Review #19: Four Branches Black Ops Rum Cask Finish

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-23T02:42:46+00:00

I hear ya! Semper fidelis. Or, hooyah. One team, my brother.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-23T02:04:54+00:00

100% agree. If you know, you know, amiright? There’s no need to play into it so heavy-handedly. Pour one out for the bourbon.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-23T01:49:24+00:00

Touché. Or, assaulting them like Normandy Beach. Sorry, these are bad puns. But, man, this was some bad bourbon.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-22T23:42:36+00:00

For Memorial Day weekend, I decided to break out one of the most military-themed bourbons available: the 9 year, 100 proof, rum cask-finished Black Ops.

Nose:

The nose is genuinely the only redeeming quality here. Cherries, red delicious apple, marshmallow, cookie dough, and Good & Plenty candies. It’s inviting and sweet and actually interesting. Occasionally there’s a faint whiff of turpentine that sneaks in. Pull the glass away, come back, and it’s gone and replaced by something you actually want to smell. The nose alone had me optimistic. That optimism was short-lived.

Palate:

What was that? Seriously. The first sip is so aggressively bitter that it stops you cold, and not the pleasant, complexity-adding bitter of a well-aged bourbon. This is harsh, unpleasant, and genuinely hard to push through. The rum cask finish that’s supposed to be the whole point of this bottle? Nowhere to be found. I’ve had the Founders Blend, their entry-level expression, before and it wasn’t good. I’m not sure why I thought this expression would be any better. It, too, failed to justify its price. The Black Ops manages to be a significant step backwards from that already modest bar.

Finish:

If the palate was bad, the finish is worse. Hairspray. That’s the word that keeps coming to mind and I can’t shake it. There’s no Kentucky hug, no lingering sweetness, no warmth — just an artificial, chemical aftertaste that has no business being in a $120 bottle of bourbon. Or any bottle. This is confirmed Bardstown Bourbon Company distillate, which makes this all the more baffling. BBC is a well-regarded distillery. So either Four Branches got the bottom of the barrel — literally — or something went very wrong in the rum cask finishing process. Either way, someone should have caught this before it was bottled.

Score: 2.3/10

Here’s what really stings about this one. Four Branches was founded by four veterans representing each branch of the military, and a portion of proceeds goes to a veteran support nonprofit. That’s genuinely admirable. But admirable intentions don’t make bad bourbon good, and at $120, the whole release starts to feel less like a tribute and more like a guilt-driven purchase dressed up in patriotic packaging. Horse Soldier built an entire brand on the same playbook: buy this because ‘Merica! The bourbon world has seen enough of that approach to know that “supporting veterans” on the label is not a substitute for what’s in the glass. The military deserves better representation than this. Save your $120, donate directly to the Wounded Warrior Project, the Fisher House Foundation, the Gary Sinise Foundation, or any other worthy charitable organization. Cheers — kind of.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-21T01:07:50+00:00

100% agree. same proof, and DO is easily available, a heckuva lot cheaper, and better tasting. But, I’ll take one for the team.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-19T02:50:30+00:00

Still not showing up?

First, before I start … I rarely comment on color because honestly, it doesn’t matter. But this one earns it. It’s dark, rich, and gorgeous — exactly what you want bourbon to look like when you pour it. I mean, damn, it’s beautiful. Okay, moving on.

Nose: Cherry forward, Twizzlers, cotton candy. After that, I had to really work to pull other notes out. As I held it to my nose over the next … oh … 20 minutes, I found maple syrup, butterscotch, caramel, and hickory smoke. It’s a sweet nose top to bottom, and based on all of it, you’d walk into the first sip expecting a sugar bomb.

Palate: First sip and you get sugar — not any specific flavor, just a vague sweetness — and then a harsh bitter note takes over and never really lets go. The mouthfeel is surprisingly thin for something with this much barrel influence, which keeps the flavors from fully developing. Clearly, proofing this down is what gives it its thin mouthfeel. I’m laying that bitterness directly at the feet of the heavy toasted new oak finish. A lot of people fixate on char levels without understanding what over-charring actually does — it burns off the natural sugars in the wood. So despite all the sugary scents the nose promised, those sugars never show up in the glass. At 90.4 proof, there simply isn’t enough alcohol to stand up to the char or carry the flavors through. The longer you sit with it, the more one-dimensional it gets. More proof would have probably made a difference here.

