Gin proof

[Fat Guy]

I made a gimlet the other day and it had, to me, an unpleasantly strong alcohol burn. I looked on the bottle -- I had used Bombay Sapphire -- and it said it was 94 proof. Then I looked at a bottle of Gordon's gin, which is what I'd used the time before, and it was 80 proof. It seems there's a significant variation in alcohol content among brands.

What's the deal with all this variation? And what's the best way to adjust proportions when you get a spirit with more or less alcohol than you were hoping for?

[Chris Hennes]

For reference, on my shelf are Whitley Neil (84 proof), Hendricks (88 proof), Brokers (94 proof) and Beefeater (94 proof). So the proof is pretty much all over the map. If the alcohol burn bothers you I think you would either have to adjust proportions, or let the drink dilute more or less from the ice before serving it. But either of these solutions of course changes not just the alcohol content, but the flavor balance.

[Fat Guy]

Vodka seems to be much more standardized, with every bottle in my cabinet being 80 proof.

[thirtyoneknots]

94.7 degrees of alcohol by volume is a (or maybe even the) traditional proof for gin, which I suspect has to do with it correlating to a more round number in the older system for proof (alcohol by weight). Most gin lovers I think will agree that generally speaking the ones that are bottled closer to 94 proof are more flavorful than those bottled closer to 80 proof abv. The culprit could also be the specific gin used...I find Sapphire to be relatively rough around the edges compared to bottles like Beefeater, Tanqueray, or even Bombay Dry. Coldness, of course, also affects how 'smooth' the liquor will taste.

[mkayahara]

Yeah, the interesting thing to me is what effect proof has on flavour. Where I live, I can buy only 80-proof versions of Beefeater, Tanqueray, Gordons, Bombay Sapphire, and Broker's. I never understood what the fuss was about Tanqueray until I bought a bottle at duty free.

As for ways to account for the higher proof when mixing drinks: I build my Gimlets, rather than shaking them, and I find they're pretty tasty at a wide range of proportions, but I always, always, always let some of the ice melt before drinking. With a higher-proof gin, you could just let it dilute a little longer. Either that, or make a point of reaching for the lower-proof stuff when you make a Gimlet.

[slkinsey]

Steven, if you're still making your gimlets the way I remember the Shawpiro Family Gimlets being made, then you're making them extremely lean. This means that there isn't a whole lot of other stuff in there to counterbalance the intensity and alcoholic strength of the gin, and you're getting more or less a glass of straight gin with a little touch of some other stuff in there.

This doesn't mean you can't use a higher proof gin, but it does mean that you need to get more dilution in order to lower the proof if you don't like the "bite" of the alcohol. Or, of course, you can start off with a softer, lower proof gin such as Gordon's or Plymouth.

As with any spirit, you have to consider the intensity of flavor and the alcoholic proof when you are deciding which brand to use for the cocktail you would like to make and for your own personal preferences and mixological practices. For example, when making a long drink with other strong flavorings (a Gin-Gin Mule, for example) you might like to choose a strongly-flavored and higher proof gin like Tanqueray or Beefeater. This is because you need the intensity of flavor and higher proof in there, or the gin and alcohol will get lost and you might as well be drinking a glass of mint-spiked ginger beer. If you're making a modern-style "extra dry" Martini, you might rather choose a soft, lower proof gin like Plymouth.

[evo-lution]

Vodka seems to be much more standardized, with every bottle in my cabinet being 80 proof.

←

The flavour of gin changes dramatically dependent on its strength, with the various botanicals coming through differently, so I'm sure that is a major reason why the master distillers will have chosen the various bottling strengths and not just stuck to a uniformed figure.

Next to me I have;

The London Gin - 47%

Bombay Sapphire - 47%

Bombay Sapphire - 40%

Bombay Dry - 43%

Martin Miller's Westbourne Strength - 45.2%

Martin Miller's - 40%

Beefeater - 40%

Whitley Neill - 42%

Seagram's Extra Dry - 40%

Seagram's Distiller's Reserve - 51%

Hendrick's - 44%

Bols Genever - 42%

Ketel 1 Genever - 35%

Bokma 5 - 38%

Both's Old Tom - 47%

The Secret Treasure's Limited Edition Old Tom - 40%

The difference between the two Bombay Sapphires is noticable due to that extra 7%.

Personally speaking, I'm glad I have this range of strengths to factor in when making drinks.

[Dave the Cook]

I had a similar question a few years ago. The result was this bit of education.

[David A. Goldfarb]

My personal favorite for the list--

Boodles - 45.2%

[thirtyoneknots]

This doesn't mean you can't use a higher proof gin, but it does mean that you need to get more dilution in order to lower the proof if you don't like the "bite" of the alcohol.  Or, of course, you can start off with a softer, lower proof gin such as Gordon's or Plymouth.

←

Excellent point, keep in mind the original Gimlet recipe was half Rose's and half Plymouth gin...sounds way too sweet, til you consider that that Plymouth was 116 proof at the time.

