TN 1995 Montelena Estate Cabernet

Jack_Bulkin · June 1, 2009, 2:55am

After a day off from daddy duties, a solid round of golf, and a blissful wine blogging experience today, I decided to open up a usual Robert Parker favorite The Chateau Montelena Estate 1995 Cabernet Savignon.
Decanted 3 hours in my cellar.
The wine has a solid nose of creme-de-cassis, scortched earth and dry but lingering dark blue fruits. It is for that Winery, a typically powerful, long and note worthy wine. It still has many years left, there is no rush to open this wine. I would give you all Robert Parker’s score, but I am no longer a member there, and don’t have it memorized, but I am proud to be here.

Terence_T-Bone_Livingston · June 1, 2009, 2:59am

Jack,
I remember tasting this wine at the winery in 1999, and it was the wine of the trip back then. Very memorable, great to see it still has a long life ahead of it. I can still taste it!

Peter_C · June 1, 2009, 3:00am

Good to hear, just picked up one at auction.

Steve_Saxon · June 1, 2009, 3:02am

Nice post Jack, I love that wine.

Peter_C · June 1, 2009, 3:03am

Oops, mine is an 85, tee hee.

Jack_Bulkin · June 1, 2009, 3:05am

Peter if it was well stored, you will not be disappointed. The 85,86 and 87 were noteworthy and memorable wine experiences.

Peter_C · June 1, 2009, 3:09am

Nice, snagged an 86 in the lot as well.

Michael_Malinoski · June 1, 2009, 3:47am

Um, I think only he who actually waved the successful paddle should be allowed to say he “snagged” those wines… I’m looking forward to some, as well!

-Michael

Ken_V · June 3, 2009, 2:43am

The 86 Montelena is actually quite a bit better than the 85 imo.

Jack_Bulkin · June 3, 2009, 2:46am

I agree Ken. The 87 was as well. On day two the 95 was a very lovely wine. Still had the power but with equal elegance.

Brad_S_w_a_l_l_o_w · June 3, 2009, 2:53am

A little drifty here, but if the 1995 is on a restaurant wine list for $175 and the 1991 is on the same list for $215, which would you choose? This, by the way, is a real-life situation. The restaurant is a steak house near where I live, and I may just wind up there on Father’s Day.

Jack_Bulkin · June 3, 2009, 3:20am

Brad, I really have liked both of the wines. I may have enjoyed the 91 a little more but I was always very partial to that vintage in general. Both wines need considerable decants. I don’t know the storage conditions of the restaurant, but if you are satisfied that the storage is good, I would probably go for the 91 and ask them to decant in advance for at least 2-4 hours. Report back to us. These are exactly the kind of stories and suggestions about wine that can really help us all as posters.

Brad_S_w_a_l_l_o_w · June 3, 2009, 3:41am

Jack Bulkin:

Brad S w a l l o w:

A little drifty here, but if the 1995 is on a restaurant wine list for $175 and the 1991 is on the same list for $215, which would you choose? This, by the way, is a real-life situation. The restaurant is a steak house near where I live, and I may just wind up there on Father’s Day.

Brad, I really have liked both of the wines. I may have enjoyed the 91 a little more but I was always very partial to that vintage in general. Both wines need considerable decants. I don’t know the storage conditions of the restaurant, but if you are satisfied that the storage is good, I would probably go for the 91 and ask them to decant in advance for at least 2-4 hours. Report back to us. These are exactly the kind of stories and suggestions about wine that can really help us all as posters.

Jack,

Thanks for the reply. If I am fortunate enough to wind up at this restaurant for Father’s Day, I will indeed report. I will say I am confident in the commitment of this place to excellent wine service and storage. In any event, it sounds like it would be hard to go wrong with either vintage and the quality of the particular bottle they pull will have much to do with the outcome.

Brad

Tyler_Rico · June 3, 2009, 4:09am

I agree with you on this one. Although the 85 is still kicking, the 86 tops it and 87 tops both. Had the 85 a few weeks and it was showing really well, picking up a lot more secondary characteristics compared to when I had it last. 86 has more backbone to last a few more years while the 85 probably isn’t getting any better. The 87 on the other hand is a different beast with a minimum of 5 years left in it.

Ken_V · June 3, 2009, 5:44pm

Jack Bulkin:

Brad S w a l l o w:

A little drifty here, but if the 1995 is on a restaurant wine list for $175 and the 1991 is on the same list for $215, which would you choose? This, by the way, is a real-life situation. The restaurant is a steak house near where I live, and I may just wind up there on Father’s Day.

Brad, I really have liked both of the wines. I may have enjoyed the 91 a little more but I was always very partial to that vintage in general. Both wines need considerable decants. I don’t know the storage conditions of the restaurant, but if you are satisfied that the storage is good, I would probably go for the 91 and ask them to decant in advance for at least 2-4 hours. Report back to us. These are exactly the kind of stories and suggestions about wine that can really help us all as posters.

I agree with all of Jack’s points here. The style of the 91 is more austere, but I have never had a better bottle of California Cabernet!

Alan_Rath · June 3, 2009, 6:59pm

If the bottle has been stored well and is in good shape, that’s a no-brainer: 91. A good bottle of 91 Montelena is one of the finest Cali Cab experiences you can have. 95 is a good choice as well, though I’d go for 96 over 95.
Alan