Introduction
Today, we're diving into the 1792 Small Batch Bourbon, a whiskey that somehow has eluded our podcast until now. This is a bit surprising since Bob has had a bottle on his shelf for years, and it’s a staple for many whiskey enthusiasts. Over the next five weeks, we'll be exploring five different expressions from 1792, starting with their flagship product, the Small Batch.
This bourbon comes in at 93.7 proof—a very specific number that falls within that sweet spot we love: the 90-95 proof range. 1792 is known for its high rye mash bill, but it’s interesting that neither of us picked up much rye on the nose. Still, 1792 Small Batch is a fan favorite and sits comfortably in the $30 price range. It's a versatile bottle, both in terms of flavor and presentation, making it a popular gift option as well. Let's dive in.
The following review is taken from our episode "Notorious/1792 Small Batch." Click the link to listen to this review in audio format.
Nose
Bob: The nose on 1792 Small Batch is beautifully sweet, with a lot of caramel, almost a hint of pink bubble gum, and a touch of rye that comes through as a slight dill note. It doesn’t scream high rye, though—it’s more like a weeded bourbon in character. Compared to other mid-shelf bourbons, I think this stands out, especially for a $30 bottle. I'm giving it an 8/10.
Brad: For me, the nose is relatively simple. I got some peanuts, caramel, vanilla, and a bit of leather, but nothing that really stood out or added depth. It’s intriguing, but it doesn’t offer much complexity. I'll give it a 7/10.
Taste
Brad: The palate was disappointing for me. I picked up some caramel, vanilla, and a bit of those rye spices, but it was harsh—much harsher than I expected for the proof. The ethanol really overpowered the flavors. I’ll give it a 5.5/10.
Bob: I'm wondering if your sample has oxidized or something because I’m getting a much better experience. The black cherry comes through on the palate, along with some oaky, tobacco, and leather notes. It’s rich without tipping into bitterness or harshness. I’m giving this an 8.5/10.
Finish
Brad: The finish fell flat for me. It’s generically sweet with a bit of oak, but nothing really memorable. I'll stick with a 6/10 here.
Bob: I found the finish to be pretty good. It has a candy sweetness, a bit of that bubble gum again, and some toasted oak. I'll give it a 7.5/10.
Balance
Brad: For me, this whiskey is not well-balanced. The harsh edges on the palate really threw me off, and there wasn’t much harmony in the flavors. I’m giving it a 5/10.
Bob: I think it’s fairly balanced, especially considering the complexity I’m getting from it. I’ll give it a 7.5/10.
Value
Brad: At $33 in Ohio, I think this is overpriced for what I’m tasting. If it were still in the $26-$28 range, I might go up to a 6.5 or 7, but over $30? It’s a 5/10 for me.
Bob: I think $30 is a fair price for what I’m getting from this bottle. It’s good quality for the money, so I’m giving it an 8/10.
Final Scores
Bob: That brings my total score to 39.5/50. I’m really enjoying this whiskey and think it’s a solid choice for the price.
Brad: I’m at a very different place with this one, sitting at 28.5/50. It just didn’t work for me.
With an average score of 34/50 or 68/100, we’re clearly at odds here. This might be one of our biggest scoring gaps ever. If you're curious to see who’s right, it might be worth picking up a bottle or getting a pour at a bar. At the very least, it’ll give you a chance to weigh in on our debate!
