whisky stones. scam or solution?

[rofl]

Whisky stones. The idea seems brilliant at first. Put soapstone rocks in your freezer then put them in your whisky. Works just like ice except they don't melt and dilute the whiskey. I originally saw them at the impulse buy counter at a supermarket bottleshop and thought it was a brilliant idea but I would do a little researce first. Of course, I was sober then.

The internet reviews say everything from it has been used for eons as a drink cooler to pointing out that they are a great idea, but they do not work. I'm on about my eighth whisky now and I am pondering the possibility of putting frozen disinfected rocks in my drink to keep it cold. It doesn't seem that unreasonable at the moment.

So, does anyone know if the science adds up or not? My original concern was that they would remain cold for about as long as ice does and you would need a lot of them if you were going to work your way through a bottle of scotch. I saw a claim on the internet by a company that sells them that they remain cold for up to two hours, but I don't believe them yet.

It seems that if you invest in granite that was under sea water it is even better! I'm curious. Are they just selling pet rocks you put in the freezer? Is just another scam? Or does this concept have potential?

[BowlOfRed]

"cold for two hours" seems a useless claim without specifying the conditions.

Water has a nice energetic phase change that gives it such a large cooling capacity. It would be a rare solid that would match it over such a short temperature range.

Now the first thing is that granite/soapstone will be much denser than water. So you wouldn't need as much volume for the same mass. Tables I found show up to 3 times water density for soapstone.

I see the specific heat of granite listed as 790 J/kg K. The bigger the number, the more "heat" it can absorb for a given temperature (say zero degrees from your home freezer). I found a soapstone reference as 980. Ice (without the phase change) is 2093. Since 2093 isn't 3 times better than 980, a given volume of soapstone would be better than a given volume of ice.... until the ice melts.

I'll skip the melting for now and mention that after it melts water has a specific heat of 4186. This is already better than the stones (but of course has the problem of diluting the drink).

But the kicker is the enthalpy of fusion of the water. You get 334000 J/kg as the ice melts. Thats where the cooling capacity of ice appears. My calculations are that the stones would have to be about 113 C cooler than the same size ice cube to provide similar capacity.

[Lamuella]

you'd probably have a better time with those plastic ice cubes you can get that have actual water inside them.

[Rasmus]

Originally Posted by rofl

It seems that if you invest in granite that was under sea water it is even better!

Why?

<whiskeysnob>You shouldn't drink whiskey cooled at all; the flavor comes out more if the drink is at room temperature. So does a little water; so if your whiskey gets slightly diluted it isn't exactly a problem.</whiskeysnob>

I don't think the stones can work just as well as ice - the transition from "frozen" to "liquid" takes extra-energy that ice can take from your drink but stones couldn't - unless your whiskey was unreasonably hot, of course. But that would have all the alcohol evaporate and the taste of whiskey and lava doesn't really mix well.

Other than that, it is a question of how well the rocks transfer heat compared to the ice.

Slight derail: I was once told that in bars they have warm and cold ice - the former to mix in cocktails that are meant to be diluted, the latter to put into drinks to cool them but without (much) melting.

[SezMe]

If you want cold whiskey (*shudder*) then just put the bottle in the freezer; don't bother with ice or stones or anything else. If it gets too warm, you're not drinking fast enough.

[remirol]

Originally Posted by rofl

Whisky stones. The idea seems brilliant at first. Put soapstone rocks in your freezer then put them in your whisky. Works just like ice except they don't melt and dilute the whiskey. I originally saw them at the impulse buy counter at a supermarket bottleshop and thought it was a brilliant idea but I would do a little researce first. Of course, I was sober then.

...

So, does anyone know if the science adds up or not? My original concern was that they would remain cold for about as long as ice does and you would need a lot of them if you were going to work your way through a bottle of scotch. I saw a claim on the internet by a company that sells them that they remain cold for up to two hours, but I don't believe them yet.

