The Great Sugar Test: Updates...

[The Fat Rum Pirate]

Pirate, are you adjusting for temperature? And is your hydro calibrated for 20 deg C (most are, it should state the calibrated temp on the scale)...

Yip and the readings are pretty consistent with what's on the bottles for the rums I thought were unadultered. Apart from the Barbancourt.

Santa Teresa 1796 was very marginally under 40% RL Seales coming in at 43%. Jamaican Monymusk Mezan was also bang on 40%

The Barbancourt could be added sugar but then again it could be incorrect ABV on the label. I would be very surprised if any testing of ABV has been done by anyone in the UK for a Barbancourt product.

[Capn Jimbo]

Houston, we're OK...

Note: this post has changed, sorry! I just now redid the test, and realized I'd misread my hydro and thermometer (wasn't using my reading glasses, can you believe).

So sorry. I don't see a problem here.

The following is now reliable..

As noted just above, I redid my Barbancourt Five Star with the new kit (0-40, 40-70 & 70-100%). An easier read (44%), and corrected to 41.5% (at 26.5 deg C, label is 43%), leading to sugar of 6g. which confirms my very rough earlier estimate of 6g. My feeling is that although this kit is definitely easier to read, I can now see why Johnny uses the 10 point hydros (following), and uses a good electronic thermometer (accurate to 0.1 degrees).

Now when I get my truly accurate 30-40 and 40-50 hydros we'll do this again, but for now I'm going to stick with 6 grams, which is close enough to Johnny's desired 0-5g range to consider that the Five Star has only a literal touch of sugar (say 1g or bit more), and is relatively unaltered for all practical purposes, which is the whole point of this testing.

Stay tuned...




*****
Note: the following seven posts seem to reflect my grievous error, my sincere apologies...

Addenda 6/25/15: retested with 40-50 hydro, for a result of 4g. The better hydro's are absolutely more accurate.

[Blade Rummer]

It would be surprising that Barbancourt would add any sugar to their rum, it certainly doesn't taste as sweet as you would expect for the amount of sugar calculated to be added. Although, sadly, in the world of rum, nothing surprises me anymore.

That being said, I am still not 100% convinced that the hydrometer test by itself is an accurate enough estimation of the sugar content of the rums. I have yet to understand why exactly any variation from the stated %ABV would only be due to sugar and nothing else.

Have there been any agricoles tested that came back as pure? If not, it may be more likely that the test is not applicable to agricoles rather than all agricoles being adulterated?

I have yet to pick up a hydrometer kit myself (I don't really have an extensive collection and I only have a few bottles open at any given time), but it would seem to me the best way to confirm any suspicious result from the hydrometer test would be to measure the sugar in a given rum by standard additions.

In other words, prepare a sugar solution of known concentration and gradually add a set amount to the rum and test it again (correcting the %ABV for the added volume of the sugar solution). For instance measure the rum by itself, than after adding 1 ml of a sucrose solution, then 2, then 3, etc. Chart the results and calculate the equation that describes the obtained curve, the interecept on the concentration axis will give you the actual sugar concentration. In other words, a non-sugared rum will have a standard curve running thru (0,0).

This is really the only way to be certain that what you are measuring is due to sugar content and ONLY sugar content.

If anyone wants to do this test but doesn't want to handle the calculations, send me the data and I'll be glad to handle the rest, it's sort of what I do for a living

[Hassouni]

I'm also surprised by the Barbancourt. Was it the 8? It doesn't taste sweet at all, and 10g is not insignificant.

Are there any other factors that could be looked at?

[The Fat Rum Pirate]

It would be surprising that Barbancourt would add any sugar to their rum, it certainly doesn't taste as sweet as you would expect for the amount of sugar calculated to be added. Although, sadly, in the world of rum, nothing surprises me anymore.

That being said, I am still not 100% convinced that the hydrometer test by itself is an accurate enough estimation of the sugar content of the rums. I have yet to understand why exactly any variation from the stated %ABV would only be due to sugar and nothing else.

Have there been any agricoles tested that came back as pure? If not, it may be more likely that the test is not applicable to agricoles rather than all agricoles being adulterated?

I have yet to pick up a hydrometer kit myself (I don't really have an extensive collection and I only have a few bottles open at any given time), but it would seem to me the best way to confirm any suspicious result from the hydrometer test would be to measure the sugar in a given rum by standard additions.

