November 14th, 2004


Previous Entry Next Entry
jimbojones
09:22 pm - Is that for what I think it's for...?

Why, yes... yes it is.

(I don't really drink enough vodka to make it worthwhile, but man, if this method can turn paint thinner Early Times into a reasonable facsimile of Jim Beam Black Label, then I am all about it...)

 
Current Mood: scientific
Current Music: Charizma - Red Light Green Light

(12 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments:



 
[User Picture] From: agentsteel53
Date: November 14th, 2004 - 06:46 pm
  (Link)
I don't get it.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: November 14th, 2004 - 08:32 pm
  (Link)
http://www5.ohmygoditburns.com/index.php?p=4#comments

This link has been going around like the clap lately. I actually don't drink vodka all that often, but I DO have a taste for the super-expensive bourbon, and a guy in the comments to the article mentioned that he's been using the same method for years to turn paint thinner Early Times into a reasonable facsimile of aged bourbon, so I decided I needed to pony up to the science wagon and give this idea a shot (ha, ha) myself.


 
From: (Anonymous)
Date: November 14th, 2004 - 09:20 pm
  (Link)
Well I am a vodka man, so it's good news for me!

[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<really,>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

Well I am a vodka man, so it's good news for me!

<really, it's so damn simple, it's obvious. One of those things that makes you jusat sit there, somewhat slack-jawed, and go "duh".>

I thought brown liquors were said to not work with this setup, as it's the particulates that give it the taste to begin with? Hmm... but then again, Jack gets filtered through charcoal after the aging process, doesn't it? I'm not a brown-liquor guy... Thoughts?


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: November 14th, 2004 - 09:30 pm
  (Link)
From the label of my Jim Beam Black (expensive 8-year aged straight bourbon whiskey):

Jim Beam Black has been aged a full eight years in new charred oak barrels, charcoal filtered and then bottled at the distillery in Kentucky at a full 86 proof. This makes Jim Beam Black a little smoother than most other premium bourbon whiskey.

It truly is a bourbon of distinctive character.


I'll give you three guesses what "aged in charred oak barrels" effectively amounts to. =)

The general idea is that if you do actual charcoal filtering, you get much the same effect that you would by aging for years undisturbed in a charred barrel. Yes, you probably do lose some flavor that way as compared to the traditional method; on the other hand if you can even come close to the same effect, turning $6 bourbon into something even approximating $30 bourbon, who's to complain?


 
[User Picture] From: agentsteel53
Date: November 14th, 2004 - 09:48 pm
  (Link)
heh, interesting! Do let me know what the results are!

And no, I probably will be less quick to try it... heh. I think I'll have The Glenlivet the way God intended it to be ;-)


 
From: (Anonymous)
Date: November 15th, 2004 - 01:09 am
  (Link)
hmm.. very interesting. I knew Jack was aged in charred oak, but didn't know if that would be at all like being filtered through charcoal.

Let us know how it turns out. Sure would be a nice way to go-- I'll drop $6 on the cheap crap and $5 on a filter in a heartbeat if I get the same results they're getting with the cheap vodka.

Definitely see a class-6 run coming on.....


 
From: (Anonymous)
Date: November 15th, 2004 - 01:11 am
  (Link)
agh. Never-damn-mind. Must learn to read CLOSELY, then post..

"aged in charred barrels, CHARCOAL FILTERED, etc..."



 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: November 15th, 2004 - 02:05 am
  (Link)
Heh heh heh. Well, the PuR filter setup that I got was $30 total, and replacement filters are $10 a pop - but each filter is rated for 40 gallons; so even if you quadruple-pass the bourbon before you pronounce it drinkable, that makes for 10 GALLONS of booze per $10 filter. Effectively negligible.

Also if you're a cheapass you can get a pitcher instead of the tank deal that I got, and spend about $10 less on the initial outlay (filters cost the same though) - but I thought the tank looked like a nicer setup and also it looked somewhat more likely to filter through faster since the outflow doesn't get covered as deep, so I went there. And I'm happy with it - again, the cost is negligible even at the $30 level for the first few runs; that's $30 / 10 gallons of booze = $3 per gallon. Per GALLON. Not a problem. And that's assuming quadruple-filtering.


 
[User Picture] From: staringgoldfish
Date: November 14th, 2004 - 07:11 pm
  (Link)
He's either going to try the filtering cheap vodka experiment, or he's getting ready to take recycling to a different extreme.


 
[User Picture] From: staringgoldfish
Date: November 14th, 2004 - 10:52 pm
  (Link)
GAAHH!

Thank you, Jim, for editing your post after my comment and making me look like a total doofus.


 
[User Picture] From: sanityescapesme
Date: November 15th, 2004 - 08:49 am
  (Link)
Yeah, I saw that link and it got me to a-thinkin.

We should get together sometime soon and bring various skunky liquors together for the ultimate science experiment...

-R


 
From: (Anonymous)
Date: November 27th, 2004 - 07:08 pm
  (Link)

Filters

I tried it with "El Toro" tequila. Two passes through the filter resulted in something approaching, Quarvo Gold. Not exactly, but very drinkable, as opposed to the original "El Toro".

Next try is going to be with Jack Daniels to see if I can get "Gentleman Jack" quality out of it. ;)

Cost;
USD $10.00 for a pitcher w/filter.
USD $7.00 for the "El Toro".
USD $16.85 for the Quarvo Gold baseline reference.


> Go to Top
LiveJournal.com