Conecuh Ridge Straight Bourbon Whiskey Review
Photos via Conecuh Ridge Distillery
In the whiskey world, line extensions can be a rather confusing thing to wrap your head around, at least when approaching the topic from a sufficient distance. When it comes to the average consumer, there are times when perhaps those drinkers aren’t really meant to notice that certain products hail from the same maker at all, or that differing marketing of similar products is meant to appeal to perceived different demographics of consumer. Still, there are times when the line is so fine, it’s hard to see what really differentiates a few bottles, and I find myself asking some of these questions as I look at the newly released Conecuh Ridge Straight Bourbon Whiskey.
This is a product of the similarly named Conecuh Ridge Distillery, which is also the overall entity producing the well known Clyde May’s line of bourbon and rye whiskeys. Clyde May’s has always been conceptually based around Alabama, where the famed moonshiner and bootlegger of the same name was based, but the state’s restrictive laws governing the spirits industry (many lingering from Prohibition) meant that the company has never distilled their own product there. That will finally change this year with the scheduled May opening of the very impressive looking Conecuh Ridge Distillery in Troy, Alabama, which will serve as a major tourist spot and destination distillery. But of course, bourbon has a long lead time: It presumably will be years and years before any spirit distilled and aged in Alabama makes it into any of their bottles.
That means Clyde May’s will remain a sourced brand for the foreseeable future, and the new Conecuh Ridge Straight Bourbon, meant to “commemorate the opening of the new distillery,” is in the same boat. Like bottles of Clyde May’s bourbon, the label notes that this was distilled in Indiana, presumably by the mega producers at MGP of Indiana. It’s a moderately aged, 5-year stated bourbon with a stout ABV of 50.3% (100.6 proof). In a vacuum, that sounds perfectly fine … but what exactly differentiates this from say, Clyde May’s Special Reserve, which carries a 6-year age statement and 110 proof point? They’re both MGP bourbons of similar age and proof. Perhaps they’re drawn from different mash bills? If not, does it not feel rather like splitting hairs?
Regardless, at the end of the day this means we’re tasting some modestly aged MGP bourbon here, so let’s get to it.