The review for this bottle is in the comments below...

{Note: You can find me on instagram @whiskeyincontext}

For reviews 100 and 101, let’s try something fun: a blind battle of 100- and 101-proof limited editions 😀

In 2025, the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection did something it hadn't done in nearly two decades: it added a new member to the lineup. E.H. Taylor Bottled-in-Bond Bourbon joined the five BTAC staples this fall as the collection's first expansion since 2006 (when Thomas H. Handy Sazerac was brought aboard). This blind pits 2025’s BTAC newcomer against one of the elder statesmen of the group: Eagle Rare 17.

Both E.H. Taylor and Eagle Rare use Buffalo Trace's low-rye Mash Bill #1, and on paper they sit closer together than you might expect from a "new release vs. long-running icon" matchup. E.H. Taylor leans on its Bottled-in-Bond pedigree — aged 15 years, 4 months, and bottled at exactly 100 proof. Eagle Rare 17 goes a touch further in both directions, aged even longer than its name suggests (18 years, 4 months for this release) and bottled at 101 proof in tribute to Eagle Rare's original 1975 launch strength.

Given this, any real difference here likely comes down to barrel selection and each label's underlying philosophy, rather than their proof or age doing all that much heavy lifting (if any at all). Eagle Rare 17 comes into this blind in with decades of pedigree and a well-earned reputation as one of the most consistent age-stated bourbons in the country. E.H. Taylor, on the other hand, comes in as the new kid in the BTAC lineup, looking to to live up to the Colonel's name and to prove that it truly belongs there.

So, without further adieu, let’s see if the rookie can hang with the veteran in a blind!

ABOUT Eagle Rare 17-Year

*From the Distillery: We have hand-selected our very best available barrels to produce the finest possible whiskey. In tribute to the original Eagle Rare brand launched in 1975, this whiskey is bottled at the original strength of 101 proof. The crystal-clear glass bottle we’ve chosen showcases the whiskey’s gorgeous amber color. Every bottle was handbottled and labeled to ensure the highest quality finish.

*Mash bill: Buffalo Trace mash bill #1 (low rye)

*Filtration: Chill Filtered

*Release Year: 2025

*Age Statement: 18 Years, 4 Months

*Proof: 101

ABOUT E.H. Taylor BTAC Bottled-in-Bond

*From the Distillery: We have hand-selected our very best available barrels to produce the finest possible whiskey. This release pays tribute to Taylor’s pursuit of perfection and his pivotal role in passing The Bottled in Bond Act of 1897. That piece of legislation cemented Taylor’s reputation as the Father of Modern Bourbon and set in motion a quality standard for whiskey that was more rigorous and exacting than any standard set before or since. The crystal-clear glass bottle we’ve chosen showcases the whiskey’s gorgeous amber color. Every bottle was handbottled and labeled to ensure the highest quality finish.

*Mash bill: Buffalo Trace mash bill #1 (low rye)

*Filtration: Chill Filtered

*Release Year: 2025

*Age Statement: 15 Years, 4 Months

*Proof: 100

*******************

REVIEW: For the purpose of this blind, both bourbons have been poured into glencairns and rested for approximately 15 minutes.

Appearance A: Coppery amber; not terribly oily or viscous

Appearance B: An ever-so-slightly lighter shade of amber; maybe slightly more viscous, but that’s far from a sure thing

Nose A: Lots of Buffalo Trace grape hits right off the bat. There’s also some sweetness like buttercream frosting and a little oakiness as well. Cinnamon quickly joins the grape at the forefront, with the slightest touch of pepper in the background as well. Once the glass is empty, grape and leather remain.

Nose B: This one has cherry front and center rather than grape. It smells like a combination of dark luxardo-style cherries and straight-up pie filling. Oak, allspice, and maybe a little nutmeg are there as well. Once the glass is empty, there are still cherry, subtle grape, and leather notes in the glass.

