This was fun. No real expectations...I mean what would you expect from a Kenwood 1997. Very pleasant surprise. Needed about 1/2 hr of air. Still dark still somewhat fresh. Reminded me of a value priced Medoc at 5-7 years without the green pepper. Good on the attack, short to medium on the finish. This is not going to get better. Don't over complicated the food pairing. A simple steak and salad. Baked potato with sour cream and bacon. Again, who would have thought..a 1997 kenwood!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Scoring a Random Mini Vertical - Kenwood Jack London Cabernet - 1996, 1997, 1998 (Pueblo West, Colorado): This was the unanimous WOTN for myself and the two family members who are somewhat into wine and enjoyed these bottles with me. Much darker aromas and color than the 96, with more blue and black fruits dominating and sweet cassis. This was drinking much younger than the 96 and definitely had a bigger/more full mouth-feel. Blind I probably would have called it an early 2000 cab. Incredibly smooth with integrated tannins and a long finish. A great 1997 cab that has aged very well and IMHO, drinking at it’s peak.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
I am surprised at the nose of a wine this old. It seems “fresher” than I would have guessed—not oaky at all. Introduction to the palate is quite pleasant—fairly smooth with typical cabernet cassis flavors. Very tame tannin. However, as the wine moves past mid-palate a sharp tartness takes over. Sadly, what begins as a terrific, aged Cabernet Sauvignon slides down on the finish to a good wine, but not a special wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Took to a big party. The wine evolved slowly over a period of several hours once opened. A bit barrel-y from the start, seemed a bit faded, but as the wine got air, it brightened and became soft and complex on the nose and palate. Wood influences receeded and some nice raspberry and leather notes came to the fore.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
found this recently randomly in a liquor store for $42....wow, what an amazing find....the wine was drinking so well with mellow tannins that blended so well into the overall structure of the wine...tasted like a $150-200 bottle....still lots of fruit--mostly black cherry, blackberry and graphite, hints of grass and brick, everything melded well together...what a special vintage
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
She's at the end! Good, smooth wine. Tannins are almost completely gone. Decanted 2 hours. It opened nicely but the 'punch' is all gone. Glad I saved it though...
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
This was the last of the four bottles of 97 Jack London that I had. I drank it after the Burgess 95 Cab, which is an EXCELLENT value. At $20, this is one of the best QPR wines I've had. This is a wine that's on-par with the Burgess, but with a different experience. The mouthfeel was a bit less refined than the Burgess due to the still assertive tannins, but not in an overpowering way. Well balanced, with a long finish that ended on woody fruit notes. This wine may actually still have some time left, but I don't think I'll be able to find it anywhere.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Garnet to rim. Medium intensity, fully integrated aroma of deep plum, tobacco and minor old leather. Slightly generic flavor due to age. Very nice in the mouth with no weaknesses. Whole greater than sum of its parts. Still strong and very enjoyable. Now but no rush. Fruit less expresive than 1998 but this is more complete.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
good wine, still some tannins there. Fruit up front, some spice with a decent finish...the bouquet is fair with plum and black olive. Nice wine better than I expected.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
1996: Was best of 3 upon opening. Smells of oak and berry and vanilla. Tastes of black cherry, oak, sweet tobacco and spice. 1997: Smelled dark, dank and musty upon opening. After a couple of hours smell dissipated and some of the oak and fruit became apparent. Tastes of red fruit, vanilla, spice and tobacco. 1998: Smelled a little green and musty upon being opened. After about 2 hours smell evened out, tobacco, spice and green pepper. Tastes of red fruit, vanilla, spice and tobacco.
Overall the 96 was the best, but given time open the 97 and 98 became more balanced and were close seconds.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Smells of oak and red fruit. Tastes of oak and spice initially and then the red and dark fruit flavors mixed with tobacco come in late along with light tannins. Has good balance and structure.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Wow, what a great mature cab nose. It is still very rich fruit with tamed tannins now but there is still plenty of life left. Sadly only one more bottle left from the original case. I'll drink the last one in 2010. It has been a great ride and I doubt I'll find another $25 cab that can give such pleasure over the long haul.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I couldn't stand it anymore so I opened my second bottle. It was a little weaker but it still knocked my socks off! It still had structure and lush plum flavor and I probably could have kept it for awhile longer. But my filet mignon was beckoning for it. I'll buy another vintage soon and see how it compares.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
I wrote to the winemaker in the summer of 2005 and asked him when I should open this bottle. At the time, I actually had one bottle (but I've since acquired another). He told me this:
Grace, You are in luck, the 1997 was one of the best of the decade. I can tell you I had the wine a few weeks ago and it is tasting great right now and should continue to age well for another 5 to 10 years if it is stored properly. If you have any more questions just let me know.
