Sugar In Rum By Richard Seale

Dai · Post by **Dai** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:12 am

http://thefloatingrumshack.com/content/ ... hard-seale

He mentions a guy called Johnny Drejer

http://www.drecon.dk/
http://www.drecon.dk/index.php/16-the-hydrometer-method
http://www.drecon.dk/index.php/17-list-of-rum-measured

Pusser's - Blue Label 54,5 50,3 (20gm/l)
Pusser's 15 year 40 32,4 (27gm/l)

Rum-pelstiltskin · Post by **Rum-pelstiltskin** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:30 am

This isn't an argument Seale is going to win. He's only going to do him and his business more damage. Sad but true.

Pussers has rum from DDL so a no brainer it would have added sugar.

Dai · Post by **Dai** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:38 am

Rum-pelstiltskin wrote:This isn't an argument Seale is going to win. He's only going to do him and his business more damage. Sad but true.

Pussers has rum from DDL so a no brainer it would have added sugar.

Pusser's has been a long time debate on the project because it was suppose to be made to the original royal navy recipe. We can only assume that this recipe contained added sugar then?

Or maybe not!
Pusser's - Red label 42 38,5 (6gm/l)
Pusser's - Blue label 75 74,1 (6gm/l)

I'll back Richard Seale on this issue and yes he has an uphill fight, a bloody steep hill at that.

It does not seem to have damaged him so far.

Rum-pelstiltskin · Post by **Rum-pelstiltskin** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:43 am

Dai wrote:
Rum-pelstiltskin wrote:This isn't an argument Seale is going to win. He's only going to do him and his business more damage. Sad but true.

Pussers has rum from DDL so a no brainer it would have added sugar.
Pusser's has been a long time debate on the project because it was suppose to be made to the original royal navy recipe. We can only assume that this recipe contained added sugar then?

I'll back Richard Seale on this issue and yes he has an uphill fight, a bloody steep hill at that.

It does not seem to have damaged him so far.

The Original Navy Recipe will have evolved over time. If Pussers is based on the later recipe (which I suspect it will be) then it will undoubtedly have added sugar.

I've never had any Demerara or Navy rum which doesn't have added sugar. A lot of rum was bulk shipped to England and made more palatable with sweeteners etc. Sugar being the most obvious choice.

Dai · Post by **Dai** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:50 am

From our understanding and from what Pusser's claim it is to the Admiralty standard as served to seamen before blacktot day. According to tests the 75% version only has 6gm/l so it looks like the 54% AND 40% are adulterated according to Johnny Drejer tests.

Rum-pelstiltskin · Post by **Rum-pelstiltskin** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:00 am

Dai wrote:From our understanding and from what Pusser's claim it is to the Admiralty standard as served to seamen before blacktot day. According to tests the 75% version only has 6gm/l so it looks like the 54% AND 40% are adulterated according to Johnny Drejer tests.

The Admiralty Standard was that it included no artificial flavourings or colourings.

I was under the impression all Pussers bar the 15 Year Old were made to the same blend but differing ABV only. So the added sugar differences is a surprise.

But as its a rum with a Demerara blend. No surprise sugar is added.

Dai · Post by **Dai** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:06 am

Rum-pelstiltskin wrote:
Dai wrote:From our understanding and from what Pusser's claim it is to the Admiralty standard as served to seamen before blacktot day. According to tests the 75% version only has 6gm/l so it looks like the 54% AND 40% are adulterated according to Johnny Drejer tests.
The Admiralty Standard was that it included no artificial flavourings or colourings.

I was under the impression all Pussers bar the 15 Year Old were made to the same blend but differing ABV only. So the added sugar differences is a surprise.

But as its a rum with a Demerara blend. No surprise sugar is added.

Yes indeed a surprise. Most of us here were under the impression that Pusser's didn't add sugar. Even the rep on the Pusser's stand at this years rumfest assured me that Pusser's didn't add sugar so either he is full of it or he is as ignorant as the rest of us.

Rum-pelstiltskin · Post by **Rum-pelstiltskin** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:16 am

Indeed. At the end of the day Pussers are marketing a drink. In a very competitive environment.

The Admiralty stated no artificial colourings in their rum. Sugar was probably always added. I doubt our Sailors were given premium product.

I like Pussers and Pussers rum a great deal. However, they are no better than a number of other rum producers who try to hide what really goes on in rum making.

Dai · Post by **Dai** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:52 am

Rum-pelstiltskin wrote:Indeed. At the end of the day Pussers are marketing a drink. In a very competitive environment.

The Admiralty stated no artificial colourings in their rum. Sugar was probably always added. I doubt our Sailors were given premium product.