Palate A: Medium mouthfeel. This is interesting – it takes a couple sips for the grape from the nose to really show up on the front of the palate, but once there, it’s plenty strong. It’s joined by a lot of sweet, mature oak and tobacco, along with cinnamon, a touch of pepper, and some allspice, vanilla, and caramel. The grape continues into the mid-palate, where it melds with caramel-vanilla, a chocolatey note, and still more oak. Ultimately, this tastes like a very mature whiskey.

Palate B: The cherry sweetness is definitely present on this one! There’s the slightest hint of astringency, but along with that are some very nice flavors, including confectionery sugar and semi-sweet chocolate. The flavors get a bit darker as the sip shifts from front to mid-palate, with some stewed fruit or raisin-type flavors making an appearance along with some caramel, cinnamon, and just a touch of pepper.

Finish A: Pretty long and oaky (and somewhat drying), with a bit of pepper at the beginning of the aftertaste. From there, it evolves into a nice leather-and-tobacco flavor.

Finish B: Relatively long and very sweet, with cherry front and center, along with some oak, caramel, and baking spices of some sort that I can’t quite identify – maybe a combination of cinnamon and nutmeg? The cherry stays present throughout, and is joined by leather in the aftertaste.

Rating A: 8.7

Rating B: 8.9

Thoughts: These were both really, really good bourbons. Both highlighted what Buffalo Trace’s mash bill #1 can be when allowed to mature and when blended from specially-selected barrels. With its strong grape notes, A struck me as a pour of Eagle Rare turned up to eleventy. Add in the oakiness (which was a bit drying on the finish, but not in a distracting way), and it seems like that one must be the Eagle Rare 17. B, on the other hand, was very cherry-forward, and its combination of confectionery sugar and caramel came across to me as an E.H. Taylor small batch that had been aged and blended to near-perfection. That’s the rationale behind my predictions, so let’s see which is actually which!

Prediction A: Eagle Rare 17

Prediction B: E.H. Taylor BTAC

****************

Actual A: E.H. Taylor BTAC

Actual B: Eagle Rare 17

More Thoughts: Well, I got that one backward! It’s interesting to me that I got so much more oak on the palate and finish from the whiskey that was exactly three years younger than its counterpart in this blind. The grape being so strong on the Taylor was surprising to me because I tend to associate that more with Eagle Rare, while the cherry pie filling and darker mid-palate flavors on the ER17 made me think Taylor. I also expected the one with more oakiness on it would be the older of the two, and the fact that wasn’t the case points to the true expertise that went into balancing the integration of oak into the older Eagle Rare.

Based on my preconceived expectations, I thought that I was rating the newest BTAC offering – E.H. Taylor – higher than one of the most storied expressions in the lineup. It turns out that’s not the case, as ER17 edged out EHT in part by virtue of its masterfully-integrated oak and less-drying finish.

Obviously, neither of these was a loser: they were both really great bourbons, and I really can’t recommend either highly enough. The huge and obvious issues of price and availability aside, if you get a chance to partake in either of these, I don’t think you’ll come away disappointed. I know I didn’t!

********************

Previous Ratings (all reviews are available in my archive, but there may be some discrepancies in numeric rating, as these are updated to include decimals and adjusted for blinds & re-reviews)

1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out

2 | Poor | I wouldn’t consume by choice.
Maker’s Mark staved private selection (2.5)
Penelope Architect custom build (2.5)

3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.
Willett Pot Still (3)

4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but better exists
Found North SiB Oloroso finish (4.5)
Daniel Weller Emmer Wheat (4.5)
Augusta Buckner’s 10yr (4.6)
Shortbarrel Sapsquatch (4.8)

5 | Good | Good, just fine
Jack Daniel’s SBBP Rye (5)
Jack Daniel’s Heritage (5)
Four Roses SBBP OESO (5)
New Riff 4yr SBBP (5)
Four Roses SBBP OBSV (5.3)
Evan Williams America250 SiB (5.3)
New Riff Balboa Rye (5.4)
Blanton’s (5.5)
Old Forester 1924 (5.7)
Elijah Craig Toasted (5.8)
Lasso Motel 18yr ALW (5.8)