In other words, prepare a sugar solution of known concentration and gradually add a set amount to the rum and test it again (correcting the %ABV for the added volume of the sugar solution). For instance measure the rum by itself, than after adding 1 ml of a sucrose solution, then 2, then 3, etc. Chart the results and calculate the equation that describes the obtained curve, the interecept on the concentration axis will give you the actual sugar concentration. In other words, a non-sugared rum will have a standard curve running thru (0,0).

This is really the only way to be certain that what you are measuring is due to sugar content and ONLY sugar content.

If anyone wants to do this test but doesn't want to handle the calculations, send me the data and I'll be glad to handle the rest, it's sort of what I do for a living

I don't think the Hydrometer test is 100% accurate and I agree in some instances other things will come into play.

BUT as with any testing if we all do it in roughly the same way and get roughly the same results then it does suggest something is up either with the ABV content of our rum or there are things in it which are affecting the ABV.

Currently we think that is mainly sugar.

The one interesting thing on this subject is that NONE of the major distillers have spoken out and offered any even rudimentary scientific evidence to show why (other than sugar) the rums are showing different readings.

In my recent interview with Johnny he stated that he has little negative feedback from inside the rum world. This wall of silence to me says only one thing. They've been found out.

Interestingly I will shortly be speaking with the Master Distiller for Santa Teresa's rums. He is very passionate about rum and what is added to it. I'm expecting quite an interesting exchange of emails!

[The Fat Rum Pirate]

I'm also surprised by the Barbancourt. Was it the 8? It doesn't taste sweet at all, and 10g is not insignificant.

Are there any other factors that could be looked at?

I would say Barbancourt is pretty sweet and smooth. It's almost silky. The website alludes to quite a lot of "Cognac" like practices. So maybe a little dosage is done (it certainly appears to to be the case).

It's worth noting I don't think Barbancourt themselves have ever come out and said anything about the added sugar debate? Has the question ever been asked? Apologies if it has but it seems that like Pussers before we have believed a rum to be pure when perhaps its not the case.

[Hassouni]

I'm also surprised by the Barbancourt. Was it the 8? It doesn't taste sweet at all, and 10g is not insignificant.

Are there any other factors that could be looked at?

I would say Barbancourt is pretty sweet and smooth. It's almost silky. The website alludes to quite a lot of "Cognac" like practices. So maybe a little dosage is done (it certainly appears to to be the case).

It's worth noting I don't think Barbancourt themselves have ever come out and said anything about the added sugar debate? Has the question ever been asked? Apologies if it has but it seems that like Pussers before we have believed a rum to be pure when perhaps its not the case.

No, I don't think they've said anything.

Is there no way to measure the brix of rum? That measures sugar content directly. However, I know that a refractometer, used to measure sugar content in liquids, gets screwed up when there's alcohol involved, so is there any other way besides the difference between label ABV and measured ABV?

[The Fat Rum Pirate]

I'm also surprised by the Barbancourt. Was it the 8? It doesn't taste sweet at all, and 10g is not insignificant.

Are there any other factors that could be looked at?

I would say Barbancourt is pretty sweet and smooth. It's almost silky. The website alludes to quite a lot of "Cognac" like practices. So maybe a little dosage is done (it certainly appears to to be the case).

It's worth noting I don't think Barbancourt themselves have ever come out and said anything about the added sugar debate? Has the question ever been asked? Apologies if it has but it seems that like Pussers before we have believed a rum to be pure when perhaps its not the case.

No, I don't think they've said anything.

Is there no way to measure the brix of rum? That measures sugar content directly. However, I know that a refractometer, used to measure sugar content in liquids, gets screwed up when there's alcohol involved, so is there any other way besides the difference between label ABV and measured ABV?

There will be expensive lab equipment but we don't have that. For the purposes of letting the rum companies know that consumers are on to something (I will be posting Sugar Test Results on my site as well soon) then the Hydrometer method will work.

We don't have to prove it is sugar they have to give us an explanation of what it is if its not sugar.....

We aren't the ones marketing it.

[Capn Jimbo]

My sincere apologies...

I completely screwed up my readings and calculations, was rushing and wasn't wearing my reading glasses, ouch! See the corrected post (red) about 6 posts above. This was VERY misleading to you all and I apologize!

My earlier rough estimate was 6 grams, and after properly retesting with the 40-70%, the results have confirmed that figure. I now used an electronic thermometer for precision, accurate to 0.1 degrees. Please note that the last six or seven intervening posts followed my compleatly idiotic error and led to unnecessary speculation.

