12 yo Canadian O.F.C.

Talk about Tennessee, American and Rye Whiskey here.

Moderator: Squire

12 yo Canadian O.F.C.

Unread postby Joeluka » Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:15 pm

I was wondering if anyone here (i.e. Mike Veach or Gary Gillman) could tell me if a bottle of 12yo Canadian O.F.C. Canadian whisky-a Blend from 1951 is anything special. Does this bottle have any history to it or is it just an old bottle of canadian whiskey. It was made by Schenley ltd. and its 86.8 proof. I'm not interested in $$$value just taste value. I scored this and a bottle of Crown Royal from 1954 in my wifes grandma's house again. I opened the CR and tasted with a current bottle of CR and the difference was unmistakable. The older was so much smoother with a depth to the finish that in a blind taste test I dont think you would ever guess they were the saqme label. Anyway I was just wondering if the OFC has any history to it.

Thanks for your help.
Joeluka
 

Unread postby gillmang » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:28 pm

Great notes, Joe.

I too once had an early 50's bottle of CR. Because CR used some 30 year old whisky, some of it was made in the 30's (i.e., if your bottle was tax-stamped '54, it was sold in '64 as a nominal 10 year old. But because it has 30 year whisky in it, some goes back to '34 - see?). My experience was like yours, tasted against a current CR the oldie was clearly superior. I think in fact current CR does not use 30 year old whiskey but also, the blend just isn't as good. I think the ones from the era you are talking about used more straight whiskey in the blend than today, or more straight rye at any rate.

As for Schenley OFC. Interesting it is 12 years old, today it is much younger (around 4 years). It is actually a very good whisky even today, quite rye-edged. I am sure yours is sensational because it is older whisky and in those years again more straight rye would have used in the blend than today. That Schenley plant was built in Valleyfield, Quebec in about '46 and is owned by Barton now. So it would have used whisky made somewhere other than in Valleyfield, no doubt at whatever plant Schenley used in Canada before Valleyfield was built (unless there was a plant onsite that was rebuilt). If you check the Barton website you will see a colour picture of that plant taken from the air which has a 60's or earlier feel to it (the typical aerial shot of the time).

If you open it please give taste notes, I really enjoyed your notes on the CR.

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Unread postby gillmang » Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:46 am

Just to elaborate on the old Canadian tax system, the date on the stamp was not the date it was sold but rather was the date the whisky was made (the youngest in the blend), so that if the whisky was, say, 6 years old, if the stamp read "1960" this meant that whisky was sold in 1966. If in fact (as often happened) some whisky in the bottle was older than 6 years old, one could deduce that that whisky was distilled before the date on the stamp. The youngest whisky in CR was (and still is I think) 10 years old, so as I said, whisky stamped say 1954 was distilled no later than that year and some of it much earlier. CR used to state on the rear label that some whisky in the bottle was 30 years old, so one could infer therefore that the oldest whisky was from 1934. This system is no longer used in Canada, there are no stamps on the labels any more. But the basic ages haven't changed (except for OFC evidently): CC (the regular one) was and is 6 years old; VO was and is 8 years old; and CR 10 years. However there are more expressions today than before (although fewer brands) so that CC comes in say 6, 10, 12, 15 and 20 year old versions, but not all the time, the first three are perennials on the market, the 15 and 20 only occasionally. In these the make-up of each is different, so it isn't just age that distinguishes them: for example, the 10 year old has more low-proof rye in it than the others.

When I sample Canadian whisky, I prefer my own blends. Right now I have one that is a combination of Danfield's Private Reserve, Royal Reserve, the two whiskies from Forty Creek, and a little Lot 40. I get very good results, light but fruity and rich-tasting. I have another another bottle which is made from similar but omits the Danfield's and it is heavier and based more on the Barrel Select of Forty Creek. Some of these actually remind me of the early 50's CR.

There is definitely a Canadian taste and Danfield's and also the new Wiser's Special Reserve 43% abv show it to perfection. It is a complex barrel taste, almost cigar box-like, hard to describe but I detect it in most brands of Canadian whisky (although some are almost sui generis like Barrel Select or Lot 40). The signature taste of Canadian in the 50's was similar but richer and more fruity, that is why a report on that OFC would be instructive. Joe, you might work these into your blind tastings against other, current Canadian whiskies.

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Unread postby bourbonv » Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:26 am

The Canadian OFC was a Schenley brand created by taking a declining bourbon brand and turning it into a Canadian whiskey brand for the name recognition in the United States. Canadian whisky was growing in demand in the late 40's and early 50's and Schenley wanted to get into the market. They bought a Canadian distillery and turned OFC and Golden Wedding into Canadian whisky brands so that they would have some name recognition in the States. They started by making these some high quality products with extra aged products (remember the bonding period in the U S was only 8 years so any whiskey over 8 years of age was considered extra aged). I have timelines for these products but there really is not much history to them.

I have never tasted any of this original product but there were some employees at U D who were around when all of this happened and they all said it was a good canadian Whisky. I would say crack it open and let us know what you think.

I would say Gary has more experience than I do and I respect his opinion.

Mike Veach
Mike Veach
"Our people live almost exclusively on whiskey" - E H Taylor, Jr. 25 April 1873
User avatar
bourbonv
Registered User
 
Posts: 4086
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Louisville, Ky.

Unread postby gillmang » Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:53 am

Thanks for that business history Mike, and I don't know that my experience is that much different than yours even with Canadian whisky!. As you and I have often discussed, it would instructive to sample together some product from 30 and 50 years ago against current product. It is hard to put one's hand on the older product, hence the value of Joe's notes.

Gary
User avatar
gillmang
Vatman
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:44 pm

Unread postby bourbonv » Fri Mar 10, 2006 12:38 pm

Gary,
I have an old bottle of Canadian whisky from the mid 1980's at home I am saving for your next visit. I don't recall the brand but it was one of the name brands such as Seagram's VO or Canadian Club. We will crack it open and explore the taste.

Mike Veach
Mike Veach
"Our people live almost exclusively on whiskey" - E H Taylor, Jr. 25 April 1873
User avatar
bourbonv
Registered User
 
Posts: 4086
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Louisville, Ky.


Return to Non-Bourbon Whiskey

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests