1792 Port Finish

1792 Series (11 of 12): Port Finish A personal anecdote: During a conversation about wine-finished bourbons at a wine bar, sparked by a discussion on Latin dance, I shared my desire to experiment with finishing 1792 small batch in a small barrel (5 L) using a wine that would enhance fruity notes like cherry, fruit punch, and watermelon. After trying a Cabernet and a 'custom red' without achieving the perfect sweet-tart balance, the owner suggested port as an ideal match. This made me realize 1792 had already perfected this concept. My own project took a different turn, but upon acquiring this bottle, I was keen to see if the executed product met the initial concept's potential. Nose: Cherries, plums, grapes, sugar. A hint of tomato. Body: Rich with grape, raisin, prunes, some cherry, apricot, and a touch of almond. Finish: Almonds and more cherry, with a subtle hint of the 1792 fruit punch flavor. It has a very thick, sugary texture and a remarkably low burn, especially considering the port influence. This is a substantial finish, executed well. While it initially reminded me somewhat of a Cabernet finish, with a Prichard Hill character, comparing it to top-tier port-finished bourbons like Angel's Envy and Isaac Bowman revealed its high quality, though it struggles with value proposition at current prices. The integration of fruit punch and port flavors is exceptional, potentially best-in-class. However, its cost makes it less accessible. It's a delicious bourbon that would be best enjoyed if shared by a friend. Anticipating the next tasting: 1792 225th Anniversary

After a long overnight shift, I drank this bourbon quickly during the day. A friend generously provided it, big thanks to him. I was really anticipating this one since I enjoyed the sweet wheat and small batch from 1792, and I absolutely love single malt scotch that has been finished in port. Unfortunately, I suspect the port casks were not top quality or the finishing period was quite brief. The base whiskey is so good that I'm still giving it a respectable rating, as I detected minimal, if any, port wine characteristics. It is sweet, much like the sweet wheat, and smooth, similar to the small batch, so what does that mean for this? It's a delicious bourbon, that's what. I could have easily refilled my tasting glass multiple times and lost count. That really says something positive about 1792's entire lineup. Whether or not you require the batch variations depends on your personal preference and financial situation. In my opinion, you can't make a mistake picking this or any other 1792 product. Get one or two and discover it for yourself. Cheers.

A pleasant variation on the standard 1792, offering increased sweetness and complexity. While not an outstanding whiskey or worth inflated secondary prices, it's a respectable and distinct dram. Received as a gift, this bottle has been worthwhile. It's particularly enjoyable now, as the port notes complement the fall and winter seasons. It was my choice for sipping while decorating for Christmas. There are few port-finished bourbons available, though this is changing rapidly. Among the three I've sampled, I favor the Angel's Envy port-finished over the 1792, with the 1792 being superior to the Abraham Bowman Port-finished. A direct comparison might alter this assessment, but generally, Angel's Envy is the preferred choice, and tracking down the 1792 isn't essential.

I was eager to sample this, being a follower of the 1792 range, though I typically don't favor less aged expressions, preferring the Full Proof and especially the 12 Year. Nose: Toasted pecan, deeply caramelized sugar, vanilla, and dried cherries. Flavor: It lacks the ethanol harshness found in the standard 1792 bottlings. It's also sweeter, featuring dark dried red fruits, vanilla, caramel, a slight funk associated with fortified wine finishes, and very little alcohol bite. Finish: Medium short, with a touch of spice and nuttiness, and a slight drying sensation. There's a hint of funk, somewhere between skunky weed and a skunk's spray, which I found slightly off-putting but not to the point of disliking it. Overall, I enjoyed it and would drink it again. If I encountered a bottle at MSRP (unlikely!), I would purchase it, but not at secondary market prices.

This does not compare favorably to other port-finished bourbons like Angel's Envy. Despite Angel's Envy being a top 3 favorite among many spirits, I find this as unappealing as the 1792 Small Batch due to its dry, tannic, Scotch-like finish of leather, tobacco, and peat. Neither neat nor with ice or water does it improve. For a port finish, opt for Angel's Envy or Midwinter Night's Dram, unless you are particularly fond of 1792 bourbon in general. It is extremely overpriced at $100 in Seattle, when available.

Nose - Maple syrup is highly prominent, offering a thick richness. A saltiness akin to salted caramel comes through. Peanut butter is also a strong component, complemented by some vanilla. The nose is very sweet and rich. Palate - Much of the nose carries over, with added cinnamon. It's slightly less substantial on the mouthfeel than the nose suggests, but still pleasant. Oak and leather provide a nice bitterness. Finish - Consistent with the palate and nose. More cinnamon spice emerges toward the end, but it remains milder than a strong baking spice.