December 3, 2014

A bag of Bowmore part four

These have been bottled at a high strength, if not always at the ‘natural cask strength’. We’ll focus on recent vintages.

Bowmore 10 yo 'Tempest' (55.9%, OB, Batch #5, 2014)

I’ve always enjoyed the Tempest, but tended to think that the newer batches had a little too much sweet oak. That’s the enemy in my book, and I find it really scary to hear distinguished industry people talk exclusively about oak these days. Like ‘Eh, next year we’ll launch a new exclusive virgin oak version, eh, we’re very excited…’ Ermnlmrnrdr… ! Colour: gold. Nose: the tropical fruits are doing the talking at first nosing (fresh pineapples), and then there’s quite a lot of limoncello and vanilla, and only a moderate brininess. Fresh oak starting to talk very loudly after ten seconds, although I wouldn’t call this baby ‘planky’. With water: hints of… our beloved wet dogs, seawater, cold tea, cinnamon… Mouth (neat): starts very creamy, very lemony, very peaty (for Bowmore) and very briny, but once again, the oak starts to feel a little more than I would have liked – but that’s me, obviously. Bags and bags of pepper after a short while. With water: very fine, but the oak’s tannicity got even more obvious. Finish: quite long, with a little aniseed and menthol, which I enjoy. Comments: as I said. Still very, very good, no doubt, but I’m not a huge fan of loud oak. Again, that’s me. SGP:565 - 83 points.

Bowmore 2002/2013 (56.8%, Malts of Scotland, bourbon hogshead, cask #13048, 282 bottles)

Bowmore 2002/2013 (56.8%, Malts of Scotland, bourbon hogshead, cask #MoS 13048, 282 bottles)

Colour: very pale white wine. Nose: a rather feinty one at first nosing, which is a little strange. Raw plum spirit, bread, yeast, wet wool… A very raw nose, not very peaty. With water: more leaven, white bread, baker’s yeast, old clothes… and all that. Very unusual, as if the cask had done, well, nothing but filtering out the fruitiness. Mouth (neat): very young, extremely punchy, on applejack, seawater (remember when we were swallowing mouthfuls when we were kids?), bitter tea and pear drops. Raw ultra-young Bowmore! With water: better I have to say. I mean, more to my liking, but it remains a little newmaky and raw. Finish: long, grassier, rough, bitterish. Very ashy and peppery aftertaste, but there’s a little lemon too. Comments: a brutal youngster. I think Malts of Scotland had/have many much better Bowmores – well all of the other ones, this is an exception in my book. The exception that proves the rule. SGP:375 - 77 points.

Proof? There…

Bowmore 1999/2011 (61.2%, Malts of Scotland, bourbon hogshead, cask #MoS 110014, 290 bottles)

That’s the earlier livery. Colour: white wine. Nose: it’s not that this baby’s much more complex or refined than the previous one, it’s just that it’s much cleaner, straighter, more essentially Bowmore (as they say in magazines). Now there’s a farmy side to it, a nose of working kiln, and bags and bags of ashes. A fireplace the next morning. With water: really, it’s the kiln! Barley, peat smoke, old wood, the workers’ aftershave (hey I’m joking!) And just a drop of poire williams. Mouth (neat): bang! Nails you a bit at this strength, but I like this citrus mingled with a huge smokiness. With water: impeccable whistle-clean Bowmoreness. Ashy lemony sooty briny peat. Finish: long, maybe a tad acrid, but that’s more than all right. Comments: phew! SGP:357 - 85 points.

Check the index of all Bowmore I've tasted so far

Pete McPeat and Jack Washback