Empirical testing says they don't hold up to most of the claims I see people make from them. I got some for Christmas a couple years back, and what I've found is: I can put 3 in a glass of scotch and the drink will tend to stay cool (not cold) until it's (the drink, that is) used up. You get nine in a bag, so you pretty much just rotate a fresh 3 in for every drink until you can no longer operate the freezer, at which point it doesn't matter what temperature the scotch is.

The one claim they _do_ hold up to is that they don't water down the whisky at all. So if you're just looking for something to put a light chill on your sippy-cup, then these work fine; if you want cold scotch, you're stuck with using ice. (Or, as someone else noted, just stick the damn bottle in the freezer.)

[quarky]

I would think that platinum would work better than the stone. Could be pricier, though.

[Damien Evans]

What kind of heathen would do such a thing, even if it worked?

The only acceptable addition to put in your whisky is a dash of water.

[sadhatter]

A "frostee mug" would probably be a better choice, i have found they work perfect for alcohol, with the exception that beer tends to turn into a beer slushie in them. They cool the living **** out of things, don't water it down, and if you get the decent quality ones, last longer than ice.

[Foolmewunz]

Originally Posted by Damien Evans

What kind of heathen would do such a thing, even if it worked?

The only acceptable addition to put in your whisky is a dash of water.

Old Highlander Joke: Water??!! Ach! I want to drink it laddie, not take a bath in it.

[wardenclyffe]

It may be apocryphal, but I've heard that legendary comic-actor W.C. Fields used to store large steel ball bearings in his freezer to be used to keep his drinks cool and non-diluted.

Ward

[quarky]

Originally Posted by wardenclyffe

It may be apocryphal, but I've heard that legendary comic-actor W.C. Fields used to store large steel ball bearings in his freezer to be used to keep his drinks cool and non-diluted.

Ward

If he had any class, he would have at least used gold balls.

[FreshHat]

Originally Posted by wardenclyffe

It may be apocryphal, but I've heard that legendary comic-actor W.C. Fields used to store large steel ball bearings in his freezer to be used to keep his drinks cool and non-diluted.

Ward

Also apocryphal:

Fields would jokingly refer to the gin in his flask (which he turned to frequently while shooting a film) as "pineapple juice".

A new production assistant was given the task of readying Fields' dressing room as his assignment for his first day on the job. He was reminded to be certain Mr. Fields' flask was filled with "pineapple juice". Unfortunately, the newbie took the order literally, and carried out the order to the letter.

When Fields took a swig , he immediately spat it out and blustered "some sonofabitch has replaced my "pineapple juice" with pineapple juice!"

As for my tipple, I like it the way Coronation St.'s Fred Elliot used to order it:

"Scotch & threat."
(The "threat" being just the slightest hint, or "threat" of water.)

[learner]

Another W.C.Fields quote...."I never drink Water,..Fish **** in it."

[George152]

Originally Posted by SezMe

If you want cold whiskey (*shudder*) then just put the bottle in the freezer; don't bother with ice or stones or anything else. If it gets too warm, you're not drinking fast enough.

Now that's the truth

[quarky]

I resent the lost btus from drinking cold whiskey.

That's pretty lazy, I guess.

But someone gets stuck bringing the temp of the ingested indulgence back up to 98.6F

Stupid whiskey. Stupid thermodynamics.

[Soapy Sam]

Whisky on the rocks?
The health and safety implications of putting rocks in your glass are nearly as horrific as those for drinking whisky in the first place.
It could shatter the glass and spill the whisky. You might swallow the rocks.
It disnae bear thinking about.

What barbarians chill whisky anyway?

The idea of water, as far as I know, is to release some of the volatiles in the alcohol, enhancing the sensory experience . Can't say I ever noticed it myself. I never saw any sense in paying $90 for alcohol, then diluting it.

[Cuddles]

Originally Posted by quarky

I would think that platinum would work better than the stone.

