Whisky Connosr
Shop Join

Benromach 10 Year Old

A precocious 10-year old

10 788

@Pierre_WReview by @Pierre_W

16th Feb 2019


  • Nose
  • Taste
  • Finish
  • Balance
  • Overall

Show rating data charts

Distribution of ratings for this: brand user

Benromach 10 years old was first released in 2009 and is part of the distillery’s core range. Its maturation regime is as follows: the first nine years 80% in ex-bourbon barrels and 20% in ex-sherry casks, the last year exclusively in ex-sherry casks. My review is based on a 20cl bottle from a taster pack that includes the regular 10-year old, “Organic” and “Peat Smoke”.

The nose is fruity with flavours of oranges and grapefruits taking centre stage. Then there are notes of leather, mint, chocolate, as well as a hint of lemons. Smoke is there too but rather subdued, campfire style. All in all this is a complex and multi- layered nose.

The palate is medium-bodied and quite sweet, more so than the nose: I got notes of oranges, apples and honey. There is more smoke now, and towards the end there are malty and nutty flavours.

The finish is long and mouth watering. The orange and honey flavours are there again. Quite a bit woody and salty too.

Back in 2017 I reviewed the 10-year old 100 Proof and was so enthused with it that I made it a permanent fixture of my whisky cabinet on the spot. I must say that this “regular” 10-year old is not far behind its powered-up brother. It is an astonishingly complex and multi-layered whisky and also very well balanced. I am afraid this one, too, is bound to become a permanent fixture in my cabinet.

Related Benromach reviews


RianC commented

@Pierre_W - Nice review of one of my favourite ten year olds. I've had this side by side with the 10/100 and agree that it still holds its head up. Excellent value for money whisky!

5 months ago 1Who liked this?

Nozinan commented

I like this one, and when it was available for about (what was it...) $60 dollars I would have considered it a steal. Now it’s $80 and if I didn’t have one I would still consider it a value purchase.

A note about the timeline you touched on. In 2012 or 2013 my BIL and I bought a 200 cc bottle and it was excellent. I’m pretty sure it was unpeated. The one I bought 2 years ago is, I think, the result of rebranding and it does contain peat.

I agree with you about the 100 proof. To me the two are very different expressions, not just the difference that 14% alcohol makes.

5 months ago 2Who liked this?

Hewie commented

@Nozinan that's an interesting observation regarding peated vs. unpeated versions. My understanding was that they set out to produce a whisky that represented what was commonly produced by Speyside in bygone days i.e. including peat. A friend I shared this with (who was born in Scotland) said it was the smell of her Grannies kitchen - and I don't think she meant that her Granny was on the bottle all day long laughing

5 months ago 1Who liked this?

Nozinan commented

@Hewie agreed, that’s the backstory with the rebranding. But I think in the first part of this decade, at least in Canada, they were selling something that was I peated. I remember tasting milk chocolate.....

5 months ago 0

cricklewood commented

Great review, touches on the complexities of this whisky, most of the rest of the range is good too but this somehow shines above them all. I traded a Laphroaig 15 200th anniversary bottle for 3 Ben 10 and don't regret that decision one bit.

4 months ago 3Who liked this?

RianC commented

@cricklewood - Have you tried the 15? Definitely my fave of the Benromachs I've tried; it was definitely what one might call a characterful malt!

4 months ago 1Who liked this?

cricklewood commented

@RianC I haven't tried that one, it's funny because neither the 15 nor the 10 have been available in Québec for close to two years now. Yet they carry every other expression in the portfolio. We did just received a few cases of the Triple Distilled, I'm hoping to pick that one up eventually once I recover from my recent whisky purchases.

4 months ago 2Who liked this?

You must be signed-in to comment here

Sign in