Glen Ord 31, 1983 (Cadenhead)

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.)

3 thoughts on “Glen Ord 31, 1983 (Cadenhead)

  1. 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.


      • 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.


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.