[Fat Guy]

Steven, if you're still making your gimlets the way I remember the Shawpiro Family Gimlets being made, then you're making them extremely lean. 

←

I start with a 3:1 ratio of booze to citrus. I don't know if that's lean. It's certainly leaner than an old-style 1:1 gimlet but not as lean as some I've seen made in bars where it's mostly booze with the tiniest splash of lime cordial. For the citrus component I use half fresh lime and half Rose's lime. So for two cocktails I'd use 1/2 ounce of fresh lime, 1/2 ounce of Rose's lime and 3 ounces of gin or vodka. On top of that, usually a little simple syrup and a couple of drops of bitters, both to taste. This seems to produce a balanced cocktail with 80-proof spirits but offers too much alcohol burn for my taste with a 94-proof spirit. Maybe the solution is just more citrus.

[slkinsey]

Ah. I'm remembering ones from several years ago when that would have been deemed "too much lime."

Most likely the solution is just to shake it longer. The longer you shake it, the more dilution you're going to get, and eventually you'll find a dilution that's to your taste.

[Fat Guy]

I will enjoy experimenting with this until I run out of 94-proof gin.

[Chris Amirault]

Most likely the solution is just to shake it longer.  The longer you shake it, the more dilution you're going to get, and eventually you'll find a dilution that's to your taste.

←

Not sure that'll work. In my reading of the critical shaking researching done at the FCI "Cooking Issues" blog lately (click here for info) and such, after about 10 seconds or so, your drink starts to drop below 0C, which means that you'll not get additional dilution while shaking. Letting it sit or "cook," post-shake will allow the ice along the container's edge to melt a bit; give it a stir after 30 or 60 seconds and you may find some happy dilution level.

[Dave the Cook]

I start with a 3:1 ratio of booze to citrus. I don't know if that's lean. It's certainly leaner than an old-style 1:1 gimlet but not as lean as some I've seen made in bars where it's mostly booze with the tiniest splash of lime cordial. For the citrus component I use half fresh lime and half Rose's lime. So for two cocktails I'd use 1/2 ounce of fresh lime, 1/2 ounce of Rose's lime and 3 ounces of gin or vodka. On top of that, usually a little simple syrup and a couple of drops of bitters, both to taste. This seems to produce a balanced cocktail with 80-proof spirits but offers too much alcohol burn for my taste with a 94-proof spirit. Maybe the solution is just more citrus.

←

I think your recipe incorporates a categorical error. If you make a Sidecar (say, 4 parts brandy, 2 parts triple sec, 1 part lemon), you don't lump the orange-based modifier in with the lemon and say that you've got a 4:3 ratio of booze to citrus. If you disconnect the acid from the sweetener (which is a large part of what Rose's contributes to the drink), you'll find it easier to diagnose problems.

Having said that, I don't think you're far off in using equal parts fresh lime and Rose's. I'm drinking a Gimlet now that's 4:1:1, and I find it just about right -- maybe a little sweet. If you parse your recipe in a similar manner, you're at 6:1:1 -- very lean, especially with high-proof gin. Try backing off on the spirits and see how you like it. Then adjust the lime and Rose's separately to find the exact balance you like.

[slkinsey]

Most likely the solution is just to shake it longer.  The longer you shake it, the more dilution you're going to get, and eventually you'll find a dilution that's to your taste.

Not sure that'll work. In my reading of the critical shaking researching done at the FCI "Cooking Issues" blog lately (click here for info) and such, after about 10 seconds or so, your drink starts to drop below 0C, which means that you'll not get additional dilution while shaking. Letting it sit or "cook," post-shake will allow the ice along the container's edge to melt a bit; give it a stir after 30 or 60 seconds and you may find some happy dilution level.

You might like to give it another read. Have a look at this chart here in particular. Dilution continues to increase over time, long after the mixture goes below 0C.

[Fat Guy]

Rather than water down the whole cocktail, which will simultaneously dilute the spirit and the other ingredients, would it make more sense to water down the spirit? I'm sure this runs counter to some unwritten cocktail law, but isn't the difference between a 94 proof spirit and an 80 proof spirit generally just the addition of more water? If my ideal drink is what I've described above, but made with an 80 proof spirit instead of a 94 proof spirit then, subject to mathematical refinement, why not just replace, say, 1/2 ounce of spirit with 1/2 ounce of water before shaking?

[brinza]

While I love the taste of Bombay Sapphire, I find it to be a bit delicate. It can easily get washed out when used in a G&T, and, though I've never made a Gimlet with it, I imagine the effect might be similar.

[slkinsey]

That seems a bit of trouble. I'd try shaking the drink longer and see what happens.

If you're starting out with 3 ounces of booze and 1 ounce of non-booze, and you're getting around 25% dilution when you shake (1 ounce) -- all you need is around another half-ounce of dilution to get to the same ballpark final proof.

The other thing you could do is act on Dave's suggestion and bump up the modifiers a bit. That will already lower the proof somewhat, which you could further lower with extended shaking.