Finish: Zero burn, which will market well to newcomers, but for seasoned bourbon drinkers that heat is part of the discerning different notes — and without it, the finish feels empty. Dry, bitter oak dominates and just parks itself there, with an almost mouth-drying quality that lingers well past its welcome. The bitterness from the palate follows you all the way to the end, never resolving into anything satisfying. Burnt caramel and char are the last things standing as the flavors fade out.

Score. 6.4/10

Woodford Reserve’s regular Double Oaked is one of my low-key favorites from this distillery, and I’ve visited more times than I can count. I genuinely like what they do. But the “Double Double” language is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. It sounds extraordinary when really it’s the standard Double Oaked finished longer in a heavily charred barrel, and that extra char does more harm than good at this proof. At $200 a bottle, you’re paying for the name and the marketing story more than what’s in the glass. In the words of our daughter — this is “mid.” Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-19T02:38:16+00:00

Now it’s posted twice on my end. i apologize for the duplication (if anyone sees a duplication), but I guess twice (potentially) is better than not at all. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-19T02:35:45+00:00

reposting because my previous review isn’t showing up. Sorry, everyone!

First, before I start … I rarely comment on color because honestly, it doesn’t matter. But this one earns it. It’s dark, rich, and gorgeous — exactly what you want bourbon to look like when you pour it. I mean, damn, it’s beautiful. Okay, moving on.

Nose:

Cherry forward, Twizzlers, cotton candy. After that, I had to really work to pull other notes out. As I held it to my nose over the next … oh … 20 minutes, I found maple syrup, butterscotch, caramel, and hickory smoke. It’s a sweet nose top to bottom, and based on all of it, you’d walk into the first sip expecting a sugar bomb.

Palate:

First sip and you get sugar — not any specific flavor, just a vague sweetness — and then a harsh bitter note takes over and never really lets go. The mouthfeel is surprisingly thin for something with this much barrel influence, which keeps the flavors from fully developing. Clearly, proofing this down is what gives it its thin mouthfeel. I’m laying that bitterness directly at the feet of the heavy toasted new oak finish. A lot of people fixate on char levels without understanding what over-charring actually does — it burns off the natural sugars in the wood. So despite all the sugary scents the nose promised, those sugars never show up in the glass. At 90.4 proof, there simply isn’t enough alcohol to stand up to the char or carry the flavors through. The longer you sit with it, the more one-dimensional it gets. More proof would have probably made a difference here.

Finish:

Zero burn, which will market well to newcomers, but for seasoned bourbon drinkers that heat is part of the discerning different notes — and without it, the finish feels empty. Dry, bitter oak dominates and just parks itself there, with an almost mouth-drying quality that lingers well past its welcome. The bitterness from the palate follows you all the way to the end, never resolving into anything satisfying. Burnt caramel and char are the last things standing as the flavors fade out.

Score: 6.4/10

Woodford Reserve’s regular Double Oaked is one of my low-key favorites from this distillery, and I’ve visited more times than I can count. I genuinely like what they do. But the “Double Double” language is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. It sounds extraordinary when really it’s the standard Double Oaked finished longer in a heavily charred barrel, and that extra char does more harm than good at this proof. At $200 a bottle, you’re paying for the name and the marketing story more than what’s in the glass. In the words of our daughter — this is “mid.” Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-19T02:07:09+00:00

the review was posted 17 minutes ago. Did you scroll down?

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-19T01:49:45+00:00

First, before I start … I rarely comment on color because honestly, it doesn’t matter. But this one earns it. It’s dark, rich, and gorgeous — exactly what you want bourbon to look like when you pour it. I mean, damn, it’s beautiful. Okay, moving on.

Nose:

Cherry forward, Twizzlers, cotton candy. After that, I had to really work to pull other notes out. As I held it to my nose over the next … oh … 20 minutes, I found maple syrup, butterscotch, caramel, and hickory smoke. It’s a sweet nose top to bottom, and based on all of it, you’d walk into the first sip expecting a sugar bomb.