I am so sorry. As I now know my earlier rough test (for fun with the 0-100) was 6g, and the much easier read 40-70% hydro agreed exactly. I will retest with the 40-50% when I get it, but let's summarize:


Flat Ass Bottom Line

1. As Johnny Drejer proved, the hydro test is quite accurate enough (matching not only ALKO's results, but confirmed by testing of known sugar solutions). It is important that tests be done with a 10 point scale, eg 30-40% or 40-50%.

2. My own testing was entirely consistent (at 6g) using both a 0-100 and a 40-70 - still, I can only concur with Johnny that a 10 point scale, and a very accurate thermometer is essential. Thus my final test will be done with the 40-50% hydro when I get it (soon).

3. The test remains easy and accurate, and only confirms the need for truly readable scales and an accurate thermometer.

4. No test performed without Drejer's recommended equipment should be relied upon, or as the basis for judging any rum. What we have done here is simply for fun (so far).

4. I should not have rushed my test, and especially not wearing my reading glasses. Compleatly idiotic, and an error which will - and should - live in infamy! I deeply regret my foolish post.

[Capn Jimbo]

With my asinine error in mind...


...I'd like to address some misunderstandings that I may well have caused.

Blade Rummer:

"That being said, I am still not 100% convinced that the hydrometer test by itself is an accurate enough estimation of the sugar content of the rums. I have yet to understand why exactly any variation from the stated %ABV would only be due to sugar and nothing else.

Have there been any agricoles tested that came back as pure? If not, it may be more likely that the test is not applicable to agricoles rather than all agricoles being adulterated?

In other words, prepare a sugar solution of known concentration and gradually add a set amount to the rum and test it again (correcting the %ABV for the added volume of the sugar solution)."

In creating his method, Drejer tested his rums against ALKO's figures, and also against known sugar solutions he created (exactly what you suggested). The test is reasonably accurate. Richard Seale (who also tests rums) made clear that extractives (from 0-3g) MAY show up. Thus Drejer rightfully feels that a test of 0-5g represents what we may consider a relatively pure rum.

This is fine, as what we are really concerned about are rums that test at say 45g. Addendum: Yes, Negrita Dark (agricole) has tested at <3g (Swedes).

Hass:

"I'm also surprised by the Barbancourt. Was it the 8? It doesn't taste sweet at all, and 10g is not insignificant... Is there no way to measure the brix of rum? That measures sugar content directly. However, I know that a refractometer, used to measure sugar content in liquids, gets screwed up when there's alcohol involved?"

My fault again. The hydro test is more than accurate enough, as also confirmed by Richard Seales (who also rejects the use of a refractometer for your reasons stated). I am now completely comfortable that my Barbancourt Five Star is no more than 6 g, which is only 1g higher than the accepted range of 0-5g for unadulterated rums. No test done with a 0-100% scale should be considered reliable, especially if no temperature correction is performed. Although a 40-70% is better, the gold standard remains Johnny's 40-50% for this one. When received, I'll retest one last time.

Pirate:

"I don't think the Hydrometer test is 100% accurate and I agree in some instances other things will come into play... BUT as with any testing if we all do it in roughly the same way and get roughly the same results then it does suggest something is up either with the ABV content of our rum or there are things in it which are affecting the ABV... Currently we think that is mainly sugar."

That anything but a tad of extractives (say 0-3g) shows up on the test is undisputed by Seales, or now Drejer (who tested known solutions of sugar, and also did favorable comparative tests against ALKO, all of which proved his method). Seales himself uses the method. Even considering the trivial issue of extractives, a test range of 0-5g is more than satisfactory AND quite accurate enough in stating that rum may for all practical purposes, be considered unaltered.


Flat Ass Bottom Line

The bridges of reliability and practical accuracy have been crossed. Sorry for my error - no worries with Barbancourt - keep calm and carry on...

[Blade Rummer]

Thanks for posting your corrections and clarifications, I feel a bit more reassured now about Barbancourt at least.

I'm satisfied to know that Drejer's method was verified against the ALKO's data and that he validated his method with a sugar solution test, that brings quite a bit more weight to the findings.

It will be interesting to see how the industry reacts to these results, if at all.

I get the feeling that the industry sees those of us clamouring for unaltered rums, or at the very least honestly labeled rums as a vocal minority that can be safely ignored compared to the majority of rum consumers.

But maybe I'm just jaded at this point

[Capn Jimbo]

Please be reassured...


It took some years for Z23 to be outed, at great cost to JaRiMi and myself, both of us having to face the monkeys and their master over at the Shillery. But even without any tests, not only the Zee, but the Dee and Pee rums were soon outed. The Preacher vehemently denied sugar or alteration even until the end when ALKO and the Swedes were finally published.

