Old Pulteney 17y vs 21y
By victor
The previous core range of Old Pulteney incorporated the well-regarded 17- and 21-year-old bottlings, now sadly discontinued. In the same way as many prefer the 18 year old Glendronach over the 21-year old, the 17-year-old Old Pulteney seems to hold up very well against the big brother. How about a head-to-head to see how they compare?
0.7 (Amber)
Nose
Citrus, spice, brine, pears.
Palate
Has a little bite. Salty, lots of fresh fruit. Oily. Slightly spicy.
Finish
Soft transition but the kind of finish that grows over time. More fresh fruit, and some tropical fruits as well. More brine, a little pepper, ending with a chunk of apricots.
Score
86 / 100
0-50 Subpar
51-60 Drinkable
61-70 Decent
71-80 Good
81-90 Great
91-100 Fantastic
| Country | Scotland |
|---|---|
| Region | Highland |
| Brand | Old Pulteney |
| Distillery | Pulteney Distillery |
| Abv (%) | 46 |
| Age | 17 |
| Cask Type | Refill bourbon & Oloroso |
0.8 (Deep gold)
Nose
Brine, tropical fruits. Slightly more perfume-y than the 17 year old. Some sandalwood and pleasant hints of a few more years in the cask.
Palate
Considerably softer than the younger sibling. Spice, wood, fruits, vanilla. Quite thick, still a little brine of course.
Finish
Chocolate, coffee, spice, cooked fruits. Wonderful!
Score
86 / 100
0-50 Subpar
51-60 Drinkable
61-70 Decent
71-80 Good
81-90 Great
91-100 Fantastic
| Country | Scotland |
|---|---|
| Region | Highland |
| Brand | Old Pulteney |
| Distillery | Pulteney Distillery |
| Abv (%) | 46 |
| Age | 21 |
| Cask Type | Bourbon & Sherry |
First of all, this was not a blind comparison. That fact usually carries some inherent biases with it, but I think it would have been pretty easy to discern the differences here. The 21 year old is darker, softer and carries with it some hints of even older whisky (like the 33 or 35 year olds, but only a fraction of it). The 17, on the other hand, is more lively and fresher.
The differences become clearer for every sip while going back and forth between two terribly tasty whiskies. It's not a super clear and logical line between the two - they're quite diverse whiskies albeit with a brine-y and fruity common ground.
17 has the fresh and sprawling profile going for it, but is perhaps lacking some balance and depth. The 21 is almost too soft on the palate (bordering on watery in direct comparison) but has a wonderful nose and finish. I'm just going to score them the same this time. That means that the value for the 17 is (was) considerably better of course, but let's ignore that and just say that I wish these were still readily available.