I like Pussers and Pussers rum a great deal. However, they are no better than a number of other rum producers who try to hide what really goes on in rum making.

Yep it's a pity the rum producers are not more open and honest about the spirit they produce. That's why it's up to people like us to educate our selfs and others so that we can make the best choices for our money and palate.

da'rum · Post by **da'rum** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 2:11 pm

I like Pussers and Pussers rum a great deal. However, they are no better than a number of other rum producers who try to hide what really goes on in rum making.

This ^^ pretty much sums up my feelings towards Pussers as well. A nice drop and I enjoy it but they are so full of bullshit that they are indistinguishable from the other fairytale spinners out there.

We only need to look at there steadfast adherence to the wooden stills wank that they bang on with.

Blade Rummer · Post by **Blade Rummer** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 4:16 pm

What I find interesting is that even the El Dorado 5 yo has 12 g/L of added sugar, which is almost as much as the 8 yo. Now, to me I had the ED 5 pegged as either a non or very slightly sweetened rum, esp. when compared to its older siblings. According to the Drecon results, it has nearly as much as the ED8, which is notably sweeter to my taste and leaves the telltale sticky residue around the cap.

Rum-pelstiltskin · Post by **Rum-pelstiltskin** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 4:24 pm

Blade Rummer wrote:What I find interesting is that even the El Dorado 5 yo has 12 g/L of added sugar, which is almost as much as the 8 yo. Now, to me I had the ED 5 pegged as either a non or very slightly sweetened rum, esp. when compared to its older siblings. According to the Drecon results, it has nearly as much as the ED8, which is notably sweeter to my taste and leaves the telltale sticky residue around the cap.

How much difference do you think these additions make taste wise? Is this an enormous amount of sugar?

Dai · Post by **Dai** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 4:26 pm

Blade Rummer wrote:What I find interesting is that even the El Dorado 5 yo has 12 g/L of added sugar, which is almost as much as the 8 yo. Now, to me I had the ED 5 pegged as either a non or very slightly sweetened rum, esp. when compared to its older siblings. According to the Drecon results, it has nearly as much as the ED8, which is notably sweeter to my taste and leaves the telltale sticky residue around the cap.

I cracked open my bottle of ED8 this Sunday and I'm surprised it has added sugar as it's not a particularly a sweet rum. I'm shocked at the 5year old having added sugar. There are a few shocks in Johnny's results. It makes me want to switch to whisky or bourbon just to get value for money.

I read these results and I get the feeling that most of the rum industry is just taking the piss.

One other area I noticed in Johnny's results is the actual alcoholic strength readings he was getting. If they are accurate then we are truly being ripped off on some products.

El Dorado 21 43 34,7 33
El Dorado 25 1980 43 28,5 51

Super expensive rums like the ED 21/25 being absolutely obliterated with sugar. The 25 is really expensive I pity anyone who shelled out £379.95 for it. Even the 21 year old @ £79 with 33gm/l is ripping the consumer off.

One real shocker for me was Dos Maderos 5+5 @33gm/l. Sherry barrels my arse just dose it with sugar and crack on with the bullshit marketing.

Dai · Post by **Dai** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:12 pm

Rum-pelstiltskin wrote:
Blade Rummer wrote:What I find interesting is that even the El Dorado 5 yo has 12 g/L of added sugar, which is almost as much as the 8 yo. Now, to me I had the ED 5 pegged as either a non or very slightly sweetened rum, esp. when compared to its older siblings. According to the Drecon results, it has nearly as much as the ED8, which is notably sweeter to my taste and leaves the telltale sticky residue around the cap.
How much difference do you think these additions make taste wise? Is this an enormous amount of sugar?

Round about 10/12 gm/l is not a lot. it's about two to three teaspoons of sugar per litre it's not going to break the bank. it's when you get up to twenty gm/l and above it starts to mask the rum, it makes an alcohol driven rum taste like a well matured cask driven rum when it is not since the sugar is masking the rum. When this happens the average guy, you and me are being taken for a ride by the producer, we are given nice descriptions on the label which hide the truth it makes shell out on inferior products when we could choose a similar priced product (Seale's 10 which is a favorite among the project members) which not adulterated. It's fine for anyone to buy what they want after all it's your money. It's not fine to be taken in by the marketing and so called expert rum reviewers.

mamajuana · Post by **mamajuana** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:05 pm

A major cause for concern is the difference in measured VS the labeled ABV? How can a rum be labeled at 42% but measure less than 15% ABV? Isn't that type of variance illegal in the USA? So maybe the US bottles are more closely to the label.