I've never encountered a Bowmore that I found to be even remotely palatable. This include the few I've sampled and the many I've vicariously sampled (nosed them while others complained about the lack of palatability).
Nose: some residual vomit (see previous review of Bowmore 15), dull earthy peat, sugary-candy.
Palate: saccharine arrival with mild spice and watery peat. Thin and treacly overall.
Finish: nice bit of spice on the finish. Red fruits and watery sugar that dulls over time to reveal a vegetal note.
Seriously, how does Bowmore make money putting stuff like this out? It has deterred me from buying any Bowmore, including IB's. I'm sure they make some decent stuff....somewhere. I'll wait for a sample from a friend.
@TheConscience I am not sure after reading your different reviews of Bowmore and Laphroaig that Laimrig is for you. You can read my review of it if you want but you must like flintstone flavors to like it. If you want a heavy sherry peated scotch, I would suggest the Benriach Herodotus Fumosus. The best part is that it is cheaper!
I have to tell you, my palate is quite different from yours. I had Bunnahabain 12 yo and for me there is a terrible cabage flavor I really dislike. As from the scotches from Cambeltown, Springbank as for me a rotten vegetable note that doesn't work . I now hesitate to have another dram of either of those scotches.
By the way, if you choose to go with Laimrig and you don't like it I will be opened to a trade.
Bowmore can have this effect on people. I see it as a niche flavour profile. They have a very specific set of flavours that may or may not suit your palate. I rarely love Bowmore, but I think it's an interesting and different distillery. Agreed, though, that the 18 is a lesser whisky. There's a soapy floral note that I can't get past in that one. As suggested, the Laimrig and the Tempest are better, but still quintessentially Bowmore. If you don't like the core range I'm sure you won't like those ones either. Thanks, @TheConscience for your very frank write-up.