Quite green, medicinal peat almost chemical, vanilla, band aid, found it quite pleasant to drink.

Laphroaig Cairdeas Quarter Cask 57.2%. Consumed Jan 2020. Aroma is beautiful fudgey caramelly toffee - pleasant but no smoke - it's all oak, ex-bourbon cask. Taste is oily fudgey oaky, slightly over-oaked, as is the risk with this concept, but not in a bad way. Quite floral, much of the smoke has gone which isn't the case in the standard version of Quarter Cask. Like a salty complex bourbon. I like it but yes it's slightly too oaky for me. 3.65/87

Easiest to discuss where these deviates from a typical Laphroaig, it's fruitier on the nose with a deeper, earthier body and slightly more complexity on the finish, including the presence of burnt aniseed notes. Otherwise its very much in the same stable as the 10, QC etc, so if you like those you can't go too far wrong.

On the nose: peat, cold smoke, cereal and bread, salt, sand, mercurochrome. Opens on fruit, quince, grapefruit and some flowers. A malabar?

In the mouth: peat and cold ashes, a little sugar, lime, something metallic, liquorice and menthol.

It is a common place to treat medicinal Laphroaig peat but there is really the hospital bandage under the nose! A farmer side accompanies this sensation as well as cold ash and eugenols (dentist like).
Very thick texture, in the mouth the medicinal side literally squashes everything else, even if you smell sugar.
Long finale on ... medicinal peat.
Concentrated Laphroaig, close to 10 CS but more monolithic.

this Cairdeas desperately needs air. half way down the bottle the hate turns to love and jacks the rating up by 2 points for now.

Great and strong stuff! Very much Laphroaig. Not only strong, also fresh and with fruit, moreover complex (yes, +/-6 years, only, but seems to be complex in a certain way. At least very much of multiple-property charater!!!). Much better than the other Cairdeas from 2017, the 15 yo Cairdeas. Really.

WOW!!!! My best Laphroaig ever!!! Until now. What is still to come?
Forget about all the standard Laphroaig whisky. Forget about the 10 yo, the Select, the Four Cask. All is nothing against this great stuff, Cairdeas QC CS (2017), WOW!

liked it from the very beginning, you can argue about price/value, but cant´complain when it is in the glass: sweet medicinal smoke in the nose, easy smoky palate, takes water well and opens up further... good stuff

Wohoo ... that is a nice first sip! Powerful, seaweed, peat, salt, nice. It Takes some time until the sweetness comes forward, sweet citrus, ginger, white grapes, some sour candy. Finish long lasting, peaty. What a nice dram!

[November, 2017]  I had this dram during a community tasting "Clash of the Celts" with 5 pairs of Irish vs. Scotch whisk(e)y.  This Cairdeas was paired with the most recent Connemara (bought in 2017) https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/99446/connemara-original.  Out of 32 attendees 11 voted in favour of the Connemara and 12 in favour of the Laphroaig (9 voted for a draw).

As mainly the german voters here on WB rather score this Laphroaig pretty high I do another detailed review (I am German by myself so I understand their comments - dear Tommyknocker:  Let us share a dram and I will show you I am not a "Sissi"!).

The colour is still pale straw and the texture shows fast legs and later tears (by the way, this is not the texture of a great whisky as the oiliness is rather thin).  The nose with very punchy on immature medicinal notes (hospital waste bin) and immature barley sugars but I have to confess it is impressive.  If you like a punch in your face then this dram is right for you.  As I am older now I rather like a harmonic setting...  Nevertheless I score the nose higher than the first time for its raw power.  The initial mouthfeel is not nice at all:  biting, hot and adstringent - all feelings I do not like.  But again, it is a punch in your mouth that obviously many Germans like (you guess what I like more, now - don't you?)...

The taste is just two-dimensional on malty and phenolic flavours that fight each other into the long and bitter finish, finally the whole dram dies drying out.  Water improves the dram but it gets a run-of-the-mill that way...

