Page 1 of 1

Comments on LogicalFrank's review of Wild Turkey Russells Re

Unread postPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:46 am
by forumadmin
This is an automatically created topic for discussion about LogicalFrank's review of Wild Turkey Russells Reserve 10 year old;.

Unread postPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 11:46 am
by bourbonv
A very interesting review. I too prefered the 101 version of this product. It has more flavor and complexity. It is a superior bourbon in my opinion. It is a sad state of affairs when the accountants make them pull the better bourbon from the market and replace it with an inferior product. I wish they would offer a "Russell's Reserve Classic" at the 10yo 101 proof for those of us who appreciate good bourbon. (and they can leave the Turkey on the label, because to me the Turkey is a symbol of fine quality)

Unread postPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:18 pm
by LogicalFrank
In case it wasn't clear, I meant I preferred ordinary WT 101 (what is that, seven year?) and I've never gotten the chance to try the 101 proof version of Russel's Reserve (rather new to tasting bourbon "seriously").

In general, I just found this 90 proof version of RR to be lacking. It was decent enough and fairs reasonably well against, say, Woodford Reserve--which is what I think the new version is intended to compete w/.

Interesting what you say about the turkey on the label. I hadn't though of it before. WT 101 and the 80 proof have sort of a reputation as being party-shooters. (When we got it in college our purpose was exclusive to accelerate brain damage.) Perhaps WT is trying to get away from that image w/ their higher end whiskeys.

Unread postPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:29 pm
by bourbonv
The original 101 proof Russell's Reserve was very similar to the original 8yo 101 proof Wild Turkey - a little more wood and caramel, but still full of fruity apple and spice flavors.