6 | Very Good | A cut above
Buffalo Trace Single Oak (6)
Barrell Cigar Blend (6)
Buffalo Trace (6)
1792 BiB SiB (6)
Copper & Cask Boston Rum Party (6)
Penelope Wheated (6)
Redwood Empire Emerald Giant (6)
Peerless DO (6.1)
Copper & Cask #16 (6.3)
Stagg 25B (6.3)
Augusta Buckner’s 13yr (6.5)
Green River Honey (6.5)
Pursuit United DO (6.5)
Sagamore 9yr SiB Rye (6.5)
Sazerac FP (6.5)
Green River Wheated (6.5)
Elmer T. Lee (6.5)
Copper & Cask #14 DO (6.6)
Shortbarrel Bees Knees V (6.8)
Penelope Marshmallow Toast (6.8)
Willett 4yr Rye (6.8)
Ampersand Opimus (6.9)

7 | Great | Well above average
Blanton’s Gold (7)
John J. Bowman SiB (7)
Found North 012 (7)
Rock Hill Farms (7)
Peerless Toasted (7.1)
E.H. Taylor SiB (7.2)
Eagle Rare 10yr (7.5)
Weller 107 (7.5)
Old Forester 1910 (7.5)
Penelope Estate 10yr SiB (7.5)
E.H. Taylor BP 16 (7.6)
E.H. Taylor SmB (7.6)
Woodford DO SBBP (7.7)
Old Fitzgerald 7yr (7.7)
Eagle Rare 12yr (7.8)
E.H. Taylor Cured Oak (7.8)
Willett 8yr SiB Rye (7.9)

8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional
Joseph Magnus Cigar Blend 420 (8)
Old Dominick Staved SiB (8)
Starlight 10yr (8)
Blanton’s SFTB (8.3)
Lasso Motel SBBP Rye (8.4)
Mister Sam Tribute 4 (8.6)
E.H. Taylor BTAC 2025 (8.7)
Thomas H. Handy 2025 (8.7)
Eagle Rare 17yr 2025 (8.9)

9 | Incredible | An all time favorite

10 | Perfect | Perfect

This is the finale of my blind tournament of all 24 “post-pirate” Elijah Craig Barrel Proof batches released from 2017 through 2024.

Over the first three parts, I tasted my way through the A, B, and C batches, starting with single-elimination tournaments and then using additional blind back-testing to account for bracket luck and get a better idea of where each bottle actually belonged.

Part 1: A117-A124
Part 2: B517-B524
Part 3: C917-C924

Eventually, three bottles emerged as their respective series champions:

A-Series: A117
B-Series: B520
C-Series: C918

Now it was time to put the three winners against each other. After that, I faced each one off against some older Heaven Hill distillate to see how they would hold up outside the ECBP lineup.

Methodology

All comparisons were blind head-to-heads, with tasting notes and scores recorded before revealing the bottles. Scored using the t8ke scale.

For the finals, I started with A117 against B520, then compared the loser of that matchup (the B520) vs. C918. The idea being that if B520 won, there would be no need to test B520 against A117 again since it already lost, but if C918 won, it would go on to face A117. Hopefully the tournament graphic makes this clear.

A117 vs. B520

Left glass:
Blackberry on the nose. Very tart on the palate, with a great mouth coat and finish.

Score: 8.5
Reveal: A117

Right glass:
Brown sugar and molasses on the nose. Dark and sweet - oak and brown sugar on the palate. Great mouth coat and finish.

Score: 8
Reveal: B520

With A117 winning the first comparison, I next put B520 against C918 to see whether C918 could beat the runner-up. If it did, I would have it face off against the A117.

B520 vs C918

Left glass:
Better nose of the two. Nice rich, old flavor. Dark cherry on the development, little bit of ethanol on the finish. Incredible.

