Jim Beam is one of those names almost everybody associates with bourbon. For a lot of people, that familiar white label is practically synonymous with the spirit itself. But there’s a lot more to the Beam lineup than the bottle sitting on the bottom shelf at your local liquor store.

And some of those bottles are surprisingly good.

For this edition of The Bourbon Cheapskate, I decided to put four Jim Beam expressions up against one another in a blind tasting. The contestants were Jim Beam Freedom’s Finest, Jim Beam Black 7-Year, Jim Beam Double Oak and Jim Beam Single Barrel.

Four bourbons from the same family, each with its own approach to what makes a good whiskey. The question was whether those differences would translate into a clear winner when the labels weren’t there to influence my judgment.

I had a couple of expectations going into this tasting. I figured the Single Barrel would perform well, and I’ve generally been impressed with double-oaked bourbons. But the beauty of a blind tasting is that expectations don’t get a vote. At least, they’re not supposed to.

Setting Up the Blind

I poured 1½ ounces of each bourbon into four identical sample bottles, then jumbled the bottles so I wouldn’t know which was which. From there, I poured and tasted the samples one at a time, assigning each a letter and recording my impressions before revealing the identities.

No labels. No price tags. No preconceived rankings. Just four bourbons competing on their merits.

One thing I expected to find was the familiar Jim Beam peanut character. That’s practically a family trademark, and it showed up throughout the tasting. But beyond that common thread, the four samples displayed some interesting differences in sweetness, oak influence, complexity and finish.

Here’s how they performed.

Sample A — 82.19

Color: Solid amber.

Nose: Classic bourbon. Rich caramel, vanilla and oak lead the way, with perhaps a touch of cinnamon. Knowing all four samples came from Jim Beam, I wasn’t surprised to detect that familiar peanut character.

Palate: A small burst of oak hits the front of the palate, followed by brown sugar, vanilla, cinnamon and some tart cherries. It’s a nicely balanced collection of flavors, with the oak providing structure without overwhelming the sweeter notes.

Mouthfeel & Finish: The mouthfeel is modest, and the finish follows suit. More oak comes through, accompanied by black pepper, tart cherry and caramel. There’s plenty to appreciate here, even if I wish those flavors would linger a little longer.

Final Score: 82.19/100

Sample B — 78.77

Color: Slightly richer than Sample A, perhaps approaching light copper.

Nose: Similar in character to A, but noticeably less powerful. There’s a solid peanut butter aroma, backed by brown sugar, vanilla and cinnamon. Everything seems to be in place, but the aromas are relatively subdued.

Palate: Dusty peanuts arrive early, followed by toffee, cinnamon and a touch of milk chocolate. Those are flavors I generally enjoy, but they never quite develop the intensity I’m looking for. The ingredients are there. The execution just seems a little restrained.

Mouthfeel & Finish: The mouthfeel is on the lighter side, and the finish doesn’t do much to compensate. There’s a pronounced corn influence, along with fading peanuts and pepper. Unfortunately, the flavors disappear before they’ve made much of an impression.

Final Score: 78.77/100

Sample C — 81.75

Color: Light copper, similar to Sample B.

Nose: This might be the best nose of the tasting so far. Nice oak is softened by sweet caramel and vanilla, with brown sugar and just a touch of the familiar Beam peanut. It’s inviting, balanced and considerably more interesting than the previous sample.

Palate: Brown sugar, peanuts and chocolate lead the way, but the oak becomes more prominent as the tasting progresses. There’s also a hint of cherry toward the back end. I like the way the flavors interact, although the oak eventually begins to assert itself over the sweeter notes.

Mouthfeel & Finish: Once again, the mouthfeel is thinner than I’d prefer. The finish is similarly disappointing, with baking spice, oak and light chocolate fading more quickly than expected. There’s enough flavor here to make this a good bourbon, but a richer texture and longer finish might have elevated it considerably.

Final Score: 81.75/100

Sample D — 81.86

Color: Back to solid amber.

