? regarding Pinot Noir clones

I am curious what the overall preferance is regarding the use of several different clones in a Pinot Noir vineyard. I’m starting to work with a guy down in Garberville, southern Humboldt who’s put in 17 acres of Pinot Noir, and the majority of it is all 115, with 5% 677. He has it on 101-14, which seems appropriate for his site, but I’m concerned that only having predominantely one clone, will hinder the potential quality of the wine from it.?? What do you guys think?
He does have another 20 or so acres still to plant and I was thinking something like Pommard, Wadensville, and a few others would give a larger range of flavor/texture/aromas.??? Of course, I did just get back from Or.

Not an expert, but did some research as well as some practical testing… to my palate, I prefer 2A over 667, 777 and 115… I like the structure of the 2A relative to 667 and 777… I am least familiar with 115

also a fan of 777 and Pommard 4. 828 is a new clone i have been seeing more of recently and the wines have been very good or better.

I have no experience with planting, but consider me a fan of multiple clones. If I were planting several acres, I’d be inclinced to experiment with several things, perhaps even interplant some to experiment with that. I really like Pommard up here in Oregon. It can stand on its own pretty well. Wadenswil (2A) is very interesting, but sometimes it seems better as a component rather than on its own. The Dijons seem like components. I’d investigate Swan selection, Mt. Eden selection, etc. Here’s a cool article from an FPS newsletter a few years ago, for the really geeky. Starts on page 9.

http://fps.ucdavis.edu/WebSitePDFs/Newsletters&Publications/GrapeNewsletterOct2003.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regarding 828, there are a couple things out there under that number, I believe. You might search the “other board” for a thread from some years ago where 828 and other clones were discussed at length. Peter Carg wrote a lot about so-called “imposter 828.” Worth looking up.

My random opinions:

I like 115…and if I were to plant 17 acres with 95% one clone, that would be on the short list. But I agree it seems silly and a bit short sighted to plant that many acres to one clone on one rootstock. Peter Cargasacchi used all 115 on his Cargasacchi Vineyard…but he varied the rootstock to give variety, which was an interesting spin (which you’d expect from Peter).

Seems like the “standard” is to plant 115, 667, 777 and one other clone. There are so many vineyards planted like this its gotten monotonous. Plus I’m not a huge fan of either 667 or 777. For my palate, neither one can stand on their own…they can work well in a blend, but you have to be careful what you blend them with. There are so many other great clones/selections that both stand on there own and blend well that it’s a shame they don’t get planted more.

I think 114 and 113 are underrated…esp when 115 is involved. Both have somewhat similar profiles to 115, but are different enough to give more depth and dimension. 114 gives midpalate and texture…113 gives aromatics and brightness. Seems like 2A and Calera are interesting here as well (in the red fruit realm). Another interesting clone that isn’t planted much is 459

I love Pommard and Swan, and think they combine well with 115. I’ve never worked with Mt Eden (would like to tho) but seems like this would mix well here.

Personally I’m not such a fan of most Dijon clones, with the possible exception of 828, though as mentioned it can be hard to discern what is and what isn’t 828.

I would be inclined to plant a large variety of heritage / non Dijon clones if you can, starting with Swan and Pommard and then based upon what you can get ahold of. A little Dijon clone action won’t hurt, but going 95% 115 seems a bit limiting.

Generally, I think clones are overrated. At least from the ability to say you are going to get “A flavor” from this clone and “B flavors” from that clone, etc. There are simply too many other variables, including rootstock, soils, climate, grape growing and on and on to pin the differences simply on the clone.

That being said, I do think clonal variety can make a more complex wine and that is something you should strive for in such a larger planting. I also think mixing Dijon and non-Dijon clones makes sense.

That is about all I can say without knowing the specifics of the site.

Adam Lee
Siduri Wines

This vineyard is planted at around 500 ft elevation, sandy, silty, alluvial soil- hence the 101-14. To me, the site is similar to the vineyards on westside road- Rociolli, etc.- flat, alluvial, bench.

828 is a clone I’ve been hearing a lot of good things about.

He’s on his fourth leaf this year and is planning on sticking with cane prunning. I know this is common in Or, but what about Ca. Seems like I see more spur pruned Pinot in CA.

In doing my due diligence a lot of the growers/winemakers I spoke to echo Eric’s comments regarding 115.

On the flip side, others feel site trumps clone.

In the end, I just focused on sourcing the best grapes (variety of clones) available and am happy with the results so far.

I think this is one of those questions that if you ask 20 winemakers, you’ll get 20 different answers. I do echo Adam’s comments that the variables are too numerous to come up with a general/generic answer. That being said… here’s my 2 cents worth.

I’m not a huge fan of 828 - but that comes from a single data point. The only place we get it from is Rosella’s in Santa Lucia Highlands, where it seems to have a difficult time ripening, at least to a level we consider ripe. We let it hang an extra long time this past harvest, and it was the best 828 we’ve seen - but we had to push sugar levels pretty high and put up with a significant amount of shriveling. That stuff doesn’t really bother us, but if you’re not into water and/or acid additions, I might suggest passing on 828. Of course, my experience is very limited.