It depends on what you're actually trying to achieve. Generally, you don't put ice in a drink in order to cool it down, but to stop it warming up. That sounds similar, but it's an important distinction. Ice doesn't conduct heat all that well, but it melts gradually. So most of the time, the ice is still significantly colder than the drink. Ideally, it will melt just fast enough to prevent the drink getting any warmer, but it won't cool the drink so fast that it freezes itself.

Platinum, or pretty much any metal for that matter, will conduct heat much faster and will quickly cool the drink down so drink and metal are at the same temperature. Depending on the relative masses and starting temperatures, that could mean actually freezing it. But even if that's not the case, instead of having a cool drink that stays at a more-or-less constant temperature, you get a very cold drink that warms up as you're drinking it.

Rocks, which generally won't be as good conductors as a pure metal, will tend to behave more like ice than a metal. So while they may not be able to keep a drink cool for as long, they'll still likely keep it a constantish cool temperature rather than freezing followed by gradual warming.

Of course, it's also worth noting that water, platinum and rocks all taste significantly better than whisky, so you'd be much better off with a glass of water with cooled by platinum plated rocks and keeping the whisky as far away as possible.

[Hellbound]

Originally Posted by Cuddles

It depends...[good stuff]...as possible.

Just a point of clarification, but isn't it the phase change in ice that helps maintain a constant temp, not just the thermal conductivity? Because ice takes a lot of energy to be melted, during which time it pretty much remains at about 32 degrees. And temperature is the important thing in this case, rather than the total heat energy (as far as whether your drink feels cool or not). It seems other materials would give a more linear curve. In other words, wouldn't a graph of temperature over time look somethign like this:


The curves are the same, but it takes longer before ice starts rising.

Of course, I could be completely off-base here

[sadhatter]

Originally Posted by Cuddles

It depends on what you're actually trying to achieve. Generally, you don't put ice in a drink in order to cool it down, but to stop it warming up. That sounds similar, but it's an important distinction. Ice doesn't conduct heat all that well, but it melts gradually. So most of the time, the ice is still significantly colder than the drink. Ideally, it will melt just fast enough to prevent the drink getting any warmer, but it won't cool the drink so fast that it freezes itself.

Platinum, or pretty much any metal for that matter, will conduct heat much faster and will quickly cool the drink down so drink and metal are at the same temperature. Depending on the relative masses and starting temperatures, that could mean actually freezing it. But even if that's not the case, instead of having a cool drink that stays at a more-or-less constant temperature, you get a very cold drink that warms up as you're drinking it.

Rocks, which generally won't be as good conductors as a pure metal, will tend to behave more like ice than a metal. So while they may not be able to keep a drink cool for as long, they'll still likely keep it a constantish cool temperature rather than freezing followed by gradual warming.

Of course, it's also worth noting that water, platinum and rocks all taste significantly better than whisky, so you'd be much better off with a glass of water with cooled by platinum plated rocks and keeping the whisky as far away as possible.

And this is why i like being me, in regards to liquor.

I love to drink, but in the same sense i realize liquor, comparatively tastes like ****. Sure one can train themselves to differentiate between the different **** flavors, and even say " I love the taste." , but i seldom notice non alcoholic whiskey/vodka/etc sold, and in regards to non alcoholic beverages that are sold, they don't exactly fly off the shelves ( a recent trend in canadian convenience stores was to stock non alcoholic beer, thinking that with our cultural obsession with beer, and people "liking the taste" , it would be a viable alternative to soda. Convenience stores across Ontario suffered great losses as they realized that people are **gasp** looking to get drunk.).

100 dollar a bottle premium or 20 dollar a bottle rotgut, its all the same to me, what section do i shop in the liquor store? The one marked Clearance. And as such i have honestly tried more liquor, both premium that hasn't sold, and rotgut that never would, than most of my liquor fanatic friends.

