Craigellachie 18, 1995 (Hepburn’s Choice for K&L)

Craigellachie 18, 1995, K&L
I don’t have very much experience with Craigellachie; in fact, I’m not sure if I’ve had anything other than this G&M bottling for the Party Source. As with Diageo’s Mortlach, Craigellachie produces a heavier, meaty spirit and the G&M cask I tried was as close to Mortlach as I’ve come from any other distillery. I did like that one quite a bit and so have been on the look out for more since: of course, there hasn’t been very much of it around—especially in the US—since, as with so many distilleries, it mostly produces for blends (it is a core component of the Dewars blends). The owners, Bacardi announced last year that they would be launching a new range of single malts from Craigellachie. The new 13, 17 and 23 year olds have been well-received, on the whole, but from what I can tell they’re not deeply sherried brutes. And so when K&L announced this single sherry cask I put aside my misgivings based on their 2013 selections and got a bottle.

Well, I opened it for my local group’s April tasting and it was quite popular. Due to the vagaries of schedules we actually did two small group tastings separated by a couple of weeks, and while I liked it fine the first time, I liked it even more on the second occasion. Let’s see what I think of it now that it’s been open for about a month.

Craigellachie 18, 1995 (54.3%; Hepburn’s Choice for K&L; single sherry butt; from my own bottle)

Nose: Organic notes at first (rotting leaves, manure) and rubber; sweeter sherry notes below (raisins, orange). Gets saltier as it sits and that organic note is quite reminiscent of mossy peat. Tart apples too now along with some brighter citrus (lemon). After a bit the rubbery note transitions to camphor/mothballs; just a touch of cocoa powder too. With water the apricot that showed up late on the palate shows up on the nose as well. That mossy, peaty note is still around but it’s in the background now.

Palate: Quite salty arrival with the citrus (orange peel) expanding below it; the organic notes are here too but not as dominant. On the second sip there’s lemon and then an increasingly bitter zesty edge (not unappealingly so). With more time it gets fruitier in a slightly cough syrupy kind of way. With even more time the lemon peel is less bitter and there’s a bit of honey and some apricot too now. Water makes it fruitier and sweeter still but also less interesting as those more bracing notes recede almost entirely.

Finish: Long. The zesty citrus hangs around a while, picking up salt and oak spice along the way. The sherry separates just a tad at the end (the taste of blood/iron in the mouth). As on the palate with water.

Comments: I don’t think this is likely to be a crowd-pleaser: it’s a bit extreme at first, or, more accurately, it’s a very particular “dirty” sherried style. I don’t mean to suggest that only true adepts will like this; only that it’s a very particular style and probably not for everyone (especially not for people who don’t like any notes of sulphur). At least, that’s the case if you drink it fast. Give it a lot of time, air and eventually some water and it’ll mellow out nicely.

Rating: 87 points.

8 thoughts on “Craigellachie 18, 1995 (Hepburn’s Choice for K&L)

  1. Yum manure. Now I really can’t wait to open my bottle. Though in all seriousness I do think it sounds very nice. Those kind of notes are what makes exploring a whisky interesting. Who wants boring whisky? Not me!


    • Puke is one of the founding pillars of whisky enjoyment. I guess I am fine with that too. I have heard of people who dislike Talisker for that very reason but I find the note interesting. Its like salty, vegetal, and slightly sour but those things sometimes hit all at once which can be a little off putting to some. Still enjoyable for me.


  2. Thanks for the timely review! Of course, I then blew my budget on the Vallein Tercinier Lot 65 which I’d posted about on some forum ages ago to which some guy named Mongo famously noted: “it’s hard enough keeping up with serge with whisky.” Which was true enough but now who’s laughing?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.