Early Times Bottled-in-Bond Bourbon

Aroma - the usual suspects are present here… the caramel, vanilla, a very subtle hint of oak. There's a slight bright fruit note and some citrus to balance it out nicely. As it airs, potpourri notes begin to emerge. This is really nice for $25. Taste - Follows the aroma, but everything is toned down slightly, though the citrus is more prominent. It has more of an orange creamsicle flavor, which I really like. Overall - It drinks a bit warmer than 100 proof, honestly (but only slightly!.. Around 105-110 proof). The finish is lacking and slightly drying (as expected)… But considering the price, I think the value is much better than average. The aroma is particularly great, and I would never have guessed this was a $25 liter bottle. It's definitely something most people should try and keep stocked.

I went to my local store to buy EW BiB, and what did I find! That's right, Early Times BiB, and since I'd never tasted it, and the price was reasonable, I felt it was appropriate to purchase. The nose starts off gentle and very welcoming, with sweet dried fruit notes (like pineapple and oranges) then moving to soft light wood, with hints of grain (similar to oatmeal). On the palate, I was immediately met with warmth that then fades, making for an easy sip. I can taste the typical bourbon flavors of caramel, light brown sugar, and candy corn. For this to be 100 proof, it certainly doesn't drink like it. I enjoyed this in a Glencairn glass... Neat, of course, but I'm sure adding ice would enhance it further. All things considered, it's a great purchase at $25, especially with current price increases.

Damn you Brown Foreman! I was concerned when they sold the brand to Sazerac that this affordable gem would decline. After finishing my last bottle, I didn't immediately buy another. Seeing it on sale recently, I decided to try it again. Wow, this whiskey is terrible! The nose has a light turpentine and strong Elmer's glue aroma. The palate is identical, making me spit it out. It's not only very young, but the flavor profile is also poor. I'm trying to see if it works as a mixer. I keep adding more and more ginger ale (Vernors, the best ginger ale ever), but it doesn't cover up the bad whiskey. I think I'm going to have to discard it. I won't drink it, and if I serve it in cocktails, friends won't return. Sazerac, why acquire the name just to ruin it? Your name can't redeem this garbage, not even for the BT crowd.

Sugary sweet, savory, and buttery. Brown sugar, molasses, warm caramel/sweet corn, honey, ripe fruit, oxidized wine, hints of vanilla, cherry cola with vanilla undertones, cream soda, vanilla root beer candy, oak, spicy pepper and baking spices, burnt corn kernels, butternut squash, fire smoke/fresh oak woodiness, plantain chips, flowers and strong earthy/grassy/yeasty notes. A budget bourbon that's a high-quality dessert option. Update: After opening, it's less earthy and grassy, with more sugary sweetness, spice, and plantain chips on the finish. Update 2: More vanilla and wine notes emerge as the bottle ages. Adding water enhances sweetness, vanilla/caramel, and spice.

Scents of caramel, vanilla, musty oak, raisin, and rum, bordering on rubber; notes of vanilla and barrel spices, fig, and oak; rich sweetness fades. This might be my favorite bottom-shelf bottle. It feels richer than other bourbons in its class. It has a rum-like quality to the aroma. While I don't actually like rum, I love it when bourbon has rum notes. There's a decent amount of oak for something I assume is around 4 years old. This one truly hits all the right notes for me, and none of the wrong ones.

NEAT NOSE - Reminds me of a cherry cola on the nose, with subtle hints of vanilla and caramel. PALATE - Light on the palate. Thin mouthfeel. Flavors of caramel and vanilla. FINISH - Short, but enjoyable. SHOULD I BUY? - Yes. For the cost, it's worth getting and trying. BUY AGAIN?? - I would purchase this again. I don't have the black cap version, but if I happen to find one, I intend to get it to compare the differences between the two that I've heard about.