<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<topic>
  <id>366124</id>
  <title>My informal taste test: Makers Mark vs. Old Overholt</title>
  <published_at>Wed Jan 31 07:53:30 -0800 2007</published_at>
  <post_count>2</post_count>
  <board>
    <id>36</id>
    <name>Spirits</name>
  </board>
  <posts>
    <post>
      <post>
        <level>0</level>
        <id>2244902</id>
        <content>For some reason last night I felt inclined to do a taste test between the two.  Surprisingly, I preferred the Old Overholt rye over the Makers Mark bourbon.  Although the Makers Mark had more obvious flavor, the rye was far smoother and I enjoyed its subtlety.  

Anyone have any explanation/thoughts/other recommendations?  </content>
        <published_at>Wed Jan 31 07:53:30 -0800 2007</published_at>
        <parent_id></parent_id>
        <user>
          <id>12808</id>
          <name>Unpossible</name>
        </user>
      </post>
    </post>
    <post>
      <level>1</level>
      <id>2247530</id>
      <content>Sure.  One is a Bourbon.  One isn't.

Although Maker's Mark does contain rye, it is first and foremost a Bourbon, and as such, must be a) made from a minimum of 51 percent corn, and b) must age in new American white oak barrels.

Old Overholt is a rye whiskey -- made from rye, not from corn.  That's a substantial difference right there.  Also, I do not *think* there is a requirement for new oak aging (I'll have to check when I get home and can access my library).</content>
      <published_at>Wed Jan 31 17:38:29 -0800 2007</published_at>
      <parent_id>2244902</parent_id>
      <user>
        <id>28122</id>
        <name>zin1953</name>
      </user>
    </post>
    <post>
      <level>1</level>
      <id>2249116</id>
      <content>That's sort of like comparing apples and lychees.</content>
      <published_at>Thu Feb 01 08:08:24 -0800 2007</published_at>
      <parent_id>2244902</parent_id>
      <user>
        <id>10732</id>
        <name>JMF</name>
      </user>
    </post>
  </posts>
</topic>
