Eagle Rare 17y (Fall 2011) – The Rebuttal

In previous posts on this year’s Buffalo Trace Antique Collection, I haven’t hesitated to poke fun at Eagle Rare as not deserving to be part of the collection. After last year’s collection I felt rather confident in my assertion that the Antique Collection consisted of four great whiskies and Eagle Rare 17.

When the opportunity presented itself to try this year’s Eagle Rare, I figured it was only fair to give it a taste. If it was underwhelming again, I’d feel confident in all future write-offs of Eagle Rare.

I poured the Eagle Rare into my glass this evening ready to be underwhelmed – what’s to like? – and prepared to nose it in all of its 45% ABV glory. After a summer of high-proof bourbons, a bourbon under 100 proof seemed like a painfully unfunny punchline.

Immediately I was surprised by this year’s nose. There are sweet notes of corn in abundance and a slightly floral rye note. That is a promising start for me. Wood was certainly present as you’d expect with a 17 year old whiskey, but not out of balance or overoaked. A slight hint of white pepper provided a faint prickle. Black cherries gave some depth and darkness to the flavor, and there was a faint marshmallow hint. This was starting to hit all of my buttons. A little maple syrup could be detected at the edges, as well as some fresh cedar and pine on the nose.

To my personal taste, this had a nose that was dangerously close to being in line with my preferred profile. `Maybe not turned up to eleven and rocking out, but balanced nicely.

The palate entry was very light. Extremely light – my first impression was that it was almost watery. I thought this was where it would all fall apart. Much to my surprise the white pepper notes were the underpinning for some faint and agreeable warming. The corn sweetness was at the center, balanced by a moderate note of oak. For a fleeting second, a faint vegetal corn note could be perceived, reminding me of the youth and fire this once had. The floral bloom of rye was again evident as well.

It wasn’t the most impressive palate, but far from the worst. Drinkable in the extreme. My personal preferences run towards a weightier and bolder palate, but it was hard to deny the overall balance and well-constructed nature of this whiskey. My only quibble really was the mouthfeel which struck me as thin.

Unsurprisingly, this carried into the finish. Being a lighter whiskey, it didn’t have a long-lasting finish, nor was it particularly bold. The sweetness was again the center of attention. Wood was present as was the pepper note. After a moment or two, there were some black tea-like tannins. For the most part, this finish was OK.

As I continued to sip I was forced to really examine this whiskey. Was my negative impression of Eagle Rare a sign of my own biases? Was I perhaps more strongly prejudiced towards bruising, 65%+ cask-strength whiskies despite my protestations to the contrary? Honestly, I concluded, I was (and I am).

The fact is that I would pour this Eagle Rare for virtually any bourbon aficionado and it would do well. It’s not going to knock over the most die-hard, extreme taste adventurer (which I’m forced to admit includes my personal preference). However, it is utterly agreeable and easy-drinking.

What would I change? Well, I think it would benefit somewhat from a slightly thicker mouthfeel. The sweetness feels somewhat detached – for some reason, sweetness works better for me when it’s a full, mouth-coating bourbon. I also think a slight tweak of the ABV – perhaps to 100 proof – would help bring things into clearer focus.

All this is a long way of saying that I’m forced to admit that I’ve been unfair to Eagle Rare and that it doesn’t necessarily deserve to be a whipping boy. I do think it has a tenuous claim to being part of the BTAC – it’s less dynamic than powerhouses like the Weller or the Handy. But perhaps it’s there because it’s a very well executed, easy-drinking bourbon for the average joe. I can’t really see what would be objectionable to the average palate on this one, unless you simply didn’t like whiskey.

At a glance:

Eagle Rare 17y (Fall 2011) 45% ABV
A rather pleasant nose – sweet notes of corn and a slightly floral note of rye. Reasonable wood balance, certainly not overoaked. Slight hint of white pepper; slight hint of black cherries and the faintest whisper of marshmallow. Maple syrup is lightly present. A bit of cedar and pine.
Palate: Light on the palate. Gradually warming. Nice corn sweetness. A moderate oak note; the faintest hint of a vegetal corn note. A bit of floral rye. Faint dusting of white pepper.
Finish: Short-ish. Not very bold, not very lasting. The sweetness takes the forefront. Wood present; the pepper is there. A little bit of black tea tannins.
Comment: The nose is great. The palate and finish are a little lightweight for me with this profile. I honestly wonder if this might sing at 100 proof. This is better than last year’s for sure.
Rating:  B

4 thoughts on “Eagle Rare 17y (Fall 2011) – The Rebuttal”

  1. Nice post – don’t worry about scoring low just because it’s not your style – that’s a necessary evil in this blogging business.  I don’t think it’s possible to rate “objectively” with any consistency.  You made it clear what’s up.  But, it gives people like me a good warning who want a bit of “wow” when they spend that much money on a bottle!

    1. Thanks for the comment! This one actually caused a bigger step back for me. While I agree objectivity is almost impossible with ratings, I more wanted to examine what it was that didn’t work for me on Eagle Rare in the past. My tasting notes for the ’10 are going up shortly and that definitely shows me they’re two very different whiskies. 

      That said, I realized I was more than a bit unfair to it in general. It’s a solid bourbon! It’s not extreme in any way –  but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s bad. I think There was a bit of thinking out loud done on this review. More than anything, I think its biggest flaw for me is that it’s kind of light on the palate. If it was a little thicker – I thin that would connect the dots for me. It’s definitely on a different level than Stagg or Weller, but it’s just not as bad as I’ve wanted to make it out to be. 

      And yes, if you want a lot of wow at $80, this is not your bottle. Weller is.

      1. Well, incredible as it may seem to us, I guess not everyone out there is looking for BIG bourbon!  Your description of Eagle Rare reminds me a bit of Blanton’s bourbon.  A good bourbon with plenty of drinkability, but it was so watery thin on the palate that I just couldn’t find the justification for the price.  It’s just not what I want.  I do drink lighter whiskies, those are just the ones I tend to spend less money on, since they’re the ones I don’t pay too much attention to.  Out of curiosity, do you know if Eagle Rare and Blanton’s are the same mashbill?  I wonder if there’s something about it that Buffalo Trace decided it just doesn’t do well at high strength.

        1. From what I saw online, they have different mash bills – Eagle is from Mashbill #1 which it shares with Old Charter, Stagg and Buffalo Trace. Blanton’s uses Mashbill #2 – same as Ancient Age, Elmer T. Lee, Rock Hill Farms, and Hancock Reserve. 

          Based on my limited understanding of Buffalo Trace’s variables at this point via the Single Oak Project, I’d be curious if it’s an entry proof or barrel char issue.  

Leave a Reply