[sadhatter]

Originally Posted by Hellbound

Just a point of clarification, but isn't it the phase change in ice that helps maintain a constant temp, not just the thermal conductivity? Because ice takes a lot of energy to be melted, during which time it pretty much remains at about 32 degrees. And temperature is the important thing in this case, rather than the total heat energy (as far as whether your drink feels cool or not). It seems other materials would give a more linear curve. In other words, wouldn't a graph of temperature over time look somethign like this:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...8b4b4acb18.jpg

The curves are the same, but it takes longer before ice starts rising.

Of course, I could be completely off-base here

Slight derail, but some of my happiest days in the bar are when the ice for my whiskey sour gets stuck at the bottom of the cup. Nothing is more annoying than having to drink a beverage ( alcoholic or non.) and dodge the ice cubes to get a decent amount. And trying to use those lame little straws isn't much better.

I am honestly surprised bars don't find a way to replicate this on a constant basis.

[Damien Evans]

Originally Posted by sadhatter

And this is why i like being me, in regards to liquor.

I love to drink, but in the same sense i realize liquor, comparatively tastes like ****. Sure one can train themselves to differentiate between the different **** flavors, and even say " I love the taste." , but i seldom notice non alcoholic whiskey/vodka/etc sold, and in regards to non alcoholic beverages that are sold, they don't exactly fly off the shelves ( a recent trend in canadian convenience stores was to stock non alcoholic beer, thinking that with our cultural obsession with beer, and people "liking the taste" , it would be a viable alternative to soda. Convenience stores across Ontario suffered great losses as they realized that people are **gasp** looking to get drunk.).

100 dollar a bottle premium or 20 dollar a bottle rotgut, its all the same to me, what section do i shop in the liquor store? The one marked Clearance. And as such i have honestly tried more liquor, both premium that hasn't sold, and rotgut that never would, than most of my liquor fanatic friends.

Because obviously what tastes good can be determined objectively and everyone has the same tastes as you.

[sadhatter]

Originally Posted by Damien Evans

Because obviously what tastes good can be determined objectively and everyone has the same tastes as you.

Not in all cases, but the available evidence, would suggest that liquor is drank for its effect, as opposed to its taste. Otherwise not only would convenience stores be not losing their shirts in a failed attempt to sell non alcoholic beer, but there would be non alcoholic whiskey, vodka, etc. sold so all those people that love the taste could enjoy it when they are in a situation in which they can't get drunk. If you can't sell a beer related product in Canada, that means people don't want it, and when the only difference is that this beer doesn't get you drunk, that is a pretty clear sign that when it really comes down to it, taste isn't what someone is going after.

Liquor snobbery is the classy man's bar fight story. It makes one seem more manly/adult to say they enjoy the taste of liquor , than be one of us poor fops who doesn't think that bacterial waste tastes good.

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by Rasmus

Slight derail: I was once told that in bars they have warm and cold ice - the former to mix in cocktails that are meant to be diluted, the latter to put into drinks to cool them but without (much) melting.

Whoever told you that was pulling your leg. There is only one kind of ice.

.... Actually, there are some more, but they only exist under very special conditions. Conditions which you will not find in a bar.

Hans

[MRC_Hans]

Originally Posted by sadhatter

And this is why i like being me, in regards to liquor.

Hopefully, you like being you, in most regards. Otherwise you should give it some work.

Quote:

I love to drink, but in the same sense i realize liquor, comparatively tastes like ****. Sure one can train themselves to differentiate between the different **** flavors, and even say " I love the taste."

And you like being like that? Well, that attitude can save you some money, for sure.

Quote:

but i seldom notice non alcoholic whiskey/vodka/etc sold, and in regards to non alcoholic beverages that are sold, they don't exactly fly off the shelves ( a recent trend in canadian convenience stores was to stock non alcoholic beer, thinking that with our cultural obsession with beer, and people "liking the taste" , it would be a viable alternative to soda. Convenience stores across Ontario suffered great losses as they realized that people are **gasp** looking to get drunk.).