Pat Henderson Kenwood Vineyards Senior Winemaker (707) 833-5891
OK, so I opened my bottle in April 2006. It was fabulous!! Incredibly rich with lush plum and cassis! Wow! I was really bummed I didn't have another...Well the Kenwood rep from Sonoma came to Iowa and sure enough, I got another. I am hanging on to it for a little longer!!! We drank the 1995 just recently and it was ok---sliding downward a little but still good...
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
1997 Kenwood Cabernet Sauvignon Sonoma Valley Jack London Vineyard WIML87,NOWA,WS89 Tasted double blind on February 11, 2006 at an offline. Opened and served immediately in a Spiegelau Authentis Magnum glass. Bretty, funky nose. A little bitter black cherry on the palate. Pass is my recommendation. Likely a California CS from the 1999 vintage.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
2/5/2017 - JohnTelford Likes this wine: 90 Points
This was fun. No real expectations...I mean what would you expect from a Kenwood 1997. Very pleasant surprise. Needed about 1/2 hr of air. Still dark still somewhat fresh. Reminded me of a value priced Medoc at 5-7 years without the green pepper. Good on the attack, short to medium on the finish. This is not going to get better. Don't over complicated the food pairing. A simple steak and salad. Baked potato with sour cream and bacon. Again, who would have thought..a 1997 kenwood!
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/4/2016 - RichEB1 Likes this wine: 93 Points
Scoring a Random Mini Vertical - Kenwood Jack London Cabernet - 1996, 1997, 1998 (Pueblo West, Colorado): This was the unanimous WOTN for myself and the two family members who are somewhat into wine and enjoyed these bottles with me. Much darker aromas and color than the 96, with more blue and black fruits dominating and sweet cassis. This was drinking much younger than the 96 and definitely had a bigger/more full mouth-feel. Blind I probably would have called it an early 2000 cab. Incredibly smooth with integrated tannins and a long finish. A great 1997 cab that has aged very well and IMHO, drinking at it’s peak.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
4/25/2015 - SadEdjo Likes this wine: 92 Points
Textbook premium Cali-cab. Ripe sweet cassis, pencil shavings, sweet, well-integrated tannins. Not a rough edge to be seen. At peak
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/29/2015 - BucketList wrote: flawed
Unfortunately this bottle is well past it's prime. Not really drinkable.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
8/10/2014 - EMark wrote:
I am surprised at the nose of a wine this old. It seems “fresher” than I would have guessed—not oaky at all. Introduction to the palate is quite pleasant—fairly smooth with typical cabernet cassis flavors. Very tame tannin. However, as the wine moves past mid-palate a sharp tartness takes over. Sadly, what begins as a terrific, aged Cabernet Sauvignon slides down on the finish to a good wine, but not a special wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/19/2014 - IlonaN wrote: 90 Points
Took to a big party. The wine evolved slowly over a period of several hours once opened. A bit barrel-y from the start, seemed a bit faded, but as the wine got air, it brightened and became soft and complex on the nose and palate. Wood influences receeded and some nice raspberry and leather notes came to the fore.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/18/2014 - richshoes Likes this wine: 97 Points
found this recently randomly in a liquor store for $42....wow, what an amazing find....the wine was drinking so well with mellow tannins that blended so well into the overall structure of the wine...tasted like a $150-200 bottle....still lots of fruit--mostly black cherry, blackberry and graphite, hints of grass and brick, everything melded well together...what a special vintage
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/22/2012 - Napanapa wrote:
Spicy. Anise and licorice. Tannins smooth. At its peak.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/23/2011 - cellarrats wrote: 92 Points
She's at the end! Good, smooth wine. Tannins are almost completely gone. Decanted 2 hours. It opened nicely but the 'punch' is all gone. Glad I saved it though...