I’m also not a fan of 113. We’ve gotten that from Brosseau in Chalone and Rancho Ontiveros in Santa Maria. The wines in both cases tasted kinda flat to me. This is where my experience differs from Eric’s. I personally think that 114 brings the brightness that I love. We get 114 from a lot of sources (Shea, Keefer, Brosseau, Naylor, Russell, Ontiveros) and it’s always one of the stars. 115 is also great, and we get it from almost everywhere, but I think it’s been over-sold as the “complete clone”.

I also really like 667. We get if from a lot of places as well - Rosella’s, Russell, Aubaine, Graham, Rancho La Vina, Clos Pepe. It always seesm to add nice structure and brightness. Our experience is that it’s an earlier ripening clone, so we never have issues with it.

I think we get 777 from more sources than any other clone (Shea, Keefer, Durell, Rosella’s, Naylor, Russell, Aubaine, Clos Pepe, Rancho La Vina). The one issue with 777 is that we find it also to be late ripening… and for some reason, it’s the one clone that we seem to have more reduction issues with. It’s often kinda flabby, but it adds a lot of upfront yumminess to the wine.

Non Dijon clones can be interesting as well. We don’t get much, but we do get some Swan from Graham, 2A from Keefer, Mt Eden from Brosseau, and Pommard 5 from Keefer. I like all of those from those vineyards. I’ve been less happy with Pommard clones from warmer sites, since the wines tend to be overly tannic for my tastes. And 2A needs to be cropped to low yields for it to really work in CA.

OK - there are my comments. Just recognize that they may or may not be relevant to the site you’re talking about.

I think the best way to pick clones is to figure out as much as you can about the sites characteristics and then match the clones accordingly. Typically an alluvial sandy site with deep soils is going to have larger berries and easygoing tannins. Given this, I would look for some proportion of the clones to be smaller berried with more tannic structure. Calera could be a good fit since it offers those characteristics. I wouldn’t bet the farm on it though as it has some leafroll and can have low yields. I bet 115, 828 and pommard would all do well. Swan could be pretty and aromatic but would probably be light-bodied under those conditions. I would avoid the clones that seem to ripen late (777, 667) and I have never been super-impressed with 113-114. Overall I would be a fan of more clonal diversity and avoid any single clone.

We’'re not to 20 winemakers/20 opinons, but let me help get us closer. I have always liked diversity, I love mass selection plantings (our Selection Massale is a wine I really love and it is decidedly unique in flavor profile) and that approach appeals to me. A lot.

Otherwise, I think that short of planting lots of clones, vinifying seprately and finding out what is best for a site over years (a big undertaking most of us cannot do) the best approach is to see what other similarly situated (site/soil/exposure/rootstock.clone etc) neighbors are doing and evaluate the wines from those places.

That has always been the problem up here as we are just a baby of an industry, with very few neighbors to look over the fence and ask. This site is pretty unique to it’s area. There are a few other small vineyards in the general area. Fruitland Ridge is an area Nick Stez from Woodenhead, has been making PN from a couple of vineyards, and the potential is deffinately there.

Thanks for all the opinions guys. This is what I was hoping for. I’d say this area has a lot in common with western Anderson Valley, climate wise, with similar soils- alluvial silts on the bench lands and red clay based soils up on the hills.

Hi guys. First post on this wine board.
We have a 16 acre vineyard in Oregon, Ribbon Ridge AVA.
I strongly believe in clonal diversity as I believe complexity from blending clones is real. That being said, I certainly have some favorite clones based on drinking experience. I also think site ultimately trumps clone.
We planted a near equal balance of 667, 777 and Pommard; then just an acre of Wadenswil and an acre of 114.
Rootstocks mostly 101-14, some 3309. In retrospect the devigorating nature of RG may have been useful but primary concern was that RG in OR may need indefinite irrigation.

I’m glad that there is no ‘science’ to choosing clones and rootstock but it was/is surprising just how little literature is really out there on taste/aromatic comparisons, combinations, theoretical site matching, etc.

I love the power and intensity of some of the heritage clones (eg calera). Thought seriously about planting calera but at the end of the day thought it may be impossible to find clean calera w/o leafroll. Just seemed too risky. The two local resources for clonal diversity in Oregon are Tom Mortimer at Le Cadeau (Tom@LeCadeauVineyard.com) and Tony Soter. Steve Dorner at Cristom was also very helpful.
best,
Doug Ackerman
Armstrong Vineyard

Welcome to the board Doug,
You are in an awefully nice nieghborhood. Where are you in relation to Doug Tunnell and Brad at Ayres?

Doug, great to see you here. Hey, wouldn’t that leafroll provide a little devigoration? I ask somewhat seriously. Everyone wants clean planting material, but I think I remember from my CA days that people didn’t mind some virus in zin because it slowed the plants in a good way. Anybody have thoughts (and not shots)?

John, Doug’s literally just down Lewis Rogers Lane from Brick House and Ayers.

Hi John: as Vincent mentioned, we are on Lewis Rogers Lane, just down the hill from Brickhouse and Ayres – both of which are constant inspirations for me.

Vincent: Regarding the presence of Leafroll Virus: certainly in the short term the grapes and resultant wines may have improved complexity and intensity, but over time the vines develop diminishing yields, or at least this is my understanding. Now, if I had an “extra” small vineyard, and money was no object (yeah, that’s likely), then I’d love to see how a plot of Calera would perform here in Oregon. Fortunately, there may be a source of “clean Calera” available in the near future, but I’m just passing along rumors…

best,

Doug

Whatever you plant the least of will be your favorite.