Today’s post brings us to the Springbank 18. To be fair, I got to the 18 after the very interesting Vintage 1997 and the Gaja Barolo finish, and must admit that it came a bit short of its younger brethren, which is very surprising. There is sherry on the nose, but a good deal of vanilla points to some of it being aged in ex bourbon casks.
Photo Credit: www.allthingswhisky.com/
Springbank 18 (2nd Edition) (46% ABV, NCF, NC)
Color: Copper with slow legs.
Nose: Licorice, honey, plum, light peat and sherry notes.
Palate: Oily and full bodied with notes of mango, pepper and clove.
Linger: Long and peppery.
Conclusion
Although being an 18 Year Old, I find this expression less appealing than both the 12 Year Old Cask Strength and the 15 Year old.
I might be a bit weird, but this isn’t the only example in which I prefer younger expression over an older one in the core range of some distilleries (Highland Park and Glenfiddich come to mind).
yup same for me too.
plus i prefer the 15 year from bowmore,glenfarclas and glendronach to their 18 year sibblings.
i guess i have a semicheap taste 🙂
Manny,
I view it as judging each whisky on its merits, and choosing based on the liquid, not the label.
🙂
Nice review. We tried this 18 yo a while ago and it was good, but also prefer the younger expressions.
Jeannette
http://whiskyoftheweek.co.uk/
Thanks Jeannette,
This opinion caused quite a stir with Springbank buffs who claimed post 21 years it becomes totally amazing.
I have yet to try anything post 21 years old from Springbank, so I’ll stick to my guns at this point 🙂
Michael
By the way, I have since had the 25 year old, and I still think that the 15 is a better whisky.