Call me a "Sissi" or whatever you like but this is not my kind of whisky:  To me this is a designed, gimmickry dram that tries to impress without substance.  But Laphroaig hardcore fans surely will love this and this is absolutely okay with me - you can have all of this stuff, I will not compete with you buying these bottles...

www.laphroaigcairdeas.com .... and it still exists.

I have made an experiment blending the Cairdeas 2017 with Laphroaig PX Cask. By the way, in the past years I carried out several experiments on blending two whiskies where I believe it could fit (trying different mix ratios). More than two is not possible for me as an amateur as unfortunately I'm by far no master blender ;-). But with a blend of two whiskies, only, sometimes amazing results are possible. I would say, in 90% of the trials the result was poor or at least not satisfying, but maybe 10% of the results were very convincing or at least quite interesting.

Here, I married two NAS Laphroaigs, so we still have a NAS Single Malt. As the PX Cask is also a "Quarter Cask" plus PX finish and the Cairdeas 2017 is called a "QC CS", both ingredients of the blend should belong to the same inner family.

The result was excellent, if I took not more than 30% of PX Cask.

Best is to mix 80% of Cairdeas with 20% of PX Cask (75:25 should still be alright, too). 

The little amount of PX-Laphi adds to the lightness of the Cairdeas a nice roundness, more texture, more volume and it is more delicate. More complexity? I'm not sure. But for those who think the Cairdeas is too simple and lightweight, the little amount of PX might make these Laphroaig lovers happy. Which I prefer, the neat Cairdeas or the "80:20PX" depends on my mood. Because I also love the austere fresh iodine peatyness of the neat Cairdeas very much. But that's only me. What is for sure is that the addition of 20% of PX Cask Laphi changes the intrinsic character quite substantially, and not to the worse. 90 points on my personal scale.

Horny stuff !!!! Laphi through and through (really has everything a Laphi fan wants). Better than the Cask Strength 009. Make a blind comparison, it will open your eyes! (remembers my words :-)).

Watts for awesome stuff !! This will blow my feet off. Ten times better than the normal Quarter Cask (which among the standard Laphis with drinking strength is already one of the better ones). And he really has everything that makes a Laphi enthusiast happy (the Cairdeas is a kind of "core Laphi" with a clearly recognizable Brennereicharakter). Jo, the Sissis ... ;-) ... I can not understand after this experience either. Huh? Smell it: crazy. Then the stuff is drinking: awesome. And the hammer: Better than the Laphi Cask Strength Batch # 009. The "fat" 009 is also fat colored with sugar couleur, the Cairdeas 2017 not going. One thinks the 009 would have to have more power, so a kind of 'sherry power', but the terribly pale Cairdeas would not (I think, without Zuckecouleur both would be the same pale). So, and now I ask all of you and tasted both BLIND in direct comparison. You will have an AHA experience, promise :-). By the way: the Cairdeas has to offer in comparison to the 009 still a horny drought, comfortably high three for a Laphipuristen.

A good solid Laphroaig with has a lot to offer even if the circumstances could have said differently

If the finish would have not shown the young age of this dram I would have given it more points but the finish has this decent metallic note which you may discover in very young drams

Laphroaig Cairdeas (Feis Ile 2017)
N: smoke, alc, sweetie
G needs water, sharp, smoky and burning, typical of Lap. stop.
60

New Update (as of 4th of August, 2017), (BTW 90/100 instead of 88/100, formerly):Head-to-head comparison with the CS#009 (I received the CS today), the ABV is nearly the same, so why not comparing both neat, albeit obviously having such a different character? But the retrospect may have proved me right (at least out of my very personal perspective). 

The maybe quite astonishing (personal) result:The Cairdeas is excellent, and maybe more than that: it is absolutely not worse than the CS 009 (maybe even better??!). 

I must admit, as I love the Laphroaig 10 y.o. Cask Strength so much, I was only keen on the CS and thus consequentially neglected to order enough Cairdeas. For my belief (without knowing it) the Cairdeas was only kind of an adjunct one had to order to get the CS 009. But the comparing tasting session from tonight taught me being wrong.