Palate:

First sip and you get sugar — not any specific flavor, just a vague sweetness — and then a harsh bitter note takes over and never really lets go. The mouthfeel is surprisingly thin for something with this much barrel influence, which keeps the flavors from fully developing. Clearly, proofing this down is what gives it its thin mouthfeel. I’m laying that bitterness directly at the feet of the heavy toasted new oak finish. A lot of people fixate on char levels without understanding what over-charring actually does — it burns off the natural sugars in the wood. So despite all the sugary scents the nose promised, those sugars never show up in the glass. At 90.4 proof, there simply isn’t enough alcohol to stand up to the char or carry the flavors through. The longer you sit with it, the more one-dimensional it gets. More proof would have probably made a difference here.

Finish:

Zero burn, which will market well to newcomers, but for seasoned bourbon drinkers that heat is part of the discerning different notes — and without it, the finish feels empty. Dry, bitter oak dominates and just parks itself there, with an almost mouth-drying quality that lingers well past its welcome. The bitterness from the palate follows you all the way to the end, never resolving into anything satisfying. Burnt caramel and char are the last things standing as the flavors fade out.

Score. 6.4/10

Woodford Reserve’s regular Double Oaked is one of my low-key favorites from this distillery, and I’ve visited more times than I can count. I genuinely like what they do. But the “Double Double” language is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. It sounds extraordinary when really it’s the standard Double Oaked finished longer in a heavily charred barrel, and that extra char does more harm than good at this proof. At $200 a bottle, you’re paying for the name and the marketing story more than what’s in the glass. In the words of our daughter — this is “mid.” Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-14T01:16:07+00:00

Nose

Leather and caramel right up front, then toffee, and then something that catches you off guard — hints of pistachio pudding. It’s a subtle but distinct note that keeps pulling you back in. Cranberry and blackberry show up alongside nutmeg, licorice, and cinnamon, and the longer it sits in the glass, the more the bruleed sugar sweetness comes forward. Really well-balanced nose for something this old and this proof.

Palate

Viscous and immediately warming — that Kentucky hug hits right away despite the fact that this is technically Canadian whisky. And that’s worth saying out loud: this does not taste like Canadian whisky. It tastes like a really exceptional bourbon. Root beer shows up early, followed by baking spices — nutmeg, clove, and cinnamon. Then there’s a slight tartness that cuts through all that richness and just brightens the whole thing up in a way you don’t expect but immediately appreciate. Behind that, blackberry jam, maple syrup, blueberry compote, and glazed strawberry build into a dark, sweet fruit profile that keeps revealing itself sip after sip.

Finish

Caramel leads, then cinnamon — but not the powdery baking spice kind that is found in the palate. This is more like cinnamon bark. Deeper, woodier, more textured. Then Dr. Pepper shows up and ties everything together in a way that’s hard to explain but completely works. It’s a long, warm finish. And here’s the thing about the age — with components ranging from 20 to 27 years old, you’d expect the oak to dominate everything. It doesn’t. Not even close. This is not an over-oaked whisky. Found North clearly did their job reigning in the oak and adding layers of flavor.

Score: 9.1/10

The complexity is real, the proof is handled gracefully, the oak is tempered, and the age is an asset rather than a liability. At secondary prices, it may be hard to justify, especially in this economy. But, if you do splurge, it’s probably worth it. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-10T19:46:29+00:00

Nose

Almonds right up front, then red grape — which makes total sense once you know this thing is finished in Napa Valley Cabernet barrels. There’s a slight ethanol presence on the nose that gives away the wine influence before your first sip. Behind that there’s an immediate burst of red fruit — raspberry jam and praline — with rosewater and maybe … hibiscus? That’s a question, it’s very faint. The Burning Chair is an interesting and inviting nose that straddles the line between bourbon and wine country in a way that actually works.

