TN: Cork vs. Screw Cap at 14 years: PlumpJack Reserve Cabernet

WINE TALK
1

CORK VS. SCREW CAP AT 14 YEARS: PLUMPJACK RESERVE CABERNET - Tapestry Restaurant, Los Gatos, California (3/29/2011)


In 2000, PlumpJack Winery announced that it would be bottling half of its 1997 Reserve Cabernet (its first vintage), a total of 150 cases, under screw cap, as well as a cork sealed version. They also sold the screw cap, or Stelvin closure, bottles for $10 more than the cork sealed bottes, for a total of $135 per bottle. This made it the first premium red wine in California to be bottled under screw cap.

In 2007, winemaker Tony Biaggi explained that samples of both the stelvin enclosure and the cork sealed wines had been given to U.C. Davis to study, and that “[t]his was set up as a 10-year program, and in a couple years they [at U.C. Davis] will do a chemical analysis to see how both wines have aged.” I understand from Tercero’s Larry Schaffer, who’s inquired about the study, that it has been completed and results are likely to be released soon. There’s also talk of setting up some blindtastings in conjuction with the release of the report. Also, at a 10-year anniversary celebration at the winery in October 2007, PlumpJack poured samples of both the screw cap and cork sealed ’97 Reserve blind. There appears to have been no clear preference at that tasting, with people finding them similar, and a roughly equal number preferring the screw cap version to the cork sealed one. A January 29, 2009, article in Forbes Magazine by Eric Arnold detailed a comparison blindtasting he did with George Taber, author of To Cork or Not to Cork, on the ’97 PlumpJack Reserve bottlings. In that tasting, Eric found the screw-cap version to be “a bit richer and fruitier.”

Thanks to collector Eric Nagel, a group of us did the same blindtasting recently, adding in a third wine from the same appellation and vintage for an additional comparison, a ’97 Whitehall Lane Cabernet Reserve. All of us at the tasting preferred bottle A, finding bottle B to be the most different from the other two, and preferring bottle C to bottle B. I was guessing that the bottle under cork would show greater maturity and development, so I assumed my favorite in the tasting, bottle A, which showed the most development, would be the PlumpJack under cork. Well, it wasn’t. We were wrong all the way around. Bottle A, my favorite, which had a youthful, plush cassis palate, and I rated 92+ points, turned out to be the Whitehall Lane Reserve. The one that was most different among the three, bottle B, was showing oak on the nose, was quite tight, with firm tannins, and I rated it 89 points. It was the cork sealed PlumpJack. So between the two closures of PlumpJack, I definitely preferred our bottle C, the screw cap version, which had a plush cassis and menthol nose, was also tight, but showing more fruit than the cork sealed bottle, with more integrated oak. It needed another three to four years of bottle age. I rated it 91+ points. It did open very slowly in the glass compared to the Whitehall Lane, but at about the same pace, or faster, than the cork sealed version did. And Eric told us the result was very similar a year previously when he opened another two-pack of this wine. Then the screw cap version was the favorite of nine out of 10 of the tasters. So I find myself very much in agreement with Eric Arnold’s result, reported two years ago in Forbes, where he found the screw cap version “a bit richer and fruitier.”

So what’s my takeaway from this tasting? Well, it’s just one more data point: a sample of a wine meant for aging, nearly 14 years from the vintage, where the Stelvin closed bottle resulted in a tastier, plusher sample, with more fruit and some development of the tannins and oak than the identical wine sealed under cork. I must admit I’m surprised, as it’s not what I expected. I look forward to the release of the U.C. Davis study to see what they found chemically between the two bottles. There should be a lot more tests and tastings of this kind, as cork taint continues to be the biggest disappointment for collectors and lovers of fine wine (followed closely, these days, by premature oxidation of whites). It also makes me feel more comfortable about aging the many bottles of German Riesling I’ve collected in recent years, on which many distributors have insisted that producers use screw caps. I am thankful to Eric for having collected these two-packs many years ago, and for including me in this tasting, which he hosted, by the way, at a terrific restaurant he is co-owner of in Los Gatos: Tapestry, a California bistro. For pictures of some of the delicious food the chef created for us, including a Kobe beef “cheeseburger potsticker” appetizer, and a delicious slowly braised veal shank, see below. We had quite a few more wines before the night was over, my favorite of which was a very young, but delicious, ’07 Cayuse Syrah Cailloux Vineyard, which I’d decanted for several hours, and a magnificent bottle of 1970 Fonseca Port. We also had very good bottles of the ’95 Cakebread Cabernet and ’98 Chateau de la Gardine Chateauneuf du Pape, along with a couple of ’99 California Chardonnays. For those tasting notes too, see below.
Blindtasting: '97 Cabs, including Plumpjack with two different closures

  • 1997 Whitehall Lane Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve - USA, California, Napa Valley
    Slightly bricking very dark red violet color; plush cassis, ripe raspberry, French caramel oak nose; youthful, ripe, plush cassis, ripe raspberry palate with integrated French oak; medium-plus finish 92+ points (bottle “A”: group’s favorite) (92 pts.)
  • 1997 Plumpjack Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve (Cork Closure) McWilliams Oakville Vineyard - USA, California, Napa Valley, Oakville
    Very dark red violet color with tiny sediment; oak, dill, cassis nose; tight, very youthful, tart cassis palate with near medium acidity and firm tannins; medium finish (bottle B: group’s least favorite in blindtasting of cork closure vs. stelvin closure) (89 pts.)
  • 1997 Plumpjack Cabernet Sauvignon Reserve (Stelvin Closure) McWilliams Oakville Vineyard - USA, California, Napa Valley, Oakville
    Nearly opaque red violet color; ripe, plush berry, cassis, menthol nose; tight, ripe cassis, raspberry palate with integrated oak and firm sweet tannins, needs 3-4 years; medium-plus finish 91+ points (bottle C: we preferred this to the cork sealed version in a blindtasting) (91 pts.)

