Dewar Rattray

by **Dubois** » Wed May 03, 2006 5:44 pm

Hi folks,

Do you have some experience with Dewar Rattray's bottlings ?
If you do,how are they & which one do you have ?

Thanks !

by **Bullie** » Wed May 03, 2006 5:54 pm

I do like their Grain-bottlings.

Their Invergordon from 1964 is brilliant.

by **BruceCrichton** » Wed May 03, 2006 6:30 pm

Dewar Rattray are usually brilliant.

They were at the Speyside festival, in Dufftown, and did a roaring trade.

Be sure to get their 12 year old Stronachie, which is a delicious example of a Speyside malt.

by **Bullie** » Wed May 03, 2006 6:41 pm

BruceCrichton wrote:Be sure to get their 12 year old Stronachie, which is a delicious example of a Speyside malt.

This bottling is no produced anymore, so if you find it, buy it...

by **The Dazzler** » Wed May 03, 2006 10:13 pm

Have tried a few of the Dewar Rattray range and would probably agree with Bullie and opt for the Invergordon 40yo being my favourite. However this would be closely followed by a Caperdonich 24yo which is available at the Bow bar. Other firm favourites from Dewar rattray are Glencadam 15yo, Linkwood 19yo, Mortlach 15yo and Bunnahabhain 27yo.

Slainte

by **BruceCrichton** » Thu May 04, 2006 2:10 am

Bullie wrote:
BruceCrichton wrote:Be sure to get their 12 year old Stronachie, which is a delicious example of a Speyside malt.

This bottling is no produced anymore, so if you find it, buy it...

When did you hear this?

It wasn't mentioned at the whisky festival.

by **Bullie** » Thu May 04, 2006 10:45 am

BruceCrichton wrote:
Bullie wrote:
BruceCrichton wrote:Be sure to get their 12 year old Stronachie, which is a delicious example of a Speyside malt.

This bottling is no produced anymore, so if you find it, buy it...

When did you hear this?

It wasn't mentioned at the whisky festival.

About a month ago. As I understod it, it was a question about the name of it. I'll try to get some more info on this...

by **PeatPirate** » Thu May 04, 2006 11:25 am

Hi all,

I do like their Grain-bottlings. Their Invergordon from 1964 is brilliant.

I agree fully with you Bullie. It's one of my favourite whiskies of all time.

Bowmore 1990 Bourbon cask 15y 55.7 % is also a stunner. A clean, peaty "islay-style" Bowmore.

The Bruichladdich 1993 Dewar Rattray, 12y, 55.1 % is a rich and fruity laddie, and very nice too.

Greetz PP

by **Lawrence** » Thu May 04, 2006 5:47 pm

All we have here is the Ailsa Craig blend, I've invited them to the Victoria Whisky Festival in January 2007 in an effort to encourage them to expand their range available here.

by **The Dazzler** » Tue May 16, 2006 7:34 am

Stronnachie will not be getting stopped. I think Bullie has heard of the new rulings from the SWA that bottles of single malt in future must state the distillery source of the whisky in the bottle. In the case of Stronnachie it will state in small print under the word STRONNACHIE. These rules are to come in to effect later in the year. Far from dissapearing their will be a 17yo Stronnachie available soon and also a limited edition 30yo.

Slainte

by **kallaskander** » Tue May 16, 2006 8:29 am

Hi there,

hello dazzler, do you have further information on the SWA ruling concerning the origin of a whisky?

I would strongly aprove of that because more and more distilleries tend to see their name as a trademark like Glenfarclas does and therefore we have the likes of "Blairfindy" "Ballindaloch" "Anonymas" and so on. To be fair, the owning companies and their marketing departments are behind this development. But I would like to know what is in the bottle I am about to buy without having to consult a reference list before.
It seems LVMH has stopped Gordon&MacPhail from using the name Ardbeg on further Spirit of Scotland bottlings and so on.
Not to forget the Secret Stills No. 01 01 by G&M themselves.

So yes, I am all for the name of the producing distillery on the label of independent bottlers or on any other bottle of whisky.

Greetings
kallaskander

by **The Dazzler** » Tue May 16, 2006 9:14 am

Kallaskander,

Hi, this SWA ruling comes off the back of the "Cardhu" confussing label scenario. It is a way of the distillers stopping crazy names being used in place of the actual whisky, ie Leapfrog etc etc. However the flip-side is that independant bottlers will infact state the distillery of origin, to which distillers may frown upon further.

Glenfarclas are very keen on their whisky being bottled only by themselves. It is not illegal for independant bottlers to bottle Glenfarclas however the legalities come with the trademark of the name. In future a Ballindalloch would have to state Glenfarclas on it and this i imagine would upset Mr Grant even further. In future such disitllers I imagine will put tighter selling controls on casks or stop selling 100% casks all together, instead selling a cask of 99% X and 1% Y so that the blender still gets his wanted style and the distiller can be rest assured that if that particular cask is bottled as a single malt in future the bottler can be in trouble.

Not sure who the winners or losers are on this, though I have thought for a long time that unfortunately the independant bottler will be squeezed out of the "big brand" market so far that everyone will be selling more brands such as Glendullan, Benrinnes, etc and less Ardbeg, Bowmore, Springbank, Macallan. Lets hope this is a long time away!!

Slainte

by **kallaskander** » Tue May 16, 2006 1:18 pm

Hi there,

that makes two of us. Thank you.

Greetings
kallaskander

by **Jan** » Fri May 19, 2006 5:40 am

The Dazzler wrote: Not sure who the winners or losers are on this, though I have thought for a long time that unfortunately the independant bottler will be squeezed out of the "big brand" market so far that everyone will be selling more brands such as Glendullan, Benrinnes, etc and less Ardbeg, Bowmore, Springbank, Macallan. Lets hope this is a long time away!!

Amen to that. I guess to losers would be the enthusiast community world wide.

Cheers
Jan

by **Lawrence** » Fri May 19, 2006 5:19 pm

If the SWA becomes too draconian members will simply leave and thus not be bound by their absurd and pointless rules.