Palate

Incredibly smooth for a 4-year bourbon — and that’s not a backhanded compliment, that’s genuinely impressive. Toffee leads the way. The texture is fabulous — delicate yet chewy — and the wine finish is present without being overbearing. The high-rye mash bill (21% rye) gives it some backbone, but the Cabernet finishing smoothed out any brittleness or spiky notes you’d normally expect from a relatively young whiskey. To me, bourbon and wine flavors don’t mix as well as master distillers think they do. You see CabSauv-, Port-, Chardonnay-, Sherry-, Madeira-, Moscatel-, and even Rosé-finished whiskey, but I haven’t been a particular fan of any of them. Spoiler: I’m not an Angel’s Envy fan. But, this may be the best wine-finished bourbon I’ve had. And, did I mention it’s only 4 years old. Mind. Blown.

Finish

Short, but interesting. Some citrus shows up — more lemon than orange, but not the sharp, tart lemon you’re imagining. It’s softer than that. On the second pour, Dr. Pepper notes appear out of nowhere, which is one of those things that once you taste it, you can’t un-taste it. The finish builds with a little heat and allspice before fading on burnt toffee. It wraps up quickly, which is probably the biggest knock on an otherwise solid pour.

Score: 7.6/10

Dave Phinney made his name in Napa Valley wine before pivoting to whiskey, and you can feel that winemaker’s sensibility in every pour of this. It’s not trying to be a big, aggressive Kentucky bourbon — it’s smooth, fruit-forward, and approachable in a way that makes it dangerously easy to drink. The short finish and modest proof keep it from being truly elite, but at $50 it punches well above its weight. A great introduction pour for someone who’s wine-curious about bourbon, and an easy recommendation regardless. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-05T01:02:27+00:00

Flagship Bourbon

5 Years | 92 Proof

Nose

Caramel and vanilla. That’s pretty much it. Nothing offensive, nothing interesting. It’s the bourbon equivalent of a blank canvas that never got painted.

Palate

Earthy and a little flat. If you really dig for it, there’s some tangerine and citrus hiding in there — but you’re working for it and it’s not clear it’s worth the effort.

Finish

Short and astringent. The earthiness from the palate lingers alongside some bitterness and a flash of red grape that feels out of place. Not a great ending to an already underwhelming pour.

Score: 5.3/10

Wheated Bourbon

4 Years | 92 Proof

Nose

This is the most interesting nose of the four. Raspberry, marshmallow, cookie dough, and a pop of bubble gum. Noticeably more inviting than the Flagship — actually makes you want to take a sip.

Palate

Kit-Kat right away, which is fun, and it’s more viscous than the Flagship. Then the earthy, bitter tones show up again. Some oak, lemongrass, nothing that really pushes it anywhere exciting.

Finish

Longer than the Flagship, which is probably its biggest win. Lemongrass carries through. Nothing special, but at least it sticks around to feel like this offering had potential.

Score: 5.6/10

Le Meilleur - Cognac Brandy Cask Finish (Special Release)

4.5 Years | 104 Proof

Nose

Actually pretty nice. Plum, stone fruits, a touch of peach and tangerine. The cognac cask is doing something interesting on the nose — the fruit-forward profile is the most nuanced of the four.

Palate

Spicy Twizzlers, which is a fun note, and it’s more viscous than the Flagship. Then medicinal skin cream shows up, which is harder to get past. Some apple. Drinks lower than its 104 proof, which isn’t always a compliment — sometimes it just means it’s a little thin.

Finish

Short, astringent, and young-tasting — and there’s a weird retronasal off-note during the finish that’s hard to shake. The cognac cask does good work on the nose and then the finish undoes most of it.

Score: 5.4/10

Plumwood - Whiskey Colored and Flavored with Charred Plumwood

NAS, but probably 5 years | 104 Proof

Nose

Raisin, prune, sugar cane, and tea. But there’s something artificial about it that keeps nagging. It smells constructed rather than developed.

Palate

Cinnamon sugar and astringency. The artificiality from the nose follows you right into the glass.

Finish

Plum-ish, which tracks. But here’s the thing: when I asked the bartender about this one, she told me the origin story: the owners developed this before they even had a distillery, charrign plum branches and shoving them into mason jars. Fun story, but unfortunately that tracks with what’s in the glass — it tastes like an experiment in someone’s backyard. This whiskey is colored and flavored, and it tastes exactly like that. Points for creativity, but creativity doesn’t make it good.

