dad Red Shield, NAS, 43%
  • 1948 National Distillers Old Taylor Bottled in Bond, 6 years, 50%
  • 1988 National Distillers Old Grand-Dad Bottled in Bond, 8 years, 50%
  • 1982 National Distillers Old Grand-Dad 114 Lot 1, NAS, 57%
  • 1988 National Distillers Old Grand-Dad 114 Lot 17, NAS, 57%


1986 National Distillers Bourbon deLuxe

bottle
No Age Statement; 40% ABV; Thanks to /u/harry_fjord for the sample. Note the picture is from Google search.
The nose is kind of thin with some butterscotch sweetness, dusty bourbon notes, and older oak. It smells richer and older than it should for an 80 proof no age statement whiskey. The nose is more impressive than the taste though. The palate entry is thin and the finish is almost nonexistent. The sweet notes from the nose are there as are faint traces of older whiskey but there is also some chemical varnish / acetone notes in the mix as well. If only the palate carried through as solid as the nose this could be great. As is, it's mildly interesting due to the faint dusty profile but it's not something I would care to have again.
Rating: D

1989 National Distillers Old Grand-Dad Red Shield

bottle
No Age Statement; 43% ABV; Thanks to /u/flavorjunkie for the sample. Note the picture is from Google search.
Nose is a bit darker with caramelized sugars, toffee, and the hallmark butterscotch. It's still a little thin but more robust than the 80 proof deLuxe. I get some light rye in here as well but not really picking up on the dusty notes yet. The palate is super sweet and very caramel candy forward. The dusty old notes that I usually get in bourbons bottled before the 2000s are here but very, very faint. I will say this is the sweetest butterscotch/caramel bomb National Distillers whiskey I've had yet. The finish is a disappointment though as it's pretty weak. This is slightly interesting due to the classic National Distillers profile but like all the other ND whiskey I've had I'm left thinking how much better it would be with more proof.
Rating: C

So there you have it, all that glitters is not gold. These were bottom shelf turds back in the 80s and they are no better or worse than the stuff you can continue to find on the bottom shelf today. Hopefully things can only go up from here.
Note that price is not considered when assigning a rating. 

No comments:

Post a Comment