Crown vs. Crown

[Megawatt]

I have in front of me two bottles of Crown Royal, both Christmas gifts. One is the standard Deluxe edition, the familiar bottle adorning countless liquor cabinet shelves across the continent. The other is Cask No. 16, an ultra-premium edition finished in cognac casks. It is unclear from the company literature whether there is any difference between the composition or age of the blends, or if the cask finish is the only distinguishing feature, aside from price. Deluxe sells for $28.95 whereas Cask No. 16 commands the unlikely price of $99.95.

Nose

Straight from the bottle the differences in aroma are immediately apparent. Deluxe is light, woody, leafy, sweet, and spirity. By contrast Cask 16 is rich, dark, sugary. The more obvious rye notes have been muted in Cask 16. The unmistakeable Crown Royal profile is still present, but less dominant.

Taste

Deluxe comes across the palate sweet and minty. There is a distinct herbaceous element, almost agave-like, along with the more typical Canadian caramel notes. Mid-palate it becomes slightly oaky. The finish is rather short.

Cask 16 takes a more supple, subtle approach. One notices the silky body before any of the flavours. The leafy rye notes have all but vanished. After a couple of seconds a very dry fruitiness develops, and persists into the lengthy finish. I’m reminded somewhat of the dry fruit and nut character of Forty Creek. The brown sugar notes from the bottle are much less evident in the mouth. This whisky seems to need some time in the glass to reach its potential. The whole thing is a very subtle, elegant affair.

Body

Both whiskies fall into the medium-bodied range though Cask 16 is considerable thicker and heavier in the mouth.

Finish

Deluxe is front-loaded and short on the finish whereas Cask 16 is much the opposite; it takes more time to develop and the finish is where it shines. The dry raisin, brown sugar and gingerbread notes in the finish are very pleasant and well-balanced.

Impressions

Given time, Cask 16 shows its pedigree. I underestimated it at first. Give it a swirl to coat the glass and then sniff it after a few seconds; gentle spice, sugar, and dried fruit waft up to greet you. Likewise the flavour becomes more assertive after some minutes in the glass. This is Crown Royal at its most luxurious, if not most complex.

Deluxe seems to display more obvious rye and, strangely, oak elements in its composition. It is quite soft itself on the palate and really doesn’t give up much to its more expensive brother. In fact the differences between these whiskies are much less than one might expect, given the price difference of over $70. It is not nearly as significant, for instance, as the difference between Gibson’s Sterling and Gibson’s Finest Rare, or Alberta Premium and the Limited Edition bottling. Nevertheless, the differences are present and undeniable. After drinking Cask 16, Deluxe seems to have no finish whatsoever. The dried fruit element is also sorely missed. Deluxe also comes across far more spirity, with more obvious alcohol. It is, in any case, a top-quality blend. Mass produced it may be but put it up against any basic blended whisky and I think it fares quite well.

To conclude, Cask No. 16 might not knock your socks off, especially when taking price into account, but it certainly rewards patience. Canadian whisky is a subtle spirit to begin with, and one must keep that in mind when judging the quality of one as silky as this.

[Yello to Mello]

I always wanted to try Cask 16. I guess I will get back to this thread, I will get a CR Deluxe miniature as well.

[Yello to Mello]

I am just having some but I don't have the bottom shelfer to compare right now.

Given time, Cask 16 shows its pedigree. I underestimated it at first. Give it a swirl to coat the glass and then sniff it after a few seconds; gentle spice, sugar, and dried fruit waft up to greet you. Likewise the flavour becomes more assertive after some minutes in the glass. This is Crown Royal at its most luxurious, if not most complex.

This is exactly what happened to me.

[Uisgehound]

Well nice to know I've been spoiled by the finest Crown Royale has to offer

[Megawatt]

I am just having some but I don't have the bottom shelfer to compare right now.

Given time, Cask 16 shows its pedigree. I underestimated it at first. Give it a swirl to coat the glass and then sniff it after a few seconds; gentle spice, sugar, and dried fruit waft up to greet you. Likewise the flavour becomes more assertive after some minutes in the glass. This is Crown Royal at its most luxurious, if not most complex.

This is exactly what happened to me.

I'm curious to know how you find they compare. From what I understand you aren't a great fan of Crown Royal Deluxe. If anything, it is the more approachable of the two whiskies. Cask 16 challenges the palate more, I think.

[Yello to Mello]

You're right, I do hate CR Deluxe with a passion. However its been a few years and I may have changed. If I find that much of a contrast, it will be a good comparison. Next time I go to the store I will get a sample of it...last time I was in a rush getting out of the store so I forgot.

[Yello to Mello]

I have compared them side by side today. To answer one big question, I am no longer offended by the CR Deluxe. I think in the past it was that mint dominant in the profile that got to me. I can appreciate it for what it is amongst the bottom shelf Canadian whiskies. If I ranked all the bottom shelf Canadian whiskies this would be somewhere in the middle-mid high of the pack, below Forty Creek and Alberta Springs 10.

For the Cask 16, I like this whisky. I am a sucker for those rich and round profiles with the dried fruits. Being thicker and heavier just made it better. It is true that there are many up front notes in the Deluxe that have taken a backseat in the Cask 16.

During one sip of the Cask 16, I imagined of a somewhat tamed A'bunadh (non CS) with an French oak and spicy rye punch instead of a sherry bomb. I don't know why I thought of the A'bunadh that time but some day I will try them together.

Now for the 'frodometrical' price analysis. I think for $100 is overpriced by a bit but I partially blame Diageo marketing overhead. For LCBO standards it should be equivalent to Forty Creek Confederation reserve and Wiser's Legacy so about $20 cheaper. I say $20 less because I had a Wiser's Legacy after Cask 16 and I was favouring the Cask 16 on that particular night anyway, and I also think highly of the Legacy. $79.95 would be a fair price, also considering the range it goes for in selected US markets (I will just say $50 but there is a large range of course). I was just anxious to try this and was willing to spend the $100 at the time around Christmas.

[Frodo]

A quick dissenting note here, the CR Cask 16 has a prune taste that I found off-putting. Just couldn't get past that.

Well nice to know I've been spoiled by the finest Crown Royale has to offer

Actually the best CR has to offer IMHO is the XR but I don't think there's a lot of it around...

[Uisgehound]

A quick dissenting note here, the CR Cask 16 has a prune taste that I found off-putting. Just couldn't get past that.

Well nice to know I've been spoiled by the finest Crown Royal has to offer

Actually the best CR has to offer IMHO is the XR but I don't think there's a lot of it around...

Frodo, XR might be the "best" CR has to offer, but I can't afford that kind of "best"...and I note that John Hansel thinks Cask No16 is better tasting than the XR. Then again,What does John know?

[Frodo]

For what it's worth, neither can I! Thank goodness for LCBO tasting towers...

[Yello to Mello]

the CR Cask 16 has a prune taste that I found off-putting. Just couldn't get past that.

Thats one of the dried fruits I like about it.