Score: 9
Reveal: B520

Right glass:
Brown sugar on the nose that translates to the palate. More ethanol on the finish compared to the left glass. Great flavor, but not as balanced as the left. Very slight medicinal cherry note. Better mouth coat and finish than the left.

Score: 8.5
Reveal: C918

At that point, I felt comfortable calling the final standings. Since C918 lost to B520, which had already lost to A117, I decided not to run an additional A117 vs. C918 matchup. 

Final ECBP Standings

A117 > B520 > C918

The Winners vs. The Heaven Hill Heritage Collection

With the ECBP portion finished, I wanted to see how the three series champions would stack up against some older whiskey from the same distillery. Given how well these bottles had performed throughout their tournaments, my expectations were pretty high.

A117 vs. HHHC 17-Year

Left glass:
More muted nose than the right glass. Nice caramel on the front palate, followed by a good amount of ethanol through the development. It settles down on the back palate, where that caramel flavor returns. Great mouth tingle as it settles. Good, but not great finish.

Score: 8
Reveal: A117

Right glass:
Lovely dusty nose with some brown sugar. Tart dark fruit on the front palate that continues through the development. Excellent integration: the front, mid, and back palate flow together seamlessly without a noticeable ethanol patch in the middle. Sweet oak on the back palate.

Score: 8.5
Reveal: HHHC 17-Year

Winner: HHHC 17-Year

The right glass was simply better put together. Upon reveal, I was a bit surprised: that tart fruit is something I heavily associate with A117 from memory, so I had these backwards in my mind. I was pretty sure the right glass was the A117.

B520 vs. HHHC 18-Year

Left glass:
Great dusty note on the nose. Brown sugar and maybe some cinnamon on the front palate, followed by a good amount of ethanol through the development. Pleasant honeysuckle on the back palate. Brighter on the second sip, with that honeysuckle now appearing up front. The mouthfeel eventually comes in, although it isn’t that great. Finish is somewhat underwhelming.

Score: 7.75
Reveal: B520

Right glass:
A little caramel on the nose. Nice sweet front palate with some vanilla. Very little ethanol through the development, followed by great mouthfeel. Brown sugar on the back palate.

Score: 8.25
Reveal: HHHC 18-Year

Winner: HHHC 18-Year

B520 had some nice moments, but the 18-year offered a more consistently enjoyable experience, particularly through the development and mouthfeel. It’s interesting how both the A117 and B520’s mouthfeel and finish under-performed against the Heritage Collection relative to my memory of them against other ECBPs and on their own.

C918 vs. HHHC 22-Year

Left glass:
Nice dusty and floral front palate. A bunch of heat through the development, but it comes together on the back palate with some oak. Brighter flavor profile overall. Mouthfeel and finish are lackluster.

Score: 8
Reveal: HHHC 22-Year

Right glass:
Tastes even older than the left glass. Darker flavor profile with a little cocoa. No real ethanol interruption through the development - great integration from start to finish. Vanilla on the back palate. Mouthfeel and finish develop more nicely than the left glass.

Score: 8.5
Reveal: C918

Winner: C918

C918 gets the ECBPs on the board. Interestingly, it was also the glass that tasted older to me. The darker flavors, integration, mouthfeel, and finish gave it the edge.

What Stood Out

These latest blinds against the Heritage Collection surprised me a little bit. The 17 and 18-year were the clear winners over A117 and B520. Both ECBPs showed more ethanol through the development, while their opponents offered a more seamless experience.

Interestingly, C918 finished last among the three ECBP finalists, yet it was the only one to win its Heritage Collection matchup. That makes some sense given my personal ranking of the Heritage releases: the 17-year on top, with the 18 and 22-year tied behind it.

What makes this especially interesting to me is that A117 and B520 previously beat Stagg Jr. batches 12 and 15, respectively, in blind comparisons for me. Those are my two favorite Stagg releases out of the roughly 20 I’ve tried, and two of my all-time favorite bottles. I’d personally rank both above all three Heritage Collection releases used here.