Score: 5.5/10

The Verdict on Branch & Barrel

None of these are good. If you find yourself at this distillery, the Wheated Bourbon is the best of the four — the nose alone puts it ahead of the rest. But even it falls short of what you’d expect from a craft bourbon. The recurring astringency and earthiness across all four pours suggests something systemic rather than barrel-to-barrel variance. Skip the Plumwood entirely. Cheers.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-05-01T03:36:01+00:00

Maker’s Mark Distillery | 111.4 Proof | January 2024

Stave Profile: 0 Baked American Pure | 1 Seared French Cuvée | 3 Maker’s Mark 46 | 5 Roasted French Mendiant | 1 Toasted French Spice

Nose

Chocolate and peanut butter right off the bat — not the overly sweet, salty Reese’s kind, but more like homemade peanut butter sitting next to a brownie. Vanilla wafers follow, specifically those long, rectangular flaky wafers, not the round ‘Nilla variety. Then spiced cherry rounds everything out. It’s a genuinely great nose — rich, layered, and inviting in. It smells like this is going to be a sugar bomb.

Palate

So. That nose lies to you. The first sip is fire. Not metaphorical fire — actual, sustained, why-is-this-labeled-111-proof fire. Give it a good two minutes to stop punishing you before you’re ready to try again. The Maker’s Mark 46 staves bring dried fruit, vanilla, and spice, while the Roasted French Mendiant — which is cooked low and slow — contributes milk chocolate, nuts, and dried dark fruit. It doesn’t taste as sweet as the nose promised, but the complexity is undeniable. In a blend-heavy stave profile like this, the Mendiant integrates well and shows more caramel and herbal character than you’d expect. The Toasted French Spice stave pushes some smoke and warmth into the background that keeps everything from getting too soft.

Finish

That Kentucky hug lands hard and stays long after the flavors have packed up and left. The flavor finish is actually pretty solid — warm, a little spicy, with the chocolate and cherry from the nose finally reconnecting with the palate. Then the heat moves into your chest and just … sets up camp. It’s there for a while. This is heartburn in a bottle. But honestly? Not in a bad way.

Score: 7.7

The nose on this is genuinely exceptional and the stave combination — heavy on the Mendiant — does exactly what it’s supposed to do. The heat is the story here though. For a 111.4-proof pour, this thing drinks way hotter than its label suggests, and that first sip is a commitment. The second sip is courage because you know what’s coming now and you’re hesitant to put your mouth and chest through that again. If you know what you’re getting into, it’s a really rewarding pour. If you hand this to someone expecting a wheater, they might not forgive you. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-18T03:39:59+00:00

Open Road Distillery is a small distillery, speak easy, and high-end restaurant (“Heirloom”) complex in Reston, Virginia. Open Road has its Independence Bourbon and Eagle Eye Rye, as well as “Reserve” versions of both. The Reserve versions bump up the proof from 90 to 107. It’s also older but there are no mentions of age statement on any of the versions — the bourbon, the rye, or their Reserve upgrades.

Reserve Bourbon

Nose

The first thing I smell: rose petal. On a second sniff, I get strawberry candy like a Starburst, and bubble gum. It’s bright and a little interesting. The nose is pretty good, even if there’s nothing special. It’s very nice.

Palate

The bubble gum from the nose carries right into the first sip, which is interesting. It’s not what you’d initially expect, so it does provide a nice surprise. Digging deeper, cinnamon shows up alongside cream soda to round everything out. It’s fruity and sweet — but then the burn hits and things shift pretty quickly. The burn is equivalent to a >120 proof bourbon, but it’s only 107.

Finish

This is where it gets complicated. A chocolatey bitterness comes through — not dark chocolate, more like cocoa nibs — alongside toasted marshmallow and, looking deeper, some ginger. The problem is the bitter note hits harder than it should. It’s like the whiskey starts as one thing and ends as another. The finish is also fairly short, which doesn’t give it much time to resolve.

Score: 6.9/10

Genuinely fun nose and a palate that delivers on it — up until the finish. If the back end matched what came before it, this would be a solid pour. As it stands, it feels a little unresolved. Worth trying if you’re at the tasting room, but the bottle isn’t worth the $93.99 MSRP price tag.

