Okay, let’s do another older Glen Ord bottled by Cadenhead. This is 10 years older than Wednesday’s 21 yo (yes, that makes it 31 years old) and was bottled in 2014 from a single bourbon hogshead. I think this might be the oldest Glen Ord I’ve yet had. Considering how much I like the official 30 yo—and the fact that I really liked Wednesday’s 21 yo—I have my hopes up. Will they be fulfilled? Let’s see.
Glen Ord 31, 1983 (51%; Cadenhead; single bourbon hogshead; from a bottle split)
Nose: Malty and a little bready off the top and then on the second sniff too. There’s some lemon and some wax as well but mostly it’s the malt that registers. After a minute or so fruit begins to emerge, mostly in the citrus family: lemon and grapefruit; some gooseberry too. Muskier with water and the lemon turns to citronella.
Palate: Leads with the acidic fruit here; the malt is present as well but not as pronounced as it was on the nose on arrival. Barely any oak for a 31 yo whisky—nothing tannic at any rate. Very nice, thick texture. Gets sweeter as it goes. As it sits it gets maltier here too and also a little peppery. Okay, let’s see what water does. Well, it pulls out more of the citrus and it’s muskier here too now; some pineapple too.
Finish: Long. The oak pops out here—again, not tannic at all—but there’s not a whole lot of new development. With time it’s sweeter and more peppery here as well.
Comments: The few people who’ve reviewed this on Whiskybase seem to have found a lot more fruit in it than I did. This may possibly be a function of how long the bottle had been open before I got my pour (I don’t know how long that is). I did get more fruit with water but not at the level of the OB 28 or 30. Still, I like it a lot.
Rating: 88 points. (Pulled up by water.)
My Annoying Opinions 
I wouldn’t rush to the conclusion that this 31yr CA Ord is the same as the one on WB which is a 700ml. This bottle is a 750ml for the US and did not have the tasting notes on the back like the WB version. I’ve previously asked Cadenhead’s if this was a split cask with the U.S. Unfortunately, the crickets are still chirping.
LikeLike
Good point—thanks for catching that. So, do my notes track with yours?
LikeLike
It’s certainly not a fruit bomb and to me it was reminiscent of fresh fruit (immediate acidity – in a good way) that didn’t linger too long. And you make a great point about it not being tannic, gotta give CA credit for not letting this one sit longer.
I remember doing a side x side with the official 30yr when I first opened my CA in September. The 30yr to me was a fruit compote compared to the CA 31. A mutual friend made a comp of the 31 to Clynelish which i thought was accurate.
LikeLike