Well some of us like both the taste and the effect.

Quote:

100 dollar a bottle premium or 20 dollar a bottle rotgut, its all the same to me, what section do i shop in the liquor store?

You'd be crazy to buy the expensive stuff, except ..... how often have you tasted really good liquor? If you always buy the moonshine, it isn't strange you think it tastes like cat's piss, because it actually does.

Quote:

The one marked Clearance. And as such i have honestly tried more liquor, both premium that hasn't sold, and rotgut that never would, than most of my liquor fanatic friends.

That premium, that didn't sell, might there be a reason for that? You know, the taste is in the bottle, not on the label. You know, shops rarely sell stuff for less than it is worth.

Hans

ETA: Whops, sorry for the derail.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by sadhatter

And this is why i like being me, in regards to liquor.

I love to drink, but in the same sense i realize liquor, comparatively tastes like ****. Sure one can train themselves to differentiate between the different **** flavors, and even say " I love the taste." , but i seldom notice non alcoholic whiskey/vodka/etc sold, and in regards to non alcoholic beverages that are sold, they don't exactly fly off the shelves ( a recent trend in canadian convenience stores was to stock non alcoholic beer, thinking that with our cultural obsession with beer, and people "liking the taste" , it would be a viable alternative to soda. Convenience stores across Ontario suffered great losses as they realized that people are **gasp** looking to get drunk.).

100 dollar a bottle premium or 20 dollar a bottle rotgut, its all the same to me, what section do i shop in the liquor store? The one marked Clearance. And as such i have honestly tried more liquor, both premium that hasn't sold, and rotgut that never would, than most of my liquor fanatic friends.

I drink non-alcoholic beer somewhat regularly when I'm driving because I want a non-alcoholic drink that isn't sweet and doesn't contain caffeine.

Non-alcoholic beer doesn't taste very much like alcoholic beer (to me it's more malty in taste) and it has a very different mouth feel (thinner and with no "burn"). If they could make non-alcoholic beer that tastes and feels like alcoholic beer then I'd drink a lot more of it.

Perhaps they'll never get there (but Becks non-alcoholic is not so bad) but then again to me Diet Coke was borderline undrinkable but Coke Zero tastes and feels enough like Coke to be an acceptable alternative.

I'm sorry that you can't distinguish between Premium and Value alcohol.

I can see what you mean with Vodka (but then I don't drink Vodka hardly at all) but a quality Gin is very different to a cheap Gin (you get much better botanicals), single malt is very different to a cheap blend (although in the right circumstances I'm partial to a nip of Black Bottle) and an XO Cognac is a completely different animal to a cheap brandy.

Don't even get me started on the difference between cheap red plonk and a complex top-quality Claret, Burgundy, Barolo, Rioja (etc. etc. etc.)

But like you say, if you're happy with the cheap stuff, you're saving yourself a pretty penny.

[excaza]

Originally Posted by Rasmus

<whiskeysnob>You shouldn't drink whiskey cooled at all; the flavor comes out more if the drink is at room temperature. So does a little water; so if your whiskey gets slightly diluted it isn't exactly a problem.</whiskeysnob>

'A little' water being a few drops, not an ice cube.

[Silly Green Monkey]

What about a shot glass made of ice?

[Cuddles]

Originally Posted by Hellbound

Just a point of clarification, but isn't it the phase change in ice that helps maintain a constant temp, not just the thermal conductivity?

They're both important. The phase change takes a lot of energy, so it acts as a good heat sink, but that doesn't help if the thermal conductivity is low since the heat won't get transferred to it in the first place. Something with a very high heat capacity but low thermal conductivity won't be much good at keeping your drink cool. It will keep it slightly cooler than room temperature for a long time. Something with low heat capacity and high conductivity will keep your drink nice and cool, but only for a short time.