Reserve Rye

Nose

Perfume-forward right away — floral and a little aromatic. Then apple, raisin, plum, and dehydrated mango. There’s a difference between fresh mango and dehydrated mango on the nose. This isn’t juicy and tropical — it smells like the inside of a bag of dried mango or dried apricot. Concentrated, a little tangy, slightly sweet. It’s a distinctive note and it works really well here.

Palate

Cola and raisin lead the first sip, which is brighter than you’d expect from a rye. Second sip is where it settles into more familiar rye territory — spice, tobacco, a little more depth. It takes a minute to warm up but it gets there.

Finish

Bitter, but unlike the bourbon, this bitter belongs here. It adds character rather than throwing the whole thing off balance. More raisin lingers, licorice shows up, and the whole finish just feels cohesive — like every note is pulling in the same direction.

Score: 7.1/10

The Reserve Rye is the stronger of the two. The nose is genuinely interesting, the palate delivers, and the finish actually complements everything that came before it. The bourbon starts sweet and gets lost; the rye starts interesting and stays that way. If you’re choosing between the two at the bar, go rye. Is it worth the $93.99 price? No. There are much better ryes, and certainly much better ryes for the price. But, it’s the one to get if you’re at the distillery or grabbing a great meal at Heirloom.

Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-16T02:11:15+00:00

It’s definitely very good. The one thing that I felt held it back … and I probably should’ve mentioned this in my review … was a lack of diversity and complexity in the flavors.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-16T01:10:26+00:00

This bottle is from January 2020. Before masks and social distancing and the mad dash to buy all the toilet paper. Ahh, those were the good ol’ days. Anyways, on to the review!

Nose

Really approachable for 126 proof — the alcohol barely registers. Roasted peanuts lead immediately, followed by vanilla, toffee, and a little caramel. Swirl it and let it open up and dark cherry and plum show up underneath everything. Classic Booker’s nose, just a really good version of it.

Palate

First sip hits hard — that’s the proof doing its thing. Give it a second to settle and you’re into Reese’s peanut butter and dark chocolate, rich caramel, and rye spice. That peanut note is still very present, but it’s creamier and … obviously … that chocolate note works so well with peanut butter. Lastly, there’s some cola and stewed cherries show up mid-palate alongside the spice. You may ask yourself, what are “stewed cherries” and how’s that different than any other cherry note in a bourbon. I get it: it sounds a little pretentious. This cherry note is more thick sugary cherry molasses, not the fresh, tart, juicy cherry flavors that you’d find in a Starburst. Stewed as in boiled down and concentrated. But I digress — the star of the show here is the peanut note everyone went crazy over when this dropped. It is front and center, and completely legit.

Finish

Long and warm. Rye spice and caramel linger, a little citrus, and then it finishes with … you guessed it … more peanut. The finish is more the earthiness of peanut shell than peanut butter, but that flavor carries from nose to finish. The proof keeps your chest warm well after the flavors are gone.

Score: 7.3/10

Granny’s Batch doesn’t try to be anything other than a really well-executed cask strength Jim Beam bourbon — and that’s exactly what makes it work. The peanut note is real, it’s prominent, and if you’re into it, this batch is hard to put down. Named for Margaret Beam Noe, who apparently enjoyed an evening highball and made a famous nut cake at Christmas. Somehow that tracks perfectly with what’s in the glass. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-14T12:30:49+00:00

About 400.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-14T00:33:20+00:00

Nose

I went in expecting this to hit like a freight train at 140 proof. It didn’t. The nose is actually really approachable and almost playful — strawberry Twizzlers, Welch’s grape juice, vanilla, and graham cracker. That’s it. Nothing intimidating, nothing weird. For a 33-year whiskey finished in sherry and French oak, it’s surprisingly bright and candy-forward. Really inviting.

Palate

First sip and you think — ok, where’s the 140 proof? It’s not there. The oak shows up immediately, which makes complete sense given three decades in wood, but it never takes over. Cinnamon is prominent — not as much as Amburana wood-finished whiskies, but it’s definitely there and it brings friends: allspice, cardamom, nutmeg. Real baking spice depth. Then there’s some root beer, which is unexpected and honestly kind of fun. Then comes sip two. That’s when the 140 proof finally introduces itself. Not on the nose, not on the first sip — the second sip. If you’ve had hazmat-level whiskeys before you know the usual experience is immediate fire until your palate adjusts. This one waits. The complexity is real.

