I have been a huge fan of the Foley Claret. Since I started drinking it with the 2000 vintage it has always been a lush, fruit forward, utterly hedonistic wine. Even years like 2003 and 2004 produced wines that were at the top of their class.
Since 2005, however, the wines have changed. They, to me, are more austere (relative to prior vintages), with more noticeable tannins and more astringency. They are perhaps likely going to last longer, but on release they are not as spectacular as earlier efforts.
I had a chance to have the 2007 Claret last night and, while very good, it also possessed that mid palate harshness that could be construed as either VA or nail varnish that his 2006 effort also suffers from. Perhaps with time this wine will break out of its tannic shell, and unleash iteself as a hedonistic fruit bomb, but this may take some time.
I was informed by someone who should know that this does represent an actual change in the Claret. Earlier vintages contained some Merlot to help create the more soft mid palate, and relied on the cabernet to create all the structure. Current efforts have ditched the Merlot and instead use cabernet grapes grown from the floor of Napa valley to create its mid palate.
My question to all is do you prefer the style of 2005 and 2006, or earlier efforts like 2000 to 2004?