Considering your thoughts on these, you might want to explore New Zealand Pinot Noir instead of Burgundy.
Grand Crus from the Côte de Nuits in ripe vintages are probably going to get you closest to a style you’ll prefer, if you do want to give Burgundy the best chance of suiting your tastes. Some of those are fantastic young, while others really demand age. Read notes on producers and specific wines to get a sense of that before buying. You still might find some of them too acidic.
I would say make it a goal to attend La Paulee verticals tasting or the Grand tasting and get a lesson in Burgundy. After attending you will have a good idea of whether you like it or not. Good luck!
I generally agree with other posters that if you like a riper style, which you clearly do then I don’t really understand the motivation to try Burgundy. It will cost you more, and you’re less likely to find something you like. Plus it’s complicated to understand. But if you’ve made up your mind and that’s what you want to try I wouldn’t try one that’s mature. Acidity will feel even more prominent, fruit will be leaner, and the earthy and spicy secondary and tertiary notes will be prominent. The 2019 vintage is where I’d point you. They are wide open for current drinking with incredibly fruit purity and elevated ripeness. The structural elements, acid and tannin, do not dominate like they normally would in young burgundy from other vintages. Texturally I generally find the 2019s actually quite silky. Some have at time reminded me of some of the restrained California producers I like best from areas like Sonoma, Santa Cruz Mountains, and Santa Barbara. I’ve really enjoyed what I’ve had from just about any producer. It is certainly a vintage where the rising tide lifted all boats. Stuff that has decent availability in the US that I’d look for from 2019 might include Drouhin, Chandon de Briailles, Bachelet Monnot, and even Bouchard.
2018s while another “bigger fruit” vintage, I don’t find as open for current drinking. Generally they’re a little more buried structurally, less aromatic, and darker fruited than 2019. And again anyone who says you’re wasting your time drinking any young burgundy at all hasn’t mad many 2019s.
Look to W Kelley reviews with descriptions that appeal to you and pick up a sampling of 2019s. Then go long on what you taste and like. I think there are plenty of options but your palate is key so sample first and then load up.
IMHO, don’t buy Burgundy to try to replicate what you like in California PN. I suggested above to start by buying Burgundy by starting cheaper. But, if you want to go for the gusto, find out why people find Burgundy so seductive. Look for seduction, not power - Morey St. Denis, Chambolle-Musigny, Volnay, IMHO. As for vintage, the best recent vintage for current drinking is 2017. May not be the best vintage at its peak, but for right now, even if the 2017s are nowhere near mature (for that, find a 2007), they are open and seductive.
Not sure why anyone would suggest 2018. Very hot vintage. Doesn’t really taste like Burgundy. If you want to try Burgundy, try Burgundy. Nobody buys Burgundy looking to replicate California Pinot. That would be silly. California Pinot does a much better job of being California Pinot than Burgundy does. But, California Pinot IMHO totally and completely lacks seduction and elegance. Buy Burgundy to try to find seduction and elegance. If you don’t like it, you can go back to California Pinot, but at least you will have tried REAL Burgundy.
In addition to my two suggestions of recent Faiveley and Fourrier, wanted to add the following:
Burgundy and Napa/Sonoma obviously have different expressions of Pinot, but that shouldn’t stop the OP from trying Burgundy. No, it certainly won’t be the same, but a number of posters have effectively suggested that it’s pointless to try because they are so different, or because Burgundy is too subtle, etc. I don’t think that’s true at all - the OP should try it and make up his mind. There are also wide ranging styles in Burgundy, and some of those wines will be more familiar to palates that lean new world.
I honestly find suggestions of villages/vintages generally unhelpful in threads like these, because they require a lot of context that the OP won’t have*. My goal would be to have a fun experience, not to drink what someone on a forum considers “proper Burgundy”, whatever that might be. Nearly all new world Pinot drinkers have enjoyed Fourrier when I’ve poured it for them, which is why I recommended the wine (and Fourrier’s detractors joke that it drinks like Sonoma pinot). If the OP enjoys the wine he chooses, he can always drink something older and more classical next. If not, the itch will have been scratched.
*Pretty sure no one suggesting 2019 Chambolle would mean chewing through a 2019 Roumier Bonnes Mares.
Lucien Le Moine comes to mind, quite polished wines. And Ponsot.
Bouchard Volnay Caillerets. Vintages like 2015, 2018 and 2019 are perfect, and readily available.
“Mature high quality red burg”. At least that was the original ask. So in my mind older than 2010, 1er or grand cru, a top producer, under $250. And now it seems, someone who makes wine in a more forward style, rather than lithe and pretty, and a riper vintage like '09 or '02. This is like some wine-geek board game 
.
Thanks Chris. That’s funny. 30 years ago when I first started drinking and exploring wine seriously I bought a couple bottles of that (it’s a name you don’t forget). Not sure what prompted me to buy them, but I remember liking them. Think they were $20. I’ll have to try again.
Mike
Thanks Howard. I think you’ve nailed it. I’m not looking to buy California Pinot I like from Burgundy. I like California Pinot, therefore I want to see if pinot from the “greatest pinot region in the world” appeals to me. If the best trait is “seductive” I want to try to find that and see if I like it. If it turns out I don’t like red burgs, so be it.
Thanks Greg. I assume I’m the “OP.” Sorry for my ignorance, but what does that stand for?
That asked, I appreciate your points and as you said, I don’t think it’s pointless. Exploring wines is half the fun. If I don’t like them, no harm no foul. It’s not like I’m going to buy a hundred bottles site unseen for many thousands of dollars and then find I hate them. Just want to explore. And it seems there are diverse styles across burgundy (as you said, there’s no “proper” or best practice).
Faively and Fourrier seem like good starts. That’s the sort of thing I’m looking for in this thread.
Mike
Colonel Mustard with the candlestick in the Dining Room.
BTW, thanks everyone for your comments. I’m flattered that anyone would take the time to read, think and respond on behalf of me. I will act on these responses.
Mike
Cathiard Bourgogne are ready to drink on release, are plush/sexy in that CA Williams Selyem way and cost less than $100.
Ditto for Barthod’s Bourgogne Bon Tons in slightly more red fruited direction
Might be good litmus test.
Perrot Minot and Joseph Roty are the first that come to mind when I think of red Burgundies that can act as a sort of transitional style for CA Pinot drinkers. I might also toss in Bruno Clair as an idea based on my experience with his wines when young.
New vintages of Clair have changed quite a bit.
Roty is a good call. Especially aged ones.
Perhaps explore as many village level wines as you can to get some idea of producer styles and terroir differences. Then use that knowledge as a launch pad to pursue higher end bottles of particular areas/styles you gravitate towards for the cellar. With your stated budget you’ll find many village wines in that range and a quite a few in the $50-100 range. Cheers
OP = original poster
Yes to Cathiard which has very pretty oak since the new regime took over. Barthod is pretty different since 2018 or so, but the new wines would fit the criteria.