Quote:

In other words, wouldn't a graph of temperature over time look somethign like this:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...8b4b4acb18.jpg

The curves are the same, but it takes longer before ice starts rising.

I don't think so. I think it would look more like this (forgive my mad graphics skills):



So metal (good conductor with relatively low heat capacity) gets colder than any other, but then warms up fairly quickly. Rock (poor conductor, higher heat capacity*) just has a gradual increase. Plastic (very poor conductor, OK heat capacity) has a constant gradual rise, but then reaches a pseudo-equilibrium where it's still slowly absorbing heat at the same rate the drink is trying to warm up. Ice (OK conductor, high heat capacity) dips a bit, then has a slower increase than the metal, and there should be sudden increase in gradient at the point all the ice has melted but my drawing sucks too much show it properly.

*OK, I have no idea what the heat capacity of rock actually is, but I needed a poor conductor with highish heat capacity, so I'm going to assume there's some kind of rock that fits that.

Originally Posted by sadhatter

Sure one can train themselves to differentiate between the different **** flavors, and even say " I love the taste." , but i seldom notice non alcoholic whiskey/vodka/etc sold, and in regards to non alcoholic beverages that are sold, they don't exactly fly off the shelves

The trouble there is that non-alcoholic drinks usually just don't taste the same as alcoholic ones.

The other trouble is, as MRC_Hans notes, it's not one or the other. I like the taste of some alcoholic drinks and I like the feeling alcohol creates. Plus it should be fairly obvious that most people aren't so desperate to get drunk that they don't care what they're drinking, so they tend to want to drink things they like even when they're doing solely to get drunk.

And before anyone says anything about people mixing up horrible drinks just to get drunk, that's generally not quite the case. People mix up horrible drinks in order to screw around seeing who can drink the most horrible drink, and happen to do so while getting drunk. People do exactly the same with things like spicy foods while entirely sober. Having dick-waving competitions over who can be the most stupid in a particular way is in no way restricted to drinking or drunk people.

It's like having a pie-eating contest. Just because you occasionally try to shove as many horrible pies in your face as quickly as possible doesn't mean that horrible pies are all you ever eat. Similarly, just because some of us may occasionally come up with bizarre and often rather yucky cocktails to mess around with doesn't mean we can't also enjoy the taste of other alcoholic drinks.

[volcano]

Originally Posted by Cuddles

So metal (good conductor with relatively low heat capacity) gets colder than any other, but then warms up fairly quickly. Rock (poor conductor, higher heat capacity*) just has a gradual increase. Plastic (very poor conductor, OK heat capacity) has a constant gradual rise, but then reaches a pseudo-equilibrium where it's still slowly absorbing heat at the same rate the drink is trying to warm up. Ice (OK conductor, high heat capacity) dips a bit, then has a slower increase than the metal, and there should be sudden increase in gradient at the point all the ice has melted but my drawing sucks too much show it properly.

*OK, I have no idea what the heat capacity of rock actually is, but I needed a poor conductor with highish heat capacity, so I'm going to assume there's some kind of rock that fits that.

From the random chart here, it looks like that's about right for heat capacities. The heat capacity of metal (steel, in this case) is about 0.5 kJ/kg K, most rock types are around 0.8, and ice at 0˚C is about 2.
But most rock types are better thermal conductors that ice-- ice has a thermal conductivity of ~2 W/mK; rock varies from 2-7 W/mK.

[remirol]

Originally Posted by volcano

From the random chart here, it looks like that's about right for heat capacities. The heat capacity of metal (steel, in this case) is about 0.5 kJ/kg K, most rock types are around 0.8, and ice at 0˚C is about 2.
But most rock types are better thermal conductors that ice-- ice has a thermal conductivity of ~2 W/mK; rock varies from 2-7 W/mK.

From an equally random source here, soapstone appears to have a heat capacity of .98 and thermal conductivity of 6.4. (Relevant because this is what the particular whisky stones I own are made from.)

