I know what I’m opening tonight! (I think I have the 2003 - usually just buy the Cab, but have bought the Merlot a couple of times.)
As bad as the 2003 is…the 2004 is WAY worse.
Oh man, remember that?!! We both agreed it was the worse bottle of wine we had that year.
The Merlot is intensely oaky, BUT, with some years, my experience with the 2000 has been really quite exceptional. I recommend patience. That said, I would rather drink a decent right-banker in a second over any WA Merlot.
No change from day 2. You can’t say that I didn’t give this a chance.
I didn’t realize this, but you will be happy to hear that 2006 was the last vintage of the Merlot. The fruit is now just used for blending and the table wine.
Thanks Eric, another good reason not to buy QC.
I don’t understand? They have always blended a small percentage of Merlot. And as I mentioned, their 2000 Merlot is simply kickass.
The only good QC Merlot I’ve ever had was the 98, and that was one bottle out of four…I can’t recall drinking any 00.
Pretty much every Quilceda Cab you have ever tasted (except maybe the 1997 Champoux) has had some Merlot. I understand thinking it is too oaky, and in my experience it takes a LOOONG time to integrate. However I am trying to understand your conclusion that this is another reason not to buy Quilceda Cab. To me that is a somewhat disconnected statement.
We’ll talk about it on Thursday.