Balvenie Peat Week 2003
It seems like 2018 has been the year for disappointing whisky releases of the peated variety. First there’s the Laphroaig 2018 Cairdeas, which is thin and mediocre. Then there’s Ardbeg Grooves, which is pretty good I think, but I’m still trying to get a handle on it… it’s not exactly blowing me away, but it is pretty enjoyable (stay tuned, I’ll post a review eventually, once I make up my mind about it). And now there’s the 2003 vintage of the Balvenie’s 14 year old Peat Week.
The 2002 vintage of Peat Week, Balvenie’s initial release of their now annual limited edition peated single malt expression, was one of my absolute favorite whiskies of 2017. I liked it so much I actually named it my favorite limited release single malt in my 2017 Whisky Awards. It was such a lovely and unique whisky—Balvenie’s typical honeyed maltiness, with gentle smokiness, and so many layers of complexity.
The 2003 vintage is the 2018 version of the same whisky… but it’s hardly the same whisky. While the 2002 vintage came across as only moderately peated (if that), this year’s version is much more of a peat monster. Peat smoke surprisingly dominates this Speyside dram, which wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing, but… well I’ll save it for the actual review below.
A few quick words about the whisky before getting into the tasting notes… Balvenie began experimenting with a heavily peated single malt at some point around 2001, which led to the distillery setting aside a week every year (or so) starting in 2002 dedicated to producing heavily peated spirit. The result is the Balvenie Peat Week series, which so far has seen two releases, both aged 14 years. This 2003 vintage, like the 2002 before it, was aged exclusively in American oak (presumably in ex-bourbon casks).
The Balvenie Peat Week 2003 Review
Type: Single Malt Scotch
Region: Speyside
Age: 14 years
ABV: 48.3%
Non chill-filtered
Nose
Whoa, lots of pungent, floral peat smoke. Is this really Balvenie? Vanilla, oak, caramel, and butterscotch. A little citrus. A slightly odd note that reminds me of prickly pear cactus… it’s not bad at all, but I can’t remember ever noticing cactus on a whisky nosing before now. I kinda like it, it smells… green. But other than the peat and cactus, there’s not a whole lot interesting going on here. The weird cactus note saves it from boredom.
Palate
Floral and herbal peat smoke. Honey flavored cough syrup. Apricot. Green apple and watermelon candy. Heather. Caramel. The floral/herbal peat dominates. The mouthfeel is somewhat thin and disappointing. Not especially complex and mostly meh.
Finish
Somewhat short in length. Apples. Smoke. Caramel. Heather. Pretty basic.
Overall
I love a good peated whisky, but this peated whisky is just not that great. The floral/heather and herbal components are a bit too strong and don’t interact well with the peat smoke, in my opinion. That’s obviously a subjective opinion, but what is less subjective (although let’s be honest, all whisky reviews are entirely subjective when it comes to tasting notes and opinions) is that this whisky is on the thin side with little complexity. It’s just… boring.
In comparison to the 2002 vintage, the peat smoke on this 2003 Peat Week is much more prominent, but the whisky as a whole is much less interesting. There’s no doubt this is a Balvenie, as the basic Balvenie bourbon matured notes of honey and heather are here aplenty. But as with some of the more mediocre Balvenie malts, this is just a bit on the boring side.
The best part of this whisky is the cactus note on the nose. I’ve never experienced that particular note in a whisky previously, and I’m quite hypnotized by it. But that’s it… the other components here are rather meh. It’s a heavily peated whisky without much of anything interesting going on.
There isn’t anything wrong with this whisky, it’s just boring. In my opinion, of course.
SCORE: 4/10
Final Thoughts
Disappointing. So, so disappointing. As I mentioned earlier, I loved the 2002 vintage Peat Week… this year’s version is not nearly as good. If floral peat with honey is your thing, then maybe you’ll love this stuff, but to my palate (including tasting side by side with other peated whiskies) it’s just not that great. Hopefully next year’s version will get back to the greatness of the 2002 vintage.
Buying Advice: At about $100 for a bottle, I don’t recommend buying this. It’s just not worth that kind of money. Save yourself some dough and buy an entry level Islay whisky such as Ardbeg 10 or a less expensive peated Speysider such as Benromach Peat Smoke—you’ll get a far superior whisky for much less money.
Drink This Not That: The 2002 vintage Peat Week was vastly superior. If you can find a bottle, drink that rather than the 2003. If you can’t find the 2002, try a different (and less expensive) peated expression from a Speyside distillery, such as Benromach, Ardmore, or Benriach.
Questions about my scoring system? Refer to the Review Method & Scoring Scale page.
For more reviews, check out the Whisky Review Archive.