Unfortunately this is now approaching the bit where I slept through any thermal-dynamics portion of any classes I may have had. From what I gather, though, it would seem that it would take a long time for rock to get cold in the first place (hence freezer), a long time for rocks to cool your drink down, and a long time before the rocks (and thus, your drink) warmed back up.

This would seem to match my earlier-posted anecdotal evidence on these stones -- that they made my drink cool, not cold, and they tended to keep it there until long after I should have just finished the damn whisky.

I also could be totally misinterpreting this, however, so anyone who did NOT sleep through the above stuff is welcome to chime in. And wouldn't there be a second rate of transfer to consider -- ie. the rocks are cooling your drink at rate "X", and your drink is warming up with respect to the glass it's in and the ambient temperature at rate "Y" -- ice cools drinks well because its "X" is much faster than "Y", and these rocks' "X" may not even be sufficiently faster than "Y" to matter a damn bit?

ETA: Wait a sec. No, it wouldn't. High thermal conductivity would mean that it loses and gains what heat it can retain in the first place much more rapidly, wouldn't it -- meaning that it would cool your drink quickly, but only to a certain amount since its capacity is only half that of ice, and then stop having any effect at all?

[roger]

Sadhatter: alcoholics drink for the effect even when they hate the taste. The rest of people that hate the taste say "oh, I don't like that" and move on to soda or something.

Me, I buy a $30-40 bottle, and sip it in such small amounts that I feel no effects whatsoever. Pretty hard to understand what I'm doing it for, other than taste, given I like the taste, and try not to get the effects.

[geni]

Originally Posted by sadhatter

I love to drink, but in the same sense i realize liquor, comparatively tastes like ****. Sure one can train themselves to differentiate between the different **** flavors, and even say " I love the taste." , but i seldom notice non alcoholic whiskey/vodka/etc sold, and in regards to non alcoholic beverages that are sold, they don't exactly fly off the shelves ( a recent trend in canadian convenience stores was to stock non alcoholic beer, thinking that with our cultural obsession with beer, and people "liking the taste" , it would be a viable alternative to soda. Convenience stores across Ontario suffered great losses as they realized that people are **gasp** looking to get drunk.)

Alcopops approach the issue from the other dirrection.

[geni]

Originally Posted by roger

Me, I buy a $30-40 bottle, and sip it in such small amounts that I feel no effects whatsoever. Pretty hard to understand what I'm doing it for, other than taste, given I like the taste, and try not to get the effects.

While you might just about be able to pull that off with small beer your liver can only burn off 40% wiskey at a rate of 25ml an hour.

[cwalner]

Originally Posted by Rasmus

<whiskeysnob>You shouldn't drink whiskey cooled at all; the flavor comes out more if the drink is at room temperature. So does a little water; so if your whiskey gets slightly diluted it isn't exactly a problem.</whiskeysnob>

Interesting. I have found similar issues with a liquor regional to the Basque Country, patxaran. It was always served in a large glass with a single ice cube there and delicious. I brought a few bottles home, but did not serve them properly once (just had it neat) and it was almost undrinkable.

It was amazing what the slight chill and dilution of a single ice cube can do to the flavor of a drink.

[volcano]

Originally Posted by remirol

I also could be totally misinterpreting this, however, so anyone who did NOT sleep through the above stuff is welcome to chime in. And wouldn't there be a second rate of transfer to consider -- ie. the rocks are cooling your drink at rate "X", and your drink is warming up with respect to the glass it's in and the ambient temperature at rate "Y" -- ice cools drinks well because its "X" is much faster than "Y", and these rocks' "X" may not even be sufficiently faster than "Y" to matter a damn bit?

Although I didn't sleep through thermo, it's been long enough that I'd have to go dig back into my textbooks to set up that calculation. I'd rather test this empirically, with two glasses of whisky and equal volumes of ice and soapstone

Also, as someone said above, the comparison to ice requires us to also consider that the ice is undergoing a phase change (whereas the rock is not-- thankfully, since I prefer my whisky without molten lava...). So the thermal properties alone won't answer the problem.

