Longrow 14, 2010 Release

Let’s make it two weeks in a row of reviews of peated whiskies. This also rounds out a week of reviews with terrifically low utility. On Wednesday I reviewed a Caol Ila sold exclusively at the distillery in 2017; on Monday I reviewed a Port Ellen released in 2011. Today I have a Longrow 14 that was released in 2010. The last Longrow 14 I reviewed was from the 2011 release, so I appear to be going backwards in time. Someday I hope to review one released less than nine years ago (I don’t seem to have any in the stash). If you’ve had a more recent release perhaps you can tell me if my notes on the 2010 and 2011 releases track with what the 14 yo is like now. Okay, on to the review!

Longrow 14, 2010 Release (46%; from a sample from a friend)

Nose: The usual Longrow goodness. That is to say, sweet, mineral peat along with a bit of coal smoke and below all of that lemon and salt. The lemon gets more preserved as it sits and there’s some savoury gunpowder. A few drops of water brightens the lemon up a bit.

Palate: As promised by the nose. Maybe more smoke here. The texture stop just short of being a little too thin. As it sits familiar savoury notes emerge: coriander seed, mustard. And there’s that familiar Springbank sackcloth as well. Not much change here with water: a little less smoke maybe. The texture is not improved.

Finish: Long. The smoke goes on for a good while as does the preserved lemon. Quite peppery at the very end (cracked black pepper). Some wet stones with water.

Comments: This is very good as basic, un-messed with Longrow almost always is. I had more to say about the 2011 release but I like this a bit more (or maybe I’ve gotten easier to please in the last seven years).

Rating: 88 points.


3 thoughts on “Longrow 14, 2010 Release

  1. Looks like the last release was in 2012, so that’ll be difficult to pull off. But I’ll check my remaining bottle to see when it was released. I think I got it right before MoM shipping went through the roof, so it might be that recent.


      • I haven’t seen the 14 Year since then, so it appears to be well and gone, much like the 10 Year. It’s frustrating for everyone who liked them, but given that there seems to be no upper limit on demand for Springbank, there isn’t much reason for them to change course.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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.