The Cask Strength (CS009) is excellent, no doubt, but it is of a quite strong and kind of warm sweet compactness, while the Cairdeas 2017 is not that sweet (other kind of sweetness, i.e. no "warm" kind of sweetness which you typically get from ex-Sherry- or ex-Bourbon-Casks) instead it is quite austere, dry, fresh, "transparent", with lovely Laphroaigian notes of austere peated and iodine "quasi-fruit", that typical "Laphroaginish in its naked form" (if you know what I mean. I know, this is quite difficult to explain and to describe in words).

After all, I think that even the price tag is alright. I had first been bashing the too high price. The price/performance ratio of the CS009 is so extremely good and better of course. But compared with other Islay whiskies and Laphies in the market, I think the price for the Cairdeas is absolutely OK.

It seems that I have to re-order it (fortunately the Cairdeas is still available, while the CS is aleady sold out).#########################################Old note from before:

I made a head-to-head comparison with Laphroaig Standard Quarter Cask (bought in 2016, new label, https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/42887/laphroaig-quarter-cask ) and with Ardbeg Ten (bought in January 2014, https://www.whiskybase.com/whiskies/whisky/306/ardbeg-ten ).

Here is my personal ranking: 

1. Laphroaig Cairdeas 2017, 88/100 (revised on 4th of August, 2017: 90/100)

2. Ardbeg Ten, 88-/100

3. Laphroaig Quarter Cask (2016), 86/100

The Cairdeas 2017 exhibits a very tasty clean peaty profile, very fresh, light and fruity, and partly sweet. A nice peaty summer dram with an underlying typical Laphroaig layer. Very nice, very quaffable! 

The Ardbeg Ten is less sweet, less fruity, less fresh. But also an excellent peated dram. Of course, as everyone knows ;-). Different, but same quality (I ranked it slightly lower than the Cairdeas). However: The price is more than different ...

I perceive the standard Laphroaig Quarter Cask (48% ABV) to being more dump, more simple, more of a compact brute than the fresh lightweight Cairdeas 2017. Even when I dilute the Cairdeas to 48% ABV, the impression remains (the perceived difference in quality does not origin from the difference in ABV). The Cairdeas does "swim" very well, BTW, the addition of water is recommended. With respect to overall quality, the Cairdeas outperforms the standard Quarter Cask, this is at least my personal opinion. This hypothesizes that Laphroaig might have used better casks for this "QC Cairdeas" than for the mass market product, the standard Quarter Cask. Maybe the same practice as obviously applied for the excellent 10 years old Cask Strength, compared to the 10 y.o. (40%ABV) standard.

By the way, I remember that the Quarter Cask (48% ABV) with the old label from some years ago seemed to be of better quality than the current release. I loved that old one very much. The new one seems to be more compact, more "modern", more simple (maybe, I'm wrong as it is only in my memory).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The general ranking of the three above mentioned whiskies - here at Whiskybase.com - is as follows (1st of August, 2017): 

3. Laphroaig Cairdeas 2017, 84.10/100

1. Ardbeg Ten, 86.40/100

2. Laphroaig Quarter Cask (2016), 85.05/100

What is suprising for me is that the Laphroaig Cairdeas is rated lower than the standard Quarter Cask (with the new label). Seems quite strange to me.

OK, the price ... 

Together with international shipping costs from UK this is too high for my feeling. However, look at the high prices of many IB's, today. This maybe relativizes the price (of course if one compares it with the price/performance ratios of an Ardbeg Ten, a Laphroaig QC or especially a Laphroaig 10 y.o. Cask Strength, then it looks different).

P.S.: I used "presentation=96" in order to compensate for the "price tag" as I wanted to adjust the overall rating to be influenced by taste and nose, only, but not by price or presentation. 