So the ECBPs finished ahead of two bottles I generally prefer to the Heritage Collection, then lost to the Heritage 17 and 18-year. It’s a good reminder that blind results don’t always line up neatly with my overall preferences, and that winning one matchup doesn’t guarantee the outcome of another.

Final Thoughts

A117 was one of the last bottles I acquired for this project and the one I had the least experience with going into the finals. I hadn’t really heard or read much about it either, so I didn’t have much in the way of preconceived expectations. Seeing it finish on top was a pleasant surprise.

B520 and C919 were a different story. I watch SLB Drinks pretty regularly, and Kurt has mentioned both as his favorite ECBP releases he’s tried. That gave me pretty high expectations for those two. B520 lived up to them, while C919 fell flat for me personally. That was another reminder of how much individual preferences matter, even when taking recommendations from content creators I really enjoy.

Across the tournament, the bottles that stood out most to me combined rich flavors with good development, mouthfeel, and finish. A great opening wasn’t always enough if the rest of the experience didn’t follow through, and noticeable ethanol could get in the way of an otherwise enjoyable pour.

My biggest takeaway, though, is that at MSRP, I think almost all of these batches are worth buying. Even after dropping the consistent 12-year age statement in 2023, the lineup is still generally great. If you like ECBP’s flavor profile, it’s pretty hard to go wrong.

There’s also enough overlap that I don’t think you need to chase every release. I came away with some clear favorites, but plenty of other batches delivered a similar enough experience that I’d be happy drinking them. For me, this project helped identify which bottles I’d want to buy again, rather than convincing me I need to keep collecting every batch.

This has been a long project, but a really enjoyable one. And even after all these comparisons, the Heritage Collection blinds still managed to surprise me. That’s a big part of why I enjoy doing this - even if it can definitely be frustrating and humbling at times!

Specs:

ABV: 71.4%

Age: 15 years and 4 months

Distillery: Buffalo Trace (BTAC)

MSRP: $149.99

Price Paid: $299.99

Release/Batch: 2025

Nose: Brown Sugar upfront. Dense caramel drizzled in chocolate. Charred oak and powdered sugar on second pass with some nice cherry.

Palate: Theres a fantastic viscosity and the cherry shines on the palate. Make it chocolate covered cherry. If you let it sit on your tongue the fresh juicy cherries turn to sort of candy cherry. There’s a nice heat but it absolutely doesn’t seem like it’s 71.4%.

Finish: Here’s where it earns its keep. The heat turns up and you get a fabulous long finish with more of that cherry in the candied stage. Red hots sort of. Wonderful oak and leather notes. It fades to black pepper and gives you a beautiful hug.

9.0/10

This is just a phenomenal bottle of whiskey and it earns its reputation. I believe it’s 1A or 1B in the BTAC lineup probably just a little behind WLW most years, although 2025 specifically I’d give it to GTS by an inch.

​

*Rested 20 minutes

#Stats

Distillery: Buffalo Trace Distillery

Mashbill & Age: Undisclosed, estimated to be around 8-9 Years

Proof: 124.6 proof (62.3%)

Cost: 85$

#Tasting Notes-

Nose: Pungent as hell. Cherry, Strawberry, Vanilla caramel, Toffee, Light Oak notes. You can smell this from the end of the table if left for a couple minutes.

Palate: Nice and viscous. Coats your mouth nicely. I get some serious cola notes in the first sip but its a dark fruity cola like grape or cherry cola. Sweet but not close to overwhelming. The mid palate has a vanilla that washes the cola note away and leaves a dark fruity flavor. After a couple sips i notice it has this fruity clove note with that begins to transition into a spicy oak flavor that has some heat on it. There is a little bit of a smoky char in there that comes and goes towards the end palate that I find pleasant. A black pepper spice and ethanol heat go into the end palate but dissipate fast when the finish comes in. Sometimes it will give you a Kentucky hug though.

