A few weeks ago, on a sunny-day casual Turkey hunt, I discovered a 2006 Russell’s Reserve 10 Year Old Bourbon hiding on a shelf of 2010-era bottles. Prior to 2005, Russell’s Reserve 10-year was 101 proof bearing a completely different design. Those bottles are long gone, but if you’re lucky there’s a chance you can still find a brown-label 90-proof iteration (2005-2009).
What’s so special about finding these particular bottles? Isn’t it just plain old Russell’s 10? The answer is … it depends. If you want something truly special, you need to find bottles from the first two years of production (2005-2006), where the glass lacks embossing and the laser code is printed on the reverse label. These were bottled at Lawrenceburg, Indiana (Pernod Ricard’s bottling facility). Alternatively, laser codes etched on the glass itself will indicate bottles filled at Fort Smith, Arkansas (see my Wild Turkey Timeline for reference).
While there may be Russell’s Reserve 10-year bottles after 2006 that have similar bourbon to the first two years, I’ve yet to experience that. This may give credence to some “bottled by” conspiracy theories, though I’m personally not in that camp.
Enough of the technical details. The real proof is in the pudding. Let’s pour!
Russell’s Reserve 10 Year Old Bourbon (2006 “brown label”) – 90-proof KSBW – aged at least ten years – distilled by the Austin, Nichols Distilling Co., Lawrenceburg, KY
Tasted neat in a Glencairn after a few minutes rest …
Color: dark rosy copper
Nose: rich vanilla, maple syrup, honey, blood orange, ripe cherry, musty/funky oak, herbal tea, floral perfume
Taste: maple syrup, vanilla, honey, caramel chews, citrus, baking spice, musty oak, tobacco, leather, vegetal notes
Finish: (finishes slightly above proof) medium in duration – full/round, warm & sticky – fading vanilla, musty oak, herbal/floral spice
Overall: This Russell’s Reserve 10-year is in many ways the essence of classic Wild Turkey. Rich vanilla? Check. Thick maple/toffee? Check. Musty/funky oak? Check. Fragrant herbal/floral spice? Check. Dusty bottle vibe? Hell yes!
This is one of my favorite Wild Turkey expressions out there – even at 90 proof. Is it “Cheesy Gold Foil” level? No, but it’s definitely mature and showcasing some of the best aspects of the CGF profile (in moderate doses, of course). In fact, this 2006 Russell’s 10-year tastes remarkably similar to my 2003 Wild Turkey 101/12 export – eleven-point proof difference and all. Trust me. I had to taste side by side to confirm, but it’s the truth. Hard to believe how good $34 can taste. A bonafide blast-from-the-past diamond in the rough!
Rating: 4.5/5 🦃
first off, let me say that i’ve recently come across your site the last few months as i dive head first into whiskey and bourbon beyond the level of a casual enthusiast, and i want to say thanks for all the info, its been a great read and i’ve learned alot.
second, just picked up a bottle of this from my local store. my first dusty in fact, and obviously i was stoked to read your favorable review. based on all the info i’ve dug up online including your site my bottle is indeed one of the “first two years” bottles!
i recently had my first stip of Russell’s 10 yr from a recent release and while i found it tasty it came off a touch sweet – granted, it was one pour on one night so my opinion is liable to change the next time i try it – but how does this compare to recent releases? it’s probably a completely different animal but i’d love to hear your take…
Thanks so much for checking out my site. I truly appreciate you commenting as well.
As for Russell’s 10-year … 2005-2006 “non-embossed” bottles with the old black ink bottle code stamp are basically 101/12 profile KSBW. My belief is that they were simply batched from under-proofed barrels that couldn’t be used for export 101/12, so into RR10 they went. By the time the glass and code changed (to embossed and lasered) the profile had notably thinned out (possibly because they contained whiskey that was aged at the Old Crow stone rickhouses – another story altogether – see my WT Timeline). Post ’05/’06 RR10 is enjoyable as a daily sipper, but nowhere near what came before.
As for recent RR10, I wrote an article comparing it and modern WT101 a few months ago. Both are great daily sippers in their own way, but again … the very early RR10/90 are truly special.
Cheers!
yep, my bottle is indeed a black ink stamp, code L1226016 which I believe makes it a bottle from March 2006… can’t wait to try it!
For what it’s worth, I’ve liked the 2006 black ink, non-embossed bottles a little better than the 2005’s. Just a touch – and the color is a slight shade darker on the ones I’ve compared. Still, I’d take either year in the blink of an eye.
sorry, meant L1226061…