1792 Bottled in Bond Bourbon

Total wine store pick from Gilbert Arizona (review may be of limited use to anyone outside the Phoenix AZ area). As I have already reviewed the non-store pick this review will primarily focus on any differences between this and the standard version. Nose is heavy on butterscotch, banana, vanilla, sweet oak, and ethanol. Possibly a little richer and more intense than the standard, but the basic notes are the same. Palate matches the nose well (sorry if that makes for a boring review) with some additional barrel spices in the mid-palate in the form of clove and ginger. Finish features a full on spice bloom of peppery cinnamon and slightly bitter oak (but the bitterness works and balances the sweetness in the palate) Slightly rough. Mouthfeel is thin but also lush at the same time; thicker would work wonders but alas it’s not to be here. I am a fan of this with the standard version, and this store pick elevates everything to a slight but yet still noticeable degree. At $40 this is indeed a rebuy, but less because it’s really just that amazing and more because $40 for this quality is an increasingly rare commodity in today’s crazy bourbon market.

1792 Series (2 of 10): Bottled in Bond Did you know: You can have Bottled in Bond vodka? I didn’t think this was possible, as the BiB act stipulates that you have to age the spirit in wood for at least 4 years in a federally bonded warehouse. Turns out: you could line the wood with something to prevent the spirit from making contact. Boom. BiB vodka. Nose is oddly plain. There was a lot going on in small batch, but not so here. There’s sugar, banana, yeast. Caramel. Very reminiscent of Jack or Woodford. Body is completely different, and I’m grateful. There’s caramel apple, jello, fruit punch, watermelon, cherry, sangria. Bubblegum. Delightful. Finish lingers with mild cinnamon and Hawaiian Punch. That last note is so good here. This is possibly an even bigger juice bomb than the small batch, and I tend to prefer this proof point. However, the nose is weaker somehow, and the small batch is a bit smoother. Overall, I think I prefer small batch. Still a solid bottle. Looking forward to the next on-deck: Bottled in Bond store pick, aka “yellow label 2.0”

Well I found this one at least a year ago and have had it open for at least 6 months. Hard to come by any versions of 1792 besides the small batch and full proof here in good ol’ Florida where everything is allocated or snatched up by the taters. So with that out of the way let’s get started….. Smell is sweet bourbon and inviting. Nothing off the charts but reminded me of the small batch version, maybe even better. Taste is where I just feel like this is nothing more than well….average. I see the reviews about how much they love the BIB version and it’s so much better etc., etc. I’m just not getting anything more than an ordinary bourbon. Honestly if someone said “hey what’s the one bottle you could buy that could represent the taste of ‘bourbon’?” this would be it. Not excellent, definitely not horrible or dislikable, just….average. 🤷🏻‍♂️ I was looking forward to this bottle since I enjoyed the other two versions I just mentioned above but this one was just not worth an extra $10 over small batch. 10/4/22

Afternoon sampling; 1792 BiB is the focus here. Comparing a 2022 bottle that has been open for 6-7 months to other pours opened for approximately the same amount of time. The semi-floral, bright nose and pancacke-batter, vegetal palate have only slightly "evolved" over the aforementioned time. Wanting this to be more than it "is" (due to its relative scarcity), a neat pour finds it slightly lacking in flavor (BT), complexity (OE7) and nuance (KPSB/GD 7) when put to the test. Not that this is a poor selection; there IS a lovely oakiness and buttery richness that might appreciably contend with a Henry McKenna 10yr SB BiB. That favorable comparison having been stated, a 1792 FP Store Pick is the same price ($49.99) and makes for a tough choice on which bottling to pickup when hankering for the 1792 flavor profile.

Open 11 months Nose - Corn dust, bubble gum, strawberry, vanilla frosting, light cinnamon, light oak, and light ethanol. Palate - Chalky gum, powdered sugar, watery baking spices, and light black pepper. Finish is short with chalky mineral water, strawberry gum, clove, and light ethanol. This gets touted as the most underrated 1792 bottle. I completely disagree, it is by far the worst 1792 I've had. It has all of those chalky dry gum notes I find in the crappy bourbon they source out to NDPs, and little to none of the fruity sweetness you expect in a quality Barton product. I get that the single barrel picks may be significantly better, but the baseline 1792 Single Barrel for the exact same price is so much better than this. Honestly I'd rather drink the 86 proof Very Old Barton.

On the noise a lot is going on with this one. I get some fruitiness, but it’s quickly overtaken with fresh baked cinnamon raisin bread, and bubble gum. On the palate there is some sweetness up front like bubble gum that has been in your mouth for a while. Also some rye spice and vanilla in the mid palate with a very slight oak note on the end. Also a tart green apple at the end. Overall not a bad pour, but I think I like the small batch just a little bit more.