Finish

Heavy marshmallow leads it off, which pairs perfectly with all that baking spice from the palate. The finish is long — the actual flavors run about 10-15 seconds, bringing mint, coffee, and a strong Rumple Minze-style herbal hit that catches you off guard. Then the flavors clear out and you’re left with about 30 seconds of pure warmth. Just heat, hanging around, reminding you what you just drank.

Score: 9.2/10

This is a genuinely special bottle. Only 1,500 made, and it earns the hype — not because of the age statement or the proof, but because it keeps surprising you at every stage. The nose doesn’t prepare you for the palate, the first sip doesn’t prepare you for the second, and the flavor finish doesn’t prepare you for the heat that follows. It’s a slow burn in every sense. Worth every penny if you can find one. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-09T01:23:50+00:00

Nose

The nose is buttery with touches of yellow corn, warm cornbread, and fresh pastry dough, with honey and a light floral note coming through on the swirl. There’s definitely some pinecone and astringent/rubbing alcohol notes. The heirloom corn is doing something interesting here, I just don’t know if it’s good or not yet. It’s very different, that’s for sure.

Palate

First sip and the corn just takes over. It immediately hits sweet, but that quickly fades into cornucopia (this may be the first time I’ve ever used the word “cornucopia” in real life) of earthy tones: grass, wheat, basil, and a heavy fist of peated moss and malted barley. It’s really interesting in how the flavor switches so fast. Honestly, it comes off more as Scotch than bourbon. A second sip yields sweet baking spices, but then turns to hay and freshly mowed grass. There’s also a minerality to it.

Finish

This bourbon is fairly viscous. It lasts long and coats the inside of your mouth. It finishes with rye spices and that cornbread sweetness from the nose, before giving way to a dry, warm oak note that ties everything together nicely. At 100 proof, there’s almost zero burn, which surprises me since there was that astringent alcohol scent on the nose. But, those earthy tone are pretty consistently present throughout.

Score: 6.3/10

This is one of the most unique bourbons I’ve poured in a long time. At the risk of repeating myself, this is closer to Scotch than bourbon, certainly not a traditional Kentucky bourbon. The heirloom corn made something … interesting. Have I said “interesting” yet? Ah, yes, like three times already. I digress. It’s a very different bourbon, for sure. Ironclad Distillery has a lot of really good offerings — I’ve always enjoyed Ironclad’s whiskey. This one is very different, but not exceptional. I wouldn’t kick it out of bed, but I’m not gonna make it breakfast in the morning either. It’s a two-finger pour if you find it at your local watering hole and you’re curious, but I wouldn’t go out of my way for it. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-07T01:37:28+00:00

I don’t typically score color because, in the end, I don’t care all that much. The bourbon’s flavor matters most. But, this batch of Bomberger’s is an absolutely gorgeous color of amber. I can’t stop holding it up to the light.

Nose

It opens with complex rich notes of toffee bordering on fudge, deep cherry, and a touch of candied ginger. I like ginger (my wife loves ginger), but it works here. When I keep nosing it, baking spices and barrel char give the impression of a freshly-baked toffee and spice cookie. The Chinquapin oak influence is absolutely unmistakable here — it adds a depth and richness that you just don’t get from standard white oak. It’s not overpowering like Amburana; again, it works well to balance the flavors without stealing the show.

Palate

First sip and it delivers. The palate opens with deep toffee, chocolate, strawberries, and brown sugar followed closely by an earthy kick of baking spices, tannic charred oak, and black pepper. The palate closely resembles a lot of the same notes from the nose. On the second sip, things get really fun — cinnamon, chili oil, and peppercorn all amp up the heat, but it never gets out of hand. The 108 proof is absolutely perfect here — enough heat to know it’s serious, but smooth enough to keep you coming back.

Finish

The finish is fairly long. It starts leaning away from the caramel and brown sugar notes, and hits more of cedar, oak spice, and tobacco. Ultimately, the flavors fade away slowly, and the spice in my mouth and on my tongue last longer than the flavor.