For the rest of my report on the other wines we tasted, see the post on my blog: Cork vs. Screw Cap: PlumpJack Reserve CabernetRJonWine.com

2

Very nice post, Richard! I don’t feel that this issue will be resolved for a very long time. For one thing, there is the myriad of emotional ties and arguments that come into play whenever this comes up. “Religious fervor” would not be an inappropriate descriptor. Additionally, the science underlying the issue is constantly evolving. Cork closures are being reengineered, with natural corks being treated to minimize taint, and agglomerated/synthetic corks also evolving and advancing. As for screw caps, it is crucial to understand that the screw cap is NOT a closure. The closure lies under the cap itself, and the screw cap serves to approximate it to the bottle. This technology is also actively researched and in evolution.

I personally am hopeful that the screw cap can be perfected and win in the end. I often think of it in reverse: what it we had been using screw closures forever and somebody came along saying, “Hey, here’s a better idea…stick a piece of this bark in there instead!”

Though only one data point, your report does certainly give a lot of food for thought…thanks again!

3

Interesting. Of course, there might have been the same variation from two sealed with cork (and stelvin?) At the very least though, the stelvin did not hurt the wine, and no TCA afflicted bottles.

4

Richard,

Great notes indeed - though as Nate points out, NO study will probably move the needle much on those who feel that reds cannot be aged in screwcaps for long periods of time and ‘evolve’ as wines do under cork. The UC Davis info should be interesting - I understand that they are doing all kinds of chemical analyses, including headspace ananlysis to see what the chemical makeup is of the space above the cork and below the screwcap and above the wine.

One interesting side note - the WhiteHall Lane Reserve is now bottled under VinoLok IIRC, so you will be able to conduct a similar test in a few years with another closure type to compare/contrast with as well!

Cheers!

5

Very good article. When using screw tops, it’s almost like getting a free bottle of wine in each case when you factor in cork taint.

6

After all of the stelvin-sealed Behrens and Hitchcock wines that turned to plonk in such rapid fashion, I will not purchase any wines that use a stelvin closure.

7

Brian,

It was my understanding that the B and H problems were the result of synthetic closures, not screwcaps. I could be wrong, but that’s what I remember . . .

Cheers.

8

That’s what I thought too. I have never heard of wine in a Stelvin having issues.

9

You are correct

it sounds like Brian is confusing stelvin with synthetic corks

10

Now Richard you are completely wrong on this whole thing.

Less than one month before your note I rated that Whitehall 94. neener . j/k. I always like seeing your notes being so similar to mine.

Controlling for closure type, spontaneous bottle variation is such an enigma to me.

11

Richard - any decanting, or were they P&P’s? Whatever your answer, I am just going to suggest you are doing it wrong!!! [snort.gif]

12

They were basically popped and poured, but poured into decanters, labeled A, B and C to assist with the blinding.

13

Very neat experiment…thanks for sharing. I wouldn’t have guessed those results, except perhaps for the Whitehall being at the top of the heap :slight_smile:.

14

Great results; thanks for sharing! I wonder when the first high-end Bordeaux will release under a screw cap…

15

When are we expecting that worldwide ‘great freeze’ that will affect the deepest regions of our world?!?!? [cheers.gif]

16

That would be December 21, 2012…

17

Let me save us all some time. Now, when we read these comparative tastings where there’s an even split of people preferring the screwcap v cork, or it’s 60/40 one way or the other, or even, god forbid, there’s universal approval of the screwcapped wine, we have to bear a few things in mind.

  1. This is not a scientific test. There needs to be hundreds of bottles opened and measured, chemically analysed, compared, and peer-reviewed before any conclusions can be drawn.
  2. All mere tasting methodologies are flawed if you’re not measuring sulphur by scientific analysis.
  3. If the screwcapped wines tasted any good it’s only because you consumed a lethal dose of copper cyanide. Been nice knowing you.
  4. The wine isn’t 45 Mouton or 78 La Tache so what’s the point?
  5. Just because it appears that screwcaps work in practice doesn’t mean they work in theory.
  6. Current rates of ‘cork taint’ - which were all overstated in tha past, and often weren’t due to cork anyway - have now been reduced to 0.000001% so we should stick with the things that we know already work.

cheers,
GG

18

Richard,
Thank you for posting about this interesting tasting. The results put a smile on my face. As much as I love pulling a cork, I always consider data points such as this one to be a positive for the consumer, as well as any producer who is brave enough to travel the screwcapped road. [cheers.gif]

Graeme,
Brilliant! [welldone.gif]

19

Thank you Mr. Jennings, I’ve been wondering about those bottles.

20

Kudos to PlumpJack for this opportunity. [cheers.gif] I’d like to see more wineries try this.