I honestly can not understand the bad reviews here. I think the stuff is good and tasty. Young and not very complex, but still interesting. Yesterday I got a broken bottle from a bottle division for tasting and was biased before the first tasting because of the rating here only negative. With the tasting then came the all clear. Much better than feared! Quite different from the earlier Cairdeas and interestingly also quite different from the normal Quarter Cask. While I do not consider the Cairdeas 2017 a high-flyer, I think it's worth a meager 84 points. Especially in comparison with other whiskys, which enter significantly more points on this portal. I made a repeated comparison with the standard Laphroaig Quarter Cask OB 48 Vol.% (Filling 2016), the Laphroaig 12 yo Highgrove Cask # 3009 and the Elements of Islay Lg5 (yes, the Lg5 is not a Laphroaig, it's clear, nonetheless the comparison after the first tasting of the Cairdeas in 2017 came to a head). In a nutshell, I think the highgrove is better, because it is more complex, with more fruit flavors, more filigree and more complex. The Cairdeas 2017 seems to me less complex and has undiluted more superficial alcohol than the Highgrove, but the Cairdeas but has more of the Laphroaig-typical peat-iodine character, the flavor is very nicely subtle highlighted. Incidentally, the Cairdeas 2017 is a bit similar to the Cairdeas 2014, which I also tasted in comparison (the new Cairdeas is still very different from the previous Cairdeas, but also good). I think that the standard quartercask (as much as I like it, especially as it is an absolute value for money high-flyer with about 30 €) is qualitatively inferior to the Cairdeas 2017 (which is supposed to be the QC Cask Strength). Especially if you dilute the Cairdeas to 48 Vol.%, A direct comparison is quite possible. The Cairdeas seems to me more subtle, fleet-footed and with more typical iodine flavors of the fresh-fruity nature of the compared rather clumsy-looking standard QC (I must say, the comparison was made with the 2016 QC with the modern label, the older with the old label was, in my memory, also better than the new standard QC). The Lg5 can not deny his Lagavulin distillery profile (he should not even ;-)) and is therefore only partially comparable, but also belongs to the "clean transparent Peat Group". The Lg5 I find excellent, but not better by 4 points, as the reviews suggest here on Whiskybase.com. I have to say honestly, sometimes I do not understand the reviews here. Otherwise, they will fit very often again and for me Whiskybase.com is actually a good gauge against the sample vial or the first test bottle. But sometimes strange results come out (at least I think that's my 2 cents ...).

I do not know what the sissis have here. Burning iodine tincture poured over cotton candy, brine with furztrockenem white wine diluted to. Simply the full Laphipower, young and unadulterated. Please do not take this whisky too seriously, but who likes the Quarter Cask will understand what I mean. Delicious!

"Laphroaig Cairdeas - The 504 Edition"

Young and feisty nose when poured straight from the bottle. Lacking any depth or complexity apart from the phenolic peat. A few drops of water helped immensely, taming the fiery spirit and releasing more fruits (orchard and citrus), creamy fudge/tablet and some oaky vanilla. Water, therefore, is a must! Fiery (peppery) and peaty on the palate (even with water), with hints of wood splinters and bitterness suggesting that this was just too immature to be bottled. The finish rescues things a bit, with the trademark phenolic peat smoke lingering at the end. Good nose (with water) and good finish then...but shame about the youth/immaturity on the palate. 

The weakest of all Cairdeas so far. An acquaintance said quarter cask in cask strength. Nothing special, you do not have to

Nose: Starts quite sweet and creamy, with Scottish Tablet, caramel , vanilla fudge, and some white pepper to balance it. There’s also a nice salty Caramel touch, with the Laphraoig smokiness. charcoal, and maybe tar, but don’t expect a lot of medicinal touches on this one.. It’s quite mild peat wise , but still packs enough peatiness.

Palate: Good mouthful all in all on this one, with an initial peppery attack, moving to old style caramel candy , vanilla fudge, sweet smoke, salt and maybe a bit of sea spray , tar and soot, and quite a bit of warm wood smoke.

Finish: Sweet smoke, toasted oak, pepper, and more Tablet.

Just over five years in first fill bourbon (Heaven Hill) then a further 6 months in quarter casks.NOT full maturation as described elsewhere