15 VS. 17

by **ScotchPalate** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 5:46 pm

I would like to try the Macallan Fine Oak Range.

The 15 & 17 are both highly rated. (I'm not sure of the 17 is a US only expression).

by **peergynt323** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:31 am

The 15yo is a lot like the 12yo. I think the 17yo is slightly better, but not worth the price. So, I'd recommend the 15yo.

by **Deactivated Member** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:00 am

I can;t get to grips with the fine oak series at all. I know that many rave about them, but when I tried the range at WL Glasgow 05, I was really disappointed. I far prefer their sherried efforts.

by **Deactivated Member** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 11:07 am

A lovely little (Freudian?) slip there SP as your poll seems to offer an inadvertant comment about the price of some Macalloans! :lol:

I also don't particularly like the FO range and would personally prefer a more traditional and sherried Macallan. But I do realise that we all have different tastes and preferences, so good luck with whichever you decide upon.
MT

by **Deactivated Member** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:37 pm

Haven't had the 17. Thought the 15 was a nice malt. Comparison to sherried Macs is inevitable, I guess, but it makes as much sense to me to say "I'd rather have an Ardbeg." That wasn't the question!

by **ScotchPalate** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 7:10 pm

Macalloan! That's hilarious!! Too bad that was an accident and not intentional!

Tattie,
If you didn't submit, at least in part, a response that wasn't a little of topic, I'd be worried about you

. Maybe I should just grab an Ardbeg 10

by **Deactivated Member** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 7:32 pm

I thought I was trying to keep the other guys on-topic!

by **Lawrence** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 7:54 pm

I like the FO15 quite a lot; I just have to think of it as another Speysider other than Macallan. It has lots of flavour and many good qualities.