Nose: Things step up immediately, with brown sugar, vanilla, caramel, chocolate and a hint of cinnamon. Somewhere in that collection of aromas, I’m picking up a peanut or two. It’s a wonderfully appealing nose, particularly for someone who enjoys the sweeter side of bourbon.

Palate: Delicious. Velvety caramel, vanilla, oak, melted sugar and cinnamon combine for a rich, dessert-like experience. This is the kind of flavor profile that tends to get my attention, with sweetness taking center stage while the oak keeps everything from becoming excessive.

Mouthfeel & Finish: The mouthfeel is still a little thin, but it’s noticeably stronger than Samples B and C. The finish also has a little more staying power, delivering creamy peanut butter, sugar, light oak and cinnamon. I would have liked more viscosity, but there’s no denying the appeal of the flavors.

Final Score: 81.86/100

The Rankings

Before revealing the identities, here’s how the four samples finished according to my scores.

The first three were separated by less than half a point, which is essentially a statistical dead heat for my palate. Sample B, however, finished more than three points behind the winner, a substantial difference in a tasting where the other three were so closely matched.

That was interesting enough. But when I revealed the bottles, things became even more interesting.

The Big Reveal

Sample A — Jim Beam Double Oak (82.19)

Sample B — Jim Beam Black 7-Year (78.77)

Sample C — Jim Beam Freedom’s Finest (81.75)

Sample D — Jim Beam Single Barrel (81.86)

Well, that was interesting.

I wasn’t particularly surprised that the Single Barrel performed well. Its sweeter profile, especially the caramel, vanilla and melted sugar, was right in my wheelhouse. And I certainly wasn’t surprised that the Double Oak turned in a strong performance. I’ve developed an appreciation for what a second barrel can do to an already good bourbon, particularly when it adds richness without allowing the oak to dominate.

What did surprise me was the 7-Year Black Label.

I expected considerably more from it. Instead, it finished dead last, and not by a particularly close margin. The flavors weren’t necessarily unpleasant, but the relatively weak presentation, thin mouthfeel and short finish left it well behind the competition. In a lineup where all four bourbons share considerable family resemblance, the Black Label simply didn’t distinguish itself in the ways I hoped it would.

The other surprise was Freedom’s Finest. I wasn’t necessarily expecting it to compete so closely with the Single Barrel and Double Oak, yet it finished just 0.11 points behind the Single Barrel and only 0.44 points behind the winner. That’s a pretty impressive showing, particularly considering how little separated the top three.

And there’s one more detail worth mentioning: Every sample suffered at least somewhat from a thin mouthfeel or abbreviated finish. Even the winner didn’t deliver the rich, viscous experience I most enjoy. That common weakness probably kept the entire field from scoring higher.

The Cheapskate’s Verdict

This tasting was a good reminder of why I enjoy putting bourbons into identical bottles and taking away their labels. I might have expectations about which whiskey should win, but once the tasting begins, those expectations don’t count for much.

The Double Oak earned the highest score, the Single Barrel delivered the most appealing dessert-like flavors, and Freedom’s Finest proved more competitive than I anticipated. Meanwhile, the Black 7-Year, which I expected to hold its own, finished a distant fourth.

But here’s where The Bourbon Cheapskate has to ask one more question: Which bottle delivers the most enjoyment for the money?

That’s not necessarily the same thing as asking which bourbon earned the highest score. A bottle that scores just a fraction of a point behind another might be the smarter purchase if it costs considerably less. And a disappointing bottle might still be a reasonable option at the right price.

For now, the Double Oak gets the bragging rights. But the margins separating the top three are narrow enough that price could easily determine which one deserves a permanent place on my shelf.

And that’s why we taste them blind. Because sometimes the biggest surprise isn’t which bourbon wins. It’s which one loses.

Enjoyed this? Subscribe and get future reflections, bourbon notes, and assorted nonsense delivered straight to your inbox.

Copyright © 2026 Doug DeBolt.