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/25/2010 - Vino Hokie wrote: 92 Points
This was the last of the four bottles of 97 Jack London that I had. I drank it after the Burgess 95 Cab, which is an EXCELLENT value. At $20, this is one of the best QPR wines I've had. This is a wine that's on-par with the Burgess, but with a different experience. The mouthfeel was a bit less refined than the Burgess due to the still assertive tannins, but not in an overpowering way. Well balanced, with a long finish that ended on woody fruit notes. This wine may actually still have some time left, but I don't think I'll be able to find it anywhere.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/4/2010 - esb wrote: 90 Points
Garnet to rim. Medium intensity, fully integrated aroma of deep plum, tobacco and minor old leather. Slightly generic flavor due to age. Very nice in the mouth with no weaknesses. Whole greater than sum of its parts. Still strong and very enjoyable. Now but no rush. Fruit less expresive than 1998 but this is more complete.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/12/2010 - greyhound93 wrote: 89 Points
Good but not great cab. Medium tannins, spice and dried fruit on the palate, meaty nose.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/3/2009 - drock25 wrote: 90 Points
good wine, still some tannins there. Fruit up front, some spice with a decent finish...the bouquet is fair with plum and black olive. Nice wine better than I expected.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/14/2009 - Dr_Bob wrote: 89 Points
a bit tannic, fruit still needs decanter time to open up (?2-4 hrs)
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/6/2009 - Aztec94 wrote: 89 Points
Did vertical tasting of the 1996, 1997 and 1998.
1996: Was best of 3 upon opening. Smells of oak and berry and vanilla. Tastes of black cherry, oak, sweet tobacco and spice.
1997: Smelled dark, dank and musty upon opening. After a couple of hours smell dissipated and some of the oak and fruit became apparent. Tastes of red fruit, vanilla, spice and tobacco.
1998: Smelled a little green and musty upon being opened. After about 2 hours smell evened out, tobacco, spice and green pepper. Tastes of red fruit, vanilla, spice and tobacco.
Overall the 96 was the best, but given time open the 97 and 98 became more balanced and were close seconds.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/28/2008 - Aztec94 wrote: 90 Points
Smells of oak and red fruit. Tastes of oak and spice initially and then the red and dark fruit flavors mixed with tobacco come in late along with light tannins. Has good balance and structure.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/15/2007 - gportilla wrote:
Wow, what a great mature cab nose. It is still very rich fruit with tamed tannins now but there is still plenty of life left. Sadly only one more bottle left from the original case. I'll drink the last one in 2010. It has been a great ride and I doubt I'll find another $25 cab that can give such pleasure over the long haul.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/11/2007 - Grace 77 wrote: 88 Points
I couldn't stand it anymore so I opened my second bottle. It was a little weaker but it still knocked my socks off! It still had structure and lush plum flavor and I probably could have kept it for awhile longer. But my filet mignon was beckoning for it. I'll buy another vintage soon and see how it compares.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/11/2007 - Dale M wrote: 88 Points
Bourbon, cedar, and blackberry nose. Flavors of cassis and cedar shavings, nearly past its prime so time to drink up.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/14/2007 - sergiob wrote: 90 Points
Great full mouth feel. Good tabacco, chocolate and dark fruit. Little tannin. Was afraid I waited too long to open, but got nice surpise.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/13/2007 - Grace 77 wrote:
I wrote to the winemaker in the summer of 2005 and asked him when I should open this bottle. At the time, I actually had one bottle (but I've since acquired another). He told me this:
Grace,
You are in luck, the 1997 was one of the best of the decade. I can tell you I had the wine a few weeks ago and it is tasting great right now and should continue to age well for another 5 to 10 years if it is stored properly. If you have any more questions just let me know.
Pat Henderson
Kenwood Vineyards
Senior Winemaker
(707) 833-5891
OK, so I opened my bottle in April 2006. It was fabulous!! Incredibly rich with lush plum and cassis! Wow! I was really bummed I didn't have another...Well the Kenwood rep from Sonoma came to Iowa and sure enough, I got another. I am hanging on to it for a little longer!!! We drank the 1995 just recently and it was ok---sliding downward a little but still good...
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/11/2006 - wineismylife wrote: 87 Points
1997 Kenwood Cabernet Sauvignon Sonoma Valley Jack London Vineyard
WIML87,NOWA,WS89
Tasted double blind on February 11, 2006 at an offline. Opened and served immediately in a Spiegelau Authentis Magnum glass. Bretty, funky nose. A little bitter black cherry on the palate. Pass is my recommendation. Likely a California CS from the 1999 vintage.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/22/2005 - twoamps wrote: 89 Points
old, but in a good way. Earth and leather and a hint of chocolate. Great for a $24 bottle. Guess 97 WAS a good year...
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment