Show rating data charts
Distribution of ratings for this:
Not sure what happened to my previously written review. I guess I'll try to re-type it up:
The Glenfarclas 105 is considered an "overproof" whisky, not necessarily a true "cask strength", as the whisky is diluted down to 60%. True cask strengths vary in their ABV with each batch, as they are bottled at the same ABV as it was naturally in the cask. You can check Aberlour A'Bunadh batches which have unique cask strengths, or even Macallan Cask Strength which varies by bottlings.
The whisky is pretty light colored, perhaps a golden "pale straw".
Nose: Dried berry fruits, ripe sliced peaches, sherry, and a bit of spice.
Body: Heavy in the mouth, with a warming sensation. In this way, it is very much like the Mac CS.
Palate: Spice hits hard in the front. The semi-sweetness is present, but it is not overly sherried like I would have expected. Slightly oaky and nutty.
Finish: Pretty short, with spice coming out.
The nose is the best part of this whisky. I really enjoy the sweet, fruity and spicy aromas. I could nose this whisky all night. It is really too bad the aromas on the nose are not consistent through the palate and finish.
This is really a good thing, as Glenfarclas 105 is actually the most expensive bottle of the three whiskies that are usually compared to each other: The Glenfarclas 105, Aberlour A'Bunadh, and Macallan Cask Strength. The respective prices I usually see on the shelves are as follows: $75-80, $62, $56. However, my opinion of the three would be: A'Bunadh, Mac CS, Glenfarclas 105. So all in all, I'm pretty happy that I decided to try the Glenfarclas 105 as a 3cl sample from Master of Malt instead of purchasing the whole bottle.
This whisky is far from a bad whisky, it just isn't my favorite of the three sherried cask strength whiskies on the market. If given a bottle, I would gladly drink it empty.