According to Paul Draper, in his experience, at the same ripeness level Zins will average about one percent ABV higher than Cabs.
1 Like
No, I don’t recall anyone taking notes.
I’m with you guys. Not saying there aren’t notable exceptions, but most of what has made me happy about Zin has been exuberant youth.
I realize that zin sugar levels are higher, and most of the Ridges are above 14.5%.
I’ve aged Zinfandels 10,20,30, even 40 years. Many, Ridge in particular, have shown remarkably well for their age, but I’ve never noted any improvement after ten years.
Not Surprised… The number of 25-45 year old Ridge Zins we have had at Ridge picnics at least shows me Ridge Zins have stuffing for a long long time. Had a 93 Turley a few months ago and it was doing well. Some fruit, forest floor, mushroom with resolved tannins. Tasted more like bordeaux than Cali Zin. It was still pretty full throttle but it was not a hot candied mess.
Jorge, brought an old WS Zin to that WS offline you missed during harvest and it hid its 15%+ ABV very well and was well received buy the group.
Sean
One must be selective. The average Zinfandel, or more likely 75% of, the Zin on the market should be consumed the week of purchase. They simply don’t get the winemaking attention that other varieties do and are overly sweet and alcoholic.
Agreed. The best Zinfandel I have ever had was a 1983 Hacienda del Rio (Williams Selyem) Leno Martinelli Vyd Zin consumed in 2014 when it was 31 yrs old. On the flip side though you have to factor in storage. I have had plenty of older Zinfandels that sucked due to poor storage rather than poor fruit or poor winemaking practices. Also some wine are simply not made to age. I drink all my Turley Old Vine bottles wthin 4 years of vintage date.
In the end it boils down to what kind of experience you are after. Aged Zin takes on different characteristics that will turn off people who enjoy the freshness of young wines. While I’ve had success in many different age ranges my prefernece is normally wthin 1-10 years.
One key factor for zins, I think, is the alcohol level. If that’s very high, it tends to become more conspicuous with age.
Disagree. I’ve been to Ridge verticals where the alcohol content ranged from 12.5 to 16.5. These were 20-30+ years of age. Alcohol content had no bearing on the quality. Some 16.5% were magnificent as were some with lower contents.
I think the claret comment was spot on.
1 Like
Yep. You see that sort of range with any long running Ridge wine. That’s what you get when you pick for optimal ripeness, Brix just isn’t very important, so it’s amateurish to focus on. Complexity and longevity are primary factors.
Some producers like Ridge have an occasional vintage that’s higher ABV, but will age well because of the above. Some producers have mastered all the factors (notably in the vineyard) that allow them to routinely make high ABV wines that age well. Other producers try to mimic that, but don’t know what they’re doing, so make high ABV wines that fall apart with age. Others make high ABV wines that are intended to be consumed young and not be aged, so it’s sort of a crap shoot if a given wine happens to age well.
I mean as a general rule. I’ve had 15.5+% wines from various grapes that were balanced. But, for my palate, that’s the exception. At that ABV level, I usually find the alcohol stands out and the wines become less appealing with age. Again, in general.
What Ridges were 16.5%? I assume you’re not talking about their late harvest zins, which are a different beast, and quite wonderful in their own way.
Last year or so, Ridge sent out a holiday offer that was a 3-pack of Ridge Lytton Springs Zinfandel vintages 2008, 2009, and 2010. I bought one and haven’t opened any. I’m encouraged by these replies. I think it would a whole lot of fun to open them at the same time. When to do that? Well…now I’m second-guessing my timeline!
When for you to do that would be soon, so you get a benchmark. Their wines tend to go though a curious transition through preference zones. I’m a huge fan, but find some obnoxious on release, while others love that “hedonism”. (Many I do enjoy on release.) Some are great 4 decades from release, others still holding on and enjoyable, but faded from their peak. Many have a long plateau. Perhaps you could source a couple older vintages, and a couple younger, for a good comparative tasting.
I drink a lot of zins and aging them depends on the style.
Of course, the Ridges, Carlisles, Turleys and Bedrocks can probably stand 10 years or more.
The more fruit forward ones not so much. I usually let my decent ones sit for at least 3 to 5 years.
At the Turley pick-up party last October in Amador, they opened some library wines. The 1999 Hayne Vineyard I tasted was, as the pourer suggested, ready to drink, probably within the next 24 hours. I wouldn’t have paid $95 for it since it was a little past its prime.
Not the late harvest Ridges. Just the regular bottlings. Those late harvest ones could get up over 18%! Some of the wines at 15.5 to 16% tasted almost Burgundian. Quite the eye opener.
I am going to Bern’s after next week, will be hosting a party of wine biz associates. I am not going to spend a lot of money and I have focused on their list of aged Zinfandels. I agree with the general drift of the comments… if you’re looking for exuberance, drink them young. With age, they take on Bordeaux characteristics, something I really appreciate. I can understand why a plurality likes the fresh style… there’s a lot of Bordeaux out there and not many reds that marry the weight of fine young Zin with the vivacity. I’m looking at half a dozen Zins from the 70s on the Bern’s list, as well as a Bonny Doon from the Santa Cruz Mountains at just over 20 years of age. Yes, I will report back. Normally I would be chary of Zins at 40+ years, but we know they have been in 50 degree suspended animation since purchase, so I’m hopeful.
Based on decades of sporadic experience, I like my Zins at 2 - 3 years, then 7 - 12 years then 20 and up. Can’t remember any over 30 years, but it’s coming up.
Dan Kravitz
Very cool! I look forward to the report back. I am somewhat new in my collecting and cellaring, but have been stashing away some Ridge and Turley’s zins for drinking in many years. I look forward to your impressions overall on the older bottles.
(And, you just inspired me to check out the Bern’s wine list. wow… The zinfandel list alone is incredible.)
As noted above, the obvious answer is “it depends on the winery.” Ravenswood, Carlisle and Ridge Zins age well, from all I’ve experienced. But does Zin, generally, evolve into huge complexity like great Cabernets or Pinots or Barolos/Barbarescos? No, not IMO.
I like that Zin can drink well young, as I’m less into cellering lately and more into drinking young.
to Mark Morrissette,
My experience is somewhat limited, but I think Ridge Zinfandels are much better candidates for mid to long term ageing than Turley. I’ve enjoyed a number of Turley Zinfandels, but they have been more in the opulent, very ripe ‘fruit-bomb’ style, while Ridge wines tend to have better balance, higher acidity (picked at lower sugars and higher acids) and almost certainly better ability to age well.
I’ll know more in 10 days, although the relevance will sadly be limited as there probably aren’t a whole lot of Zins outside of Bern’s that have been stored for 40+ years at 50 degrees.
Dan Kravitz
I prefer Zin at 3 to 8 years of age. I have had older Zins I have enjoyed, but I enjoy them in their youthful exuberance and around 8 years when the baby fat sheds but still speaks to Zin fruit and spice.