interesting Old Overholt bottle and dating question

[afisher]

I have a 4/5th quart of Old Overholt barrel proof rye, cork-stoppered, with a serial number and the proof (114) hand-written on a printed, pseudo-hand-lettered label of rough unglazed paper. The label states it was distilled and bottled by Old Overholt in Broad Ford, PA and distributed by NDC.

The code on the bottom of the bottle has the Owens-Illinois overlapped O,I,diamond logo, and the codes D19 65-40. This could suggest either 1965 or 1940 as the age of the bottle. Both are somewhat plausible, since I have seen the claim that Broad Ford was in operation until a fire in 1965; the label seems more like a 60s conceit than something printed in the 40s. However, web sources suggest that Owens-Illinois dropped the diamond in the late 50s.

Other clues: it has a red tax stamp over the cap and neck, and has an Indiana state-shaped tax stamp with a rate of 50 cents per gallon.

I also have a pint of BiB Old Overholt, also distilled at Broad Ford, that bears the code D19 56-43, but unfortunately the dates on the BiB stamp have been rendered unreadable by moisture of some kind (maybe leakage).

Anybody know how to read these signs and date the bottle?

[gillmang]

That is very interesting, I believe the Old Overholt barrel proof rye may date from the early 1940's. Even if it is from the mid-60's, I think (based on things I have read over the years and bottles seen in collections) Overholt appeared in this form periodically between about 1940 and 1970. I think the 1960's one came in a wooden presentation box. This shows that barrel proof whiskey predated Rare Breed and Grandad 114. I would think the Overholt mentioned is from a single barrel, thus pre-dating Blanton, but I am not sure.

Can you offer any taste notes or are these remaining sealed?

Gary

[bourbonv]

This is interesting. The earliest barrel proof whiskey I have ever seen was the Weller Antique from the early 50's. If Old Overholt was doing one earlier than that then Pappy Van Winkle may have gotten the idea for his bottle from them.

The date on the glass is a tricky question because of the war. I doubt if Old Overholt would have released a barrel proof version during the war. The question of supply was too great to risk bottling at that high of a proof. Glass was also in short supply do to the war. It is during this time that the 4/5 quart became popular with the distillers since it saved glass. I would say that the bottle is probably from after the war but may be using glass that was stockpiled during the war.

[gillmang]

Thanks Mike for recollecting those early Weller 110/107's although I think there is a possibility that those numbers meant entry proof (and of course bottling proof, but not dumping proof). In any case, I am pretty sure I have read that an Overholt barrel proof was issued in the late 1930's. If it is also a single barrel, this would reinforce its distinctiveness. It may be a single barrel without so stating, of course.

Gary

[gillmang]

By the way barrel proof for the Overholt, as is still so (I presume) for Rare Breed and maybe OG 114, may have meant that without changing dumping proofs, barrels were mingled so as to produce a proof of 114. I say this because 114 is kind of a magic number, being (in the current American formulation of course) the old Sykes measure of proof spirits (57.1% - in other words 100 proof formerly was 57.1% ABV but now is 50% ABV).

In the Colonial and post-Colonial eras, 57.1% ABV, derived from England as the proof standard, would have had currency in America. Later, after Americans changed the proof calculation system so that 100 proof equals 50% ABV and not 57.1% ABV special bottlings would have been issued to commemorate the old system.

To get to 114 for this purpose, mingling different dumping proofs would have made sense. I don't think they waited until they found a barrel that dumped at 114, but maybe they did and maybe the link to Sykes is non-existent - but I don't think so.

Gary

[afisher]

Thanks for the observations. I had noted the coincidence with OGD 114, which I assume must be barrel-blended to proof, but the hand-writing on the label suggests this one may not be. There was some discussion on the whisky magazine forum of a similar bottle where it was reported at 124 proof, but who knows whether that was a typo.

I'm hoping that somebody has a couple of legible OO BiB labels that can be correlated with bottle date codes. I'm stockpiling a few "ryes that aren't there any more" to taste together, will report then. One other tidbit re WWII that I found on the web: the Broad Ford distillery apparently had a wartime contract to produce 95% ethanol.

[gillmang]

By law American distilleries were converted to wartime ethanol production and 95% was (then and now) pretty much the height of purity for ethyl alcohol. Those distillerieswhich couldn't reach 95% sent the spirit elsewhere for redistillation.

