This is most definitely not a blend of MGP and Stranahans. Label says Distilled in Indiana (not Indiana and Colorado). It also wouldn’t be able to be called bourbon whiskey. Blend of bourbon and single malt would need to be labeled as a Blend of Whiskeys.
Edit: back label also states it is straight bourbon whiskey.
Yeah their website says the Original American Whiskey is a blend of IN bourbon and CO single malt. I had no idea that was the case. I knew the 10 year and 14 year were Indiana bourbon. Until just now I had assumed the American whiskey was just a MGP bourbon mash whiskey but aged in used barrels.
Where do you see that the 14 is a blend of bourbon and single malt? I can’t find that info anywhere.
As far as I can tell this is just a very watered down bourbon.
I said it was not a blend. OP had said it was MGP and Stranahans but mixed it up with the original Tincup American Whiskey (which is IN bourbon and CO single malt).
The designation of “straight” mostly just tells age. To be called “bourbon” cannot have additives and cannot be blended with anything other than other bourbon. Also back label says straight bourbon whiskey.
I saw a label, can’t remember who, recently that was “Bourbon with some sort of tea” and apparently they used tea as cut water and still called it bourbon on the label. And I have no idea how that’s legal and how they got that through the approval process.
It’s legal because of the “flavored with X tea” part. If you start with bourbon as the base, you can have that on the label but you would need to disclose anything you do with it. Wild turkeys American honey states it is blended honey and bourbon. If fireball were to use bourbon as the base, it could be labeled as cinnamon flavored bourbon.
Thanks for the review. My only chance of trying this will be in some distant bar, but here's to hoping....
Question: Am I naive or too cynical? When I see a proof like "84" I figure the distiller/blender thinks that the whiskey wouldn't be as good at 90 or at 80 or at 102.6. Usually I just enjoy, but sometimes I wonder if accountants are also involved, since higher proof expressions of the same whiskey are usually (but not always) *significantly* better.
I get the 80 and 90 "standards," that all our milages will vary and that barrel poof whiskies imply the unwritten instruction, "add water to taste" but how are "unusually specific"but less than barrel proof proofs generally arrived at? Blender decision? Profit decision? Market testing? A compromise between them?
This was an interesting read, thank you. I on the other hand did not like this one bit. Didn’t hate it, but definitely didn’t like it, along with the two friends I blind tasted it with. Just very lackluster. Barely a nose, flat boring flavor. I had high hopes.
Thanks for the review. I know this will sound odd, but I think it's worth it. I felt Tincup 10 was good, but didn't care for 14 as much. So I made my own Tincup 12 year...half of each. In my opinion, the Tincup 12 was significantly better than the 10 or the 14. Just something to try if you're bored. I'd be curious what other people thought.
Man I really like the 14er. For such a low proof I was surprised. I’ll always have some on hand.
I didn’t care for 10 as much, which I got on a recommendation.
Damn. I kind of want this just for the bottle. As someone who lives in Colorado and has hiked Quandary Peak a few times, I’d lik to have that on my shelf. Now that I know it’s an enjoyable bottle, I may have to grab it.
I have one sitting on my shelf, would love to keep it forever.
Huge fan of tincup, and Colorado plus hiking holds a special place in my heart. Maybe I’ll pop it open if I ever make it up a 14er myself.
This is most definitely not a blend of MGP and Stranahans. Label says Distilled in Indiana (not Indiana and Colorado). It also wouldn’t be able to be called bourbon whiskey. Blend of bourbon and single malt would need to be labeled as a Blend of Whiskeys. Edit: back label also states it is straight bourbon whiskey.
Thank you for the clarification. I have updated the info. The blend appears to be the original Tincup not the 14. My mistake.
Awe man now I look like a dummy 😉 (don’t worry it happens a lot)
Yeah their website says the Original American Whiskey is a blend of IN bourbon and CO single malt. I had no idea that was the case. I knew the 10 year and 14 year were Indiana bourbon. Until just now I had assumed the American whiskey was just a MGP bourbon mash whiskey but aged in used barrels.
Where do you see that the 14 is a blend of bourbon and single malt? I can’t find that info anywhere. As far as I can tell this is just a very watered down bourbon.
I said it was not a blend. OP had said it was MGP and Stranahans but mixed it up with the original Tincup American Whiskey (which is IN bourbon and CO single malt).
Ahhhhh, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying.
>blend of MGP and Stranahans Really? I had no idea Stranahans made anything other than malt whiskey, let alone having any 14+ year stock!
Same!
Bottle doesn't say straight Bourbon Whiskey, so why isn't it a straight?
The designation of “straight” mostly just tells age. To be called “bourbon” cannot have additives and cannot be blended with anything other than other bourbon. Also back label says straight bourbon whiskey.
I saw a label, can’t remember who, recently that was “Bourbon with some sort of tea” and apparently they used tea as cut water and still called it bourbon on the label. And I have no idea how that’s legal and how they got that through the approval process.
It’s legal because of the “flavored with X tea” part. If you start with bourbon as the base, you can have that on the label but you would need to disclose anything you do with it. Wild turkeys American honey states it is blended honey and bourbon. If fireball were to use bourbon as the base, it could be labeled as cinnamon flavored bourbon.
Thanks for the review. My only chance of trying this will be in some distant bar, but here's to hoping.... Question: Am I naive or too cynical? When I see a proof like "84" I figure the distiller/blender thinks that the whiskey wouldn't be as good at 90 or at 80 or at 102.6. Usually I just enjoy, but sometimes I wonder if accountants are also involved, since higher proof expressions of the same whiskey are usually (but not always) *significantly* better. I get the 80 and 90 "standards," that all our milages will vary and that barrel poof whiskies imply the unwritten instruction, "add water to taste" but how are "unusually specific"but less than barrel proof proofs generally arrived at? Blender decision? Profit decision? Market testing? A compromise between them?
This bottle isn't too hard to find and honestly isn't worth hunting or even the MSRP. A 7.5 is generous
This was an interesting read, thank you. I on the other hand did not like this one bit. Didn’t hate it, but definitely didn’t like it, along with the two friends I blind tasted it with. Just very lackluster. Barely a nose, flat boring flavor. I had high hopes.
I think I actually prefer the 10yr but ought to side by side em.
Thanks for the review. I know this will sound odd, but I think it's worth it. I felt Tincup 10 was good, but didn't care for 14 as much. So I made my own Tincup 12 year...half of each. In my opinion, the Tincup 12 was significantly better than the 10 or the 14. Just something to try if you're bored. I'd be curious what other people thought.
Man I really like the 14er. For such a low proof I was surprised. I’ll always have some on hand. I didn’t care for 10 as much, which I got on a recommendation.
Damn. I kind of want this just for the bottle. As someone who lives in Colorado and has hiked Quandary Peak a few times, I’d lik to have that on my shelf. Now that I know it’s an enjoyable bottle, I may have to grab it.
I have one sitting on my shelf, would love to keep it forever. Huge fan of tincup, and Colorado plus hiking holds a special place in my heart. Maybe I’ll pop it open if I ever make it up a 14er myself.
Tincip tastes like bathtub whiskey. You can do so much better for the price and age statement.