Finish: A medium-long cola oak finish with hints of fruit and leather depending on how you let it sit on your tongue. It lasts longer than expected and tastes like something that makes you want to go back to sip again. I dont get an aftertaste but if it did I would claim its a little earthy. An oak type of earthy.

Conclusion: An excellent bottle. I think this is the most balanced stagg to me. I say this because im used to staggs having a heavy lean into some profile like oak, fruit, or chocolate. This one I would say is a banger for being well layered, consistent, and viscous. The cola flavor is in your face and the heat is tamed enough to let it shine while the short oak and spice notes seems to balance it out the sweetness nicely. I believe if this was older with bolder flavors and a higher proof it would be one of my favorite bottles. I still have a bottle of 25D and I would say this one is more preferable/approachable.

Score: 8.2

Would I Buy Again?: Yes, easily for the price I paid.

T8ke Scale

-1 | Disgusting | So bad I poured it out.  

(NEBC 9 Yr (1.5)),

-2 | Poor | I wouldn't consume by choice.  

-3 | Bad | Multiple flaws.  

-4 | Sub-par | Not bad, but better exists.  

-5 | Good | Good, just fine.  

-6 | Very Good | A cut above. 

(JD SBBP Rye (6.2)),

(Weller Full Proof (6.8)),

-7 | Great | Well above average.

(NEBC 7.5 Yr (7)),

(Old Forester 1920 (7.1)),

(Blantons Gold (7.2)),

(Jack Daniels SBBP Rye (7.4)),

(FR OESO (7.5)),

(Jack Daniels SBBF (7.5)),

( FR OBSF (7.8)),

(Bookers StoryTeller Batch (7.8)),

-8 | Excellent | Really quite exceptional.

(JD SBBP Rye (8)), 

(Stagg Jr 25D (8.3)),

(Jack Daniels 12 Year B4 (8.4)),

(Found North GoldFinch (8.5)),

(Rare Character Batch 2 (8.6)),

(Old Louisville 8yr (8.6)),

(Dark Arts Tokaji 7.5yr (8.7)),

(Found North Snow Day (8.7)),

(Colonel E.H. Taylor SBBP (8.8)),

(Little Book The Infinite 2 (8.9))

-9 | Incredible | An all time favorite.

(Found North B12 (9)),

(Found North Batch 009 (9.1)),

(Found North T8KE Eleventh Hour (9.2)),

(Found North Batch 008 (9.3)),

(Knobb Creek 21yr (9)),

(JM Cigar Blend Batch 414(9.5)),

-10 | Perfect | Perfect.

OLD FITZGERALD VVS 11 (2025)
Proof: 100 proof / 50% abv - bottled in bond
Age: 11yrs age stated
Paid - $170.00
Msrp - $170.00
Drank - neat
Rested - 10mins
Glass - final touch tasting glass

Unprofessional - as always!

Nose-
First and foremost greeted by a huge surge if Butterscotch and werthers original hard candy mixed together, some creme bru lee, and artificial vanilla extract. Diving in there is a mix of baking spices via Cinnamon, nutmeg, and black pepper showing itself. There is also some light charred oak serving as the back bone to the aromatics.

Palate -
First sip hits heavy with Butterscotch, caramel hard candy, and fresh cut red apples dusted with cinnamon. The second sip leans in with light holiday spice pie crust, charred oak, some more baking spices with nutmeg and clove. The final sip shows flashes of vanilla extract lying underneath more flavors from sips 1 and 2. This ties itself all together as a "fresh baked apple pie" - a very "fall" profile.

Mouthfeel -
Buttery, but not "dense". More Creamy if i had to nail it down with one word.
It Hangs on and "swishes". It does cling to the teeth and palate nicely. It also Creates some salivation through the mid and front palate and leaves an "effervescent" feeling like fizzy soda.

Finish -
Cinnamon stick, vanilla extract, red apples, and matured oak are dominant here and easily found. Continuing down the flavor turns more "caramel/toffee" in the palate. Very short but does have a small "hug".

Overall -
85/100 - very solid but not "very very special".