Would it be possible to indicate here what the labelling states? If another label said 124 proof (and I think a misproint is unlikely) that would suggest a true single barreling, which would mean too that the total output was small unless they issued different proof bottlings at the same time. So maybe they did choose a barrel that had a final proof of 114 but even so, I still feel people knew (perhaps without knowing exactly why, even then) that 114 was a special number, and the fact that that is the proof of Old Grandad's strongest whiskey today also in my view shows (no matter how it is confected) this recognition.

I and a number of people on the board have sampled old Old Overholts, in my case going back to pre-WW 1 Overholt courtesy of John (ellenjaye) of this board.

They all shared something in common, a kind of heavy toasty taste (like peanuts stored in an oak barrel for a time and then soaked in modern rye whiskey) which is different (although not unrelated) to today's Old Overholt. The pre-WW 1 had a fresh burst of wintergreen in the aftertaste which was astonishing.

Gary

[afisher]

Here's the front label text, hand-lettered and then printed, except for the text in brackets which is handprinted:

This is bottle No. [3361] of a very select stock of rare Old Overholt Pennsylvania Straight Rye Whiskey. This whiskey is 6 1/2 years old and is bottled exactly as it comes from the original barrels at [114] proof. Distilled + Bottled at Broad Ford, PA. by A. Overholt + Co., Inc., and distributed by National Distillers Products Corp., New York.
(printed signature) Thomas F. Brown Vice President

The back label is printed in a historical-looking font:

Recorded No. [3361]
In this bottle rests a rarity and a superb treat - America's great rye - Old Overholt. This whiskey is 6 1/2 years old, and bottled exactly as awn from the wood. This whiskey is rich, mellow and of unusual potency - a mighty whiskey for the delectation of yourself and your guests. Treat it with the utmost respect when used straight; use it sparingly in highball or cocktail; then you will enjoy its incomparable virtues to the utmost.

The label copy does sound more 40s than 60s...

[cowdery]

Some producers in the immediate post-prohibition period gave shareholders their dividends in whiskey, usually a special bottling. This sounds like one of those. That suggests post-prohibition but pre-war. In many cases, especially right after prohibition, the whiskey was pre-prohibition production.

[gillmang]

Very interesting, I agree, the ad copy style sounds very 1930's, which suggest the bottle (based also on the embossed bottle markings you mentioned) was put in the market in the early 1940's.

However, I don't think it was a single barrel. First, there were over 3300 bottles of this release (apparently). Second, the ad copy reads, "bottled exactly as it comes from the original barrels". The plural barrels suggests to me a mingling was done in a cistern to reach the historic proof spirits level of 114 (57% ABV).

I'd love to have your comparative taste notes.

Gary

[afisher]

So maybe the bottle was made in 1940 (per the date code), which if it were used fairly promptly would indicate that the whiskey, at 6.5 years, would be among the first post-prohibition whiskey distilled.

BTW, interesting article in Time from just before Repeal:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,746450-1,00.html

Tasting notes coming!

[cowdery]

That's a good theory. After I made my post, I realized the age argues against a pre-prohibition origin. A celebration of some of the first post-prohibition production to be fully aged and sold unblended with younger spirit makes a lot of sense.

[gillmang]

Well, the bottle might have included some pre-Pro whiskey. It might not have been a "dividend whiskey" like National Distillers Special Reserve from 1933 but it might have comprised distillations from before, during (under permit - Overholt qualified I believe) and immediately after Prohibition.

Anyway, what does it taste like (is a question on the minds of all of us here, I know)?

Gary

[churdle]

I also have a bottle of Old Overholt that matches this description, except the proof which looks like it has been handwritten in red is 122. It is in a wooden box with a certificate inside that also has this info on it.
Does anyone know if this is worth something?

churdle

[dgonano]

You may know that I also have this bottling. Mine is 113 proof , distilled and bottled at Broad Ford, PA. as opposed to some bottles only bottled at the site. They evidently also distilled at the Large plant closeby.

I strongly believe that the whiskey was distilled shortly after Prohibition ended. Bottling at 6 1/2 yrs would take you to mid 1940. This agrees with the bottle(1940) and also agrees with the distillery age. The certificate inside the box states the distillery is 130 years old...and Old Overholt began in 1810. My bottle has not been opened.

Even though the bottle numbers seem to go up to 3300 or so, the barrel proof consistently changes. I do believe the whiskey is at least small batch if not single barrel . I haven't come across any bottle with the same proof.