Qualitatively, though:
If the whisky starts at room temperature, the warmth of the drinker's hands would cause it to warm up at a rate dependent on the thermal conductivity of the glass, presumably (unless the drinker is a heathen who drinks whisky through a straw). To keep the whisky at room temperature, the rate of cooling (from the rocks) needs to balance the rate of warming (from the hands). Just comparing temperature differentials (a WAY oversimplification, of course), the whisky-hands difference is about +17˚C (assuming whisky = 20˚C, hands = 37˚C) and the stones-whisky difference is about +37˚C (stones fresh from freezer = -17˚C, whisky = 20˚C). Surface area of hands and stones might be equivocal, depending on how many stones you use.

And yes, I know that the temperature differential alone is essentially useless-- but at least qualitatively, it seems like the stones could potentially balance out the temperature rise from being held in warm hands assuming comparable rates of heat transfer, etc. and even cool the whisky beyond room temperature-- consistent with remirol's experience. Melting ice maintains a temperature of around 0˚C, so the temperature differential (whisky-melting ice) would only be 20˚C. But of course the non-melting part of the ice could be colder...

Rather than actually do the calculations, perhaps I'll conduct an experiment (my neighbor and fellow whisky fan owns some whisky stones). To do a true comparison I guess we'd have to cut our ice cubes to the same dimensions-- then again, I guess the relevant question would be "how do the whisky stones compare to a normal ice cube?" (also a problem, since our current ice cubes are actually spheres...)

[Hubert Cumberdale]

Originally Posted by sadhatter

( a recent trend in canadian convenience stores was to stock non alcoholic beer, thinking that with our cultural obsession with beer, and people "liking the taste" , it would be a viable alternative to soda. Convenience stores across Ontario suffered great losses as they realized that people are **gasp** looking to get drunk.).

Or else it could be that non-alcoholic beer is just not very popular because most people find it tastes dreadful.

Look, beer is alcoholic for a reason. Attempts to remove the alcohol and/or produce it without alcohol (and I dont see how the latter is possible and the resulting beverage to still be called beer), are bound to have collateral effects on the desirable characteristics of the brew.

Its a bit like those vegetarian sausages you find in supermarkets. Sure, they represent something that doesnt quite look totally unlike an actual sausage but they share neither taste nor texture with the article they are trying to imitate.

[roger]

Originally Posted by geni

While you might just about be able to pull that off with small beer your liver can only burn off 40% wiskey at a rate of 25ml an hour.

Which is about the amount I drink in a setting - that, or maybe 2 ounces of port, that sort of thing.

[Drudgewire]

Originally Posted by remirol

Empirical testing says they don't hold up to most of the claims I see people make from them. I got some for Christmas a couple years back, and what I've found is: I can put 3 in a glass of scotch and the drink will tend to stay cool (not cold) until it's (the drink, that is) used up. You get nine in a bag, so you pretty much just rotate a fresh 3 in for every drink until you can no longer operate the freezer, at which point it doesn't matter what temperature the scotch is.

The one claim they _do_ hold up to is that they don't water down the whisky at all. So if you're just looking for something to put a light chill on your sippy-cup, then these work fine; if you want cold scotch, you're stuck with using ice. (Or, as someone else noted, just stick the damn bottle in the freezer.)

I figure the vast majority of people who have them got them as gifts. Bought a set for my dad along with some Glencairn whiskey glasses this year and have been wondering if they work at all or not. Decided even if they don't it's an interesting novelty item that is a decent change from a book or Kindle gift certificate like he gets most years. vv

[quarky]

You've likely heard about the poison ice-cube mystery: The slow drinker dies.

Bottoms up; down the shot in one go.

Or, drink it outside, in a cold place.