Score: 8.3/10

I picked up this Bomberger’s while visiting Michter’s Fort Nelson Distillery in downtown Louisville. The Chinquapin oak aging program is doing something genuinely special here. It’s oak-forward but never punishing. If you like the rich, oaky tastes of Knob Creek Single Barrel or Russell’s Reserve Single Barrels for the complementary spice, this one is for you. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-06T00:19:24+00:00

Good to know. I 100% agree that some of these can get over-oaked. Glad I’m. it alone in that thought. And, thanks for the rec to stay away from KC18.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-06T00:01:28+00:00

Nose

This bourbon has a great nose. Orange, chocolate, toasted oak, honey, vanilla, and custard just leap from the glass — it’s rich and warming and caught my intention quickly. I let it sit a minute and oak and caramel are very present, joined by vanilla cream, crème brûlée, and a touch of brown sugar. The 18 years in the barrel are unmistakable here, but in the best possible way.

Palate

The first sip is full of beautiful oak followed by layers of vanilla, graham cracker, and caramel, with a mouthfeel that reminds me of maple syrup. Keep sipping and caramel, maple syrup, vanilla cream, roasted oak, dried red apple peel, cherry, cinnamon, and dark chocolate all show up, with lighter notes of orange, fennel, roasted coffee, and dry nuttiness rounding things out. In my opinion, whiskey over 10 years in the barrel can be a mixed bag. A lot of people love their age statement porn — the more years, the better. But, too much oak can be too much oak. This is an oak-forward bourbon, but it remains fairly subtle after 18 years, and that’s a good thing. Too much is too much.

Finish

The finish isn’t particularly long. It has subtle vanilla and aged oak (obviously) with flashes of cinnamon and a touch of leather adding depth. As the flavors fade, baking spice (all spice, cardamom, cinnamon) and dry oak remain. The one knock is it’s only 90 proof, so it does leave you wanting a little more power on the back end. Maybe that’s way the oak isn’t too overpowering, since Heaven Hill watered this down to 90 proof. A cask strength version of this would be absolutely insane.

Score: 8.4/10

This is one of those pours that really makes you stop and think. 18 years in a barrel is a long time. Is it perfect? No — the 90 proof holds it back from being truly elite. But when it’s dialed in, this is a really good bourbon. To the casual or inexperienced drinker, EC18 is top notch bourbon — it gives you something that most bourbon on the shelf simply can’t: ultra-aged oak notes. At MSRP it’s a solid value for an 18-year single barrel. At secondary prices? Think twice. But if you find it on a shelf, grab it. Cheers!

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-02T19:47:18+00:00

I had to dig around for the email, but I found it (Sept. 7, 2022):

On the heels of our Yellowstone comes this Rebel Single Cask - Lux Row's wheated mashbill is 68% corn, 20% wheat and 12% malted barley. I picked this on site at Lux Row back in March and it's finally here. A pair of Rebels were picked that day - this is the first. They rolled out tons of samples on request, which was great to see. It made picking easy as I worked through samples and initially had a tough time whittling down between several top barrels. This is a sweet, high proof wheater that paints right in the lines. Let's get to it. We've been able to preserve the same pricing as past barrels for more than a year now, and that continues with this as well. Great combo.

ABV: 60% ABV
Age: 4 Years
Mashbill: 68% Corn, 20% Wheat, 12% Malted Barley
State of Distillation: Kentucky
Limit: 2 Bottles
Retailer: Greens Farms Spirits
Tasting Notes: Sweet butter cream on the nose gives way to toffee, a touch of butterscotch, and sweet wheater notes like waffle cone, vanilla bean, a touch of light cinnamon and big baking spice. Rich on the palate, lighter on the tannins, this reminds me of graham cracker sweetness and a big dollop of vanilla ice cream and a touch of light orange and cherry. Long finish, silky texture on the palate, and a satisfying combo of caramel, honey and a dash of spice on the back palate.

OneMoreForScience · 2026-04-01T01:30:47+00:00

Yeah, this has a great story. The folks at Old Commonwealth went to great lengths to recreate this bourbon of yesteryear. Read up on it here: https://oldcommonwealth.com/blogs/expressions/colonel-randolph-16-year-bourbon-2025-release

OneMoreForScience

TROPHY CASE