Now its fair to say that there's widespread recognition of these horribly altered rums, which are more and more being rejected, and not just by a few. The subject of sugar and alteration is now common knowledge - at last - and the publication of ever more tests will now greatly accelerate public knowledge and demand for unfacked products, far beyond the super sugar bombs.

Believe me this subject is now even being discussed at the Shillery, where the S-word was formerly verboten, and subjected any who questioned this deception with "liberation".

Times have changed and thanks to the net, will now change MUCH faster.

[Capn Jimbo]

Where we are at now... and some tips...


...is the fun stage - just playing with some old 0-100 hydro's, until our competent equipment arrives. During this play stage, here's some tips...

1. Pour the rum into the cylinder by tipping the cylinder and slowly pouring the rum down the sides, to prevent splashing and the formation of bubbles. Let the rum stabilize for perhaps 10 minutes insofar as both temperature and bubbles.

2. If you are using an ordinary glass thermometer, take your time as it too needs to stabilize. Hold it by the tip top to avoid heat transfer from your 98 deg F hands. Far better, you can find nice digital probe thermometers that are instant read, with no need to stabilize (not to mention they are accurate to 0.1 degree). How much? Just $3 to $8 or so is fine.



This Insten is just fine, and $3 at Walmart. I use my grilling electronic/digital probe.

3. Stuff your pride and use a magnifying glass to read (duh) your hydro and/or glass thermo. Don't be like me and take readings without wearing your glasses. Me idiot.

4. When inserting the hydro, do it slowly (save rapid insertion for your mistress). Before letting go, give it a spin to release any bubbles clinging to the hydro (and causing error).


Flat Ass Bottom Line

Believe me - you saw me do it - its easy to rush, and make little or even big errors. A difference of just one degree (easy to do with a glass thermo) leads to a difference of 2g in sugar, not to mention misreading of your hydro. Fortunately, as long as you are aware of the need to just slow down a bit, and get decently accurate readings, the method itself is foolproof and really quite accurate.

This is exactly why I'm recommending you buy 10 point hydros (per Johnny) as they are absolutely the most accurate and easiest to read, and yes, still very inexpensive. Just buying the 30-40 and 40-50 will cover 95% of the rums you have.

If you are desperate to test an OP, just buy the kit (0-40, 40-70, 70-100) for just another $7 but use the 10 point hydros wherever possible. For the moment OP's are so few as to be irrelevant for now.

Have fun, and keep inserting, but slooooowly...

[Capn Jimbo]

Very old, nearly empty Barbancourt 15 Year:


Tested with 40-70% at 43.7% (at 26.5 deg C) corrected to 41% = 8g sugar, compare to new Barbacourt Five Star at 6g. I would note that there was only about two shots left in this very old bottle, and I have to assume some of the alcohol must surely have evaporated.

If just 1% evaporated (bringing it to 42%) in this nearly empty 15 year, that change alone would indicate 6g of sugar, the same as the new Five Star. I think this is a fair assumption, thoughts?

[The Fat Rum Pirate]

Rum ABV% Label ABV% Measured Sugar g/L
The Scarlet Ibis 49 49 0-5
Bacardi 8 40 37 12
Cadenheads Dark Rum 50 50 0-5
Mezan Jamaica 2003 40 40 0-5
Mezan Guyana Uitvluigt 40 40 0-5
Pussers 15 Year Old 40 32 29
Barbancourt 5 Star 43 41.5 6
La Hechicera 40 40 0-5
Appleton 12 43 43 0-5
Abuelo 7 Year Old 40 36 15
Zacapa 23 Sistema Solera 40 34.5 20/21
Bristol Diamond Distillery 1998 40 39.5 0-5
Bristol Spiced Rum 42 38.5 14
Bristol Port Morant 1990 (Port Finish) 46 46 0-5
Pyrat XO Reserve 40 33.5 24
Westerhall Superb Light Rum 40 38.5 0-5
Caroni 12 Year Old (Velier) 50 50 0-5
Lemon Hart 151 (Mosaiq) 75.5 73.5 10
Cruzan Single Barrel Estate (Older style bottling) 40 40 0-5
El Dorado 3 Year Old 40 40 0-5
EL Dorado 12 Year Old 40 28.5 35
El Dorado 21 Year Old 43 37.5 22
Bacardi Gran Reserva (Maestro de Ron) 40 35 19