Grant's Triple Wood

The unique bottle shape is rather appealing, possessing a utilitarian vibe with its screw top. Nose: It smells like scotch, not exceptional scotch, but not a complete failure either. It does, at least, smell like scotch. I detect sulfur, some malt, smoke, light sweet fruity and floral notes. There's also a slightly savory element, along with hay and a hint of minerality. It doesn't seem very robust, suggesting youth. Palate: It presents more cinnamon spice than another named scotch, giving it a more authentically bland, poor scotch flavor. It's thinner and less oily, with added sweetness and more pronounced fruity and floral characteristics. I get a little pear and apple. Fortunately, it's not very harsh, and I could imagine it being either 40% or 43% ABV. Sulfur is present, unfortunately, but other flavors of smoke and hay almost mask it. The harshness gradually intensifies but isn't too bad. The caramel has an artificial taste, and I do detect some alcohol. I don't enjoy this palate, but it's not aggressively bad scotch. That's a low standard, but we are discussing bottom-shelf scotch here... Finish: The finish does show increased alcohol flavor, and the rest is fairly light. I still get some sulfur, along with hay and a touch of cinnamon, but I detect significantly more minerality and pear. It's not quite as good as the palate, but it's not a major decline. Honestly, I'm undecided between this and another named scotch. If I consider that other scotch as an Irish whiskey, its oiliness makes more sense, and I prefer it until the finish. Ultimately, the sulfur here is just a bit too much, and it lacks the intrigue I find in the other, so I'll lean towards the other. I'm considering a 7 to 8 for this, settling on 7 for now, but it's a solid 7.

This has been a difficult bottle to consume, with most of it poured out. I would only wish this on my worst enemies. Here we go. Nose: Definitely sulfur, but not as overpowering as in other brands. There's a paper-like scent, faint vanilla, and some apricot. A touch of minerality, but not in a watery way. It's generic and muddled, but apart from the sulfur (a significant drawback), the aroma isn't too bad. Palate: Somewhat spicy initially, with sulfur lurking beneath. I detect cinnamon and pepper with some harshness. The minerality arrives with the apricot, which is disappointingly muted, and also some apple. There's a fair amount happening here, and most of the flavors are acceptable, but it's dull and has that sulfur backing. There's also a meaty quality, which is clearly negative, but the sulfur is a bigger issue. Finish: Sulfur, mineral fruit, a bit of spice and burn. Not a pleasant finish, but at least there are some elements present, and it's not the absolute most sulphuric scotch I've encountered (see: other brands). - Conclusion - This isn't an exciting result, but I stand by my initial rating of 7. It's comparable to a specific Pure Scot expression, but slightly better due to its considerably reduced harshness (though I might prefer the Pure Scot's flavor). This is a poor Scotch that I would politely decline if offered. It's not as bad as another spirit I carry a glove to slap anyone who offers it to me across the face with. That's why it's a 7, not a 0.

First sniff brings a pleasant, easy aroma—spicy wood, sweetness, and light fruit, with a faint harshness likely from alcohol. Honey and gentle spice start to show. Smooth and surprisingly soft, with a mild, almost slick feel. No sting on the tongue; instead, a mild butterscotch sweetness comes first, then gentle waves of cinnamon, vanilla, caramel, and a hint of chocolate. Subtle apple or fruit notes remain. After swallowing, the heat arrives—a clear, standard scotch burn, but not intense. The lingering scent is woody, with warmth that stays in your chest. No significant smoke, though a previous mezcal tasting might have affected my sense of it. A bold, straightforward scotch—uncomplicated in the best way. Smooth, drinkable, and consistent. Great for a long, thoughtful evening. A surprisingly smooth spirit with a high-class feel. --- Poem – Straightforward Scotch On a quiet night with time on my hands, when the world finally calmed its edges, you poured the past into a glass— fifteen years, condensed to this moment. The aroma hinted at wood and warmth, a memory of fruit and slight sharpness, like old paper. And when you sipped— no excuses, no pretense— just scotch, true to itself. Butterscotch dreams on the palate, vanilla embers, caramel shadows, and a warmth that followed the touch. Flowing like an unspoken idea. Simple. Genuine. Yours.

- William Grant and Sons - Family-owned business - Established in 1889 just before Christmas - Balvenie and Glenfiddich - Grant's is the 3rd best-selling brand globally, behind JW - 40% ABV - Colorant + Filtration - Replaced Grant's Family Reserve (2018) Nose: Smooth and pleasant, despite a strong alcohol presence. Sweet, vanilla, slight sherry wine notes, red fruitiness, stewed figs, apples, strawberries, light caramel, light toffee, citrus, peppery, and a woody hint reminiscent of European oak. Pleasant aromas, despite the alcohol's warmth, suggesting a decent amount of single malt in its composition. Palate: Relatively consistent with the nose, but the alcohol is much more prominent at this stage of tasting. A harsh bitterness is also noticeable afterward, but it doesn't detract from the whisky. Sweet, European oak woodiness, peppery, citrus, slightly buttery, and red fruitiness. However, these notes are easily overshadowed by the warmth of the alcohol and the harsh bitterness. Finish: Short, sweet, bitter, and warm. Overall impressions: An entry-level blended Scotch whisky, very affordably priced, and with good complexity for its class. It was replaced by the Triple Wood version, a very similar expression. The evident alcohol is the weak point of this whisky, which would be much more enjoyable if it were less warm. I recommend it for sweet mixed drinks or, at most, with ice. Overall impressions:

For a $17 whisky, this blended scotch is quite acceptable. It seems Grant's can easily create a decent blend since their primary malts are Glenfiddich, Glenkinchie, and Balvenie. One might argue that the only difference from Monkey Shoulder is the inclusion of grain whisky in this one. Bottled at 40% ABV. On the nose, it begins with a Grain Whisky character, but good notes of lemon, apples, and almonds emerge. Creamy texture. On the palate, it starts very thin, with some caramel notes. Woody, with lots of vanilla. Aftertaste is spicy. Peppery and salty, with some hay notes also present. Overall, this is a very easily drinkable whisky, especially considering the cost. You typically expect cheap blends to be for heavy "discotheque" drinking and cocktails, but this one can genuinely be enjoyed neat. My score doesn't fully reflect my true feelings about it, but it really lacks complexity and the grain whisky notes are a bit bothersome, so it gets a 63 out of 100 on my rating sheet.

Tasted neat. The nose suggests a young spirit but nothing unpleasant. I detect some red apple with the faintest hints of smoke. The palate is very light, with more apple, a bit of vanilla, and some pepper to finish it off. The finish is brief and unremarkable, but I wouldn't refuse it if offered. I purchased this bottle for 11.99 to make one of my favorite whiskey cocktails. I'll combine this with some natural coconut water over ice. This is how I developed a taste for scotch as a youth back in my homeland of Puerto Rico. With the consistently warm weather year-round, my people always have this refreshing cocktail ready. Cheers!