[Chris Amirault]

You might like to give it another read.  Have a look at this chart here in particular.  Dilution continues to increase over time, long after the mixture goes below 0C.

←

You are right, sir. I sit corrected.

[Dave the Cook]

The other thing you could do is act on Dave's suggestion and bump up the modifiers a bit.  That will already lower the proof somewhat, which you could further lower with extended shaking.

←

I wouldn't just bump up the modifiers. That's one effect, but I think the ratio needs re-evaluation. If, at 4:1:1, there's not an approximation of satisfaction, then I think Steven needs to give up on Sapphire and get some Plymouth. You, Sam (and Audrey and Janet), taught me that proof for proof's sake isn't the only factor. Proof can also mean additional flavor. If that flavor isn't wanted, then there's no point in dilution, other than some economical effect, which is easily remedied: buy a lower-proof gin and give the other stuff to a friend.

[evo-lution]

I use half fresh lime and half Rose's lime. So for two cocktails I'd use 1/2 ounce of fresh lime, 1/2 ounce of Rose's lime and 3 ounces of gin or vodka. On top of that, usually a little simple syrup and a couple of drops of bitters, both to taste. This seems to produce a balanced cocktail with 80-proof spirits but offers too much alcohol burn for my taste with a 94-proof spirit. Maybe the solution is just more citrus.

Playing with those ratios would be the obvious choice for me. Start with 2oz gin, 1/2oz fresh lime and 1/2oz Rose's lime in your tin then increase each component, dependent on what you think is needed, by a 1/4oz until you find the drink that's balanced to your taste.

This gives you a 4-1-1 ratio to start with which can be easily altered. As I think someone alluded to, I would be inclined to look at the Rose's lime as a sweetener and the fresh lime as the citrus, and not look at them both in the same light.

give the other stuff to a friend.

Or find a cocktail it works in!

[dougal]

I made a gimlet the other day and it had, to me, an unpleasantly strong alcohol burn. I looked on the bottle -- I had used Bombay Sapphire -- and it said it was 94 proof. Then I looked at a bottle of Gordon's gin, which is what I'd used the time before, and it was 80 proof. It seems there's a significant variation in alcohol content among brands.

What's the deal with all this variation? ...

←

One data point for you is that, here in the UK, tax considerations have resulted in 37.5% alcohol by volume becoming much more common than the traditional 40%.

This tax is high - perhaps 3/4 of the retail cost of a bottle of spirits.

And the tax on spirits is (largely) based on the amount of pure alcohol in the bottle. (There's a price-based sales tax ("VAT") in there as well.)

So there's been a powerful economic argument for quietly making spirits weaker ...

Plymouth Original is still at 41.8% abv, with some 'duty-free shops' getting 47%.

But Plymouth Navy Strength is 57% abv ... rather different to the typical 37.5%!

And BTW, your US 'proof' measurements convert differently into % alcohol by volume (abv) as compared to the (no longer used) UK proof numbers.

The % abv value is required to be pretty overt on the bottle label, not that everyone notices it, though.

[slkinsey]

Good point, Dougal. I was going to say that I think it's unfortunately more likely that most brands vary or determine the proof of their products based upon profitability and tax law rather than flavor and intensity considerations.

[slkinsey]

The other thing you could do is act on Dave's suggestion and bump up the modifiers a bit.  That will already lower the proof somewhat, which you could further lower with extended shaking.

I wouldn't just bump up the modifiers. That's one effect, but I think the ratio needs re-evaluation. If, at 4:1:1, there's not an approximation of satisfaction, then I think Steven needs to give up on Sapphire and get some Plymouth.

But 4:1:1 represents a bump up in the modifiers from the 6:1:1 is normally does. I would think that 2 ounces of gin with 3/4 ounces each of sweet and sour probably represents the highest level of modifiers someone might want.

You, Sam (and Audrey and Janet), taught me that proof for proof's sake isn't the only factor. Proof can also mean additional flavor. If that flavor isn't wanted, then there's no point in dilution, other than some economical effect, which is easily remedied: buy a lower-proof gin and give the other stuff to a friend.

According to Steven, it's not the higher intensity of gin flavors that he doesn't like (which makes sense, considering that Bombay Sapphire isn't all that intensely flavored anyway) but rather the alcohol "bite." This suggests that he needs to find a palatable way of reducing the proof to a level that he will enjoy while still keeping the intensity of flavor that he will enjoy. Considering that he's doing a 6:1:1 "Gimlet Sour" I would think that s 4:1:1 "Gimlet Sour" with a touch more extra shaking should do the trick.

In general, if he likes the lower proof, he's a lucky man -- Gordon's at 80 proof is the most reasonably-priced gin of quality one is likely to find. If he likes Gordon's, which is an interesting combination of (slightly) lower proof but more intensity of flavor than Plymouth, then there's no reason not to stick with it.

Edited August 11, 2009 by slkinsey (log)