This bottle was good but a bit tired. Fruit flavors were nice and full but the oak that I remember from past bottles was light and too understated to enhance the balance. It lacked much of a lingering finish. A day later it was going down hill big time
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Dusty dark berry, coffee, mocha. Good structure and decent balance. Not special but, like all CC bottlings I've had, a solid well-made wine that's a fine everyday drinker. The next level beyond the Two Vines and Grand Estates designations.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Blueberry through and through. Mild, acetone nose, palate is oaky blueberry, palate is short with a hint of acetone on the fnish. Nothing memorable, nothing structured, mild.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
I bought this pretty much knowing what I'd get. As Columbia Crest's second (third?) label, you can expect some leftover grapes. It's no great shakes, not over-the-top, everyday type drinking. Some dark fruit, chocolate, blah blah blah.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Nothing very pronounced here except maybe the finish. Nose is fine, a little dull but black cherry. Rather plain in the palate, a little tannic and somewhat heavier bodied than I was expecting. Finish is a combination of tannin and velvet, it's the most interesting part of this wine. Theres nothing wrong with this, it's a good drink but I think I like the (cheaper) Columbia Crest Grand Estate Merlot better
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Eh, nothing special. This wine was a dark, inky purple, almost back in the glass. I was hoping for more on the nose: it was fruit forward, but more generic fruit than anything specific. Spice and oak showed up as well. This wine was medium bodied on the palate, and seemed a little off. Oak, spice and cherry predominated, but the wine was chalky on the back of the palate leading into a finish that tasted a bit like fortified wine. Nothing bad, but not something I would seek out again, necessarily.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No
/ Comment
Very lean, with aromas of black fruits and dried herbs followed by clipped flavors of bittersweet chocolate and roasted tomato, and hints of singed toast. In my experience, Columbia Crest's H3 reds have been earthy, loamy and somewhat herbal, but tend to lack concentration. This wine is indicative of that profile, with a light-medium bodied frame and an abrupt finish. Not recommended.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Nose had some decent cocoa, cola, cherries. Medium bodied, the flavors start with dusty cherries and blackberries, as well as a bitter cocoa. However, a rough astringent oak dominates the palate and nearly hides the rest of the wine. It's unfortunate that this is so overoaked, because it is otherwise a well balanced smooth wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Very funky, wet and mushrooms on the nose at first but eventually blew off to smokyand slight black fruit but not much else. Blackberries and blueberries on an otherwise uneventful palate
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Very forward brambly, smoky nose with hint of treacle toffee. Refreshing blackberry blueberry flavour with lingering flavours and a smoky hint of vanilla. Nice balance. Not as flsehy as other vintages but also works better with food. Opended up over the course of a few hours. Tasty mid-week house wine at a great price.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Popped and poured. Medium-plus red/purple hue. Aromas of toasted oak with a touch of fruit. Medium to medium-plus body. Has really devolved from a somewhat palatable Merlot with little merit to what is now simply an oak-laden mess. Palate simply shows spice from the oak additives...what little fruit is underneath comes across as green and under-ripe. Technically not flawed, hence the low rating (showed best on release). Drink now. Really a shame for Columbia Crest to have ever released this Merlot when their example from the Grand Estates line scores at least in the mid eighties (not to mention the Two Vines Merlot, which is also generally much better)...hopefully just an anomaly with this vintage.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Flabby, fruity oak bomb. Big blueberry nose, jammy taste struggles to break through the vanilla. Easy enough to suck back, this would have been a good play when I was chasing girls in college but is too bit boring for adults at this price ($11).
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Consumed over three days with no discernible decrease in quality of taste. Nice deep dark color, full nose of dark berries, very approachable with very mild tannins more dark berries and a mild finish - great QPR.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Popped and poured. Medium-plus ruby/purple hue. Still has a strange "funk" on the nose somewhat reminiscent of fruit that is matched by aromas of well-toasted, spicy oak and alcohol (the oak component is especially disconcerting at this point, definite overuse). Medium body. On the palate, flavors of black cherry, plum, vanilla bean, and toasted oak are actually quite pleasant. Tannins are slightly drying. Seemed to improve with air, albeit slightly. This wine may never come together, the oak component seems to have grown. Drink up within the next 1-2 years before the fruit fades away.
***Quick commentary - Clearly this wine has been over-manipulated by use of oak chips and/or powder. The fruit that may have existed before the oak element was added could have actually led to a much better result. At this point, the always solid Grand Estates Merlot is a better wine and value.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
On opening had almost no aroma and very thin taste, though very smooth with nicely chewy tannins. I was thinking low 80's score, but after a few hours took a nice smokey, woodsy smell and a little more flavor. Still, even at this price point many better options.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
This is my second bottle of this and I can't believe I didn't pick up before on the insane oakiness on this. This wine needs an hour or so to breathe to let the fruit aroma build up enough to even try to compete with the oak. Luckily the oak is fairly smooth and sweet and not horrendously overpowering, but I can't help but feel they really over oaked this. The fruit is actually decent once you get over the nose and let it sit in the glass/decanter for a while. Nice acid too, which really cut through the fat of the beef ribs I had with it.
Overall, fairly drinkable, but too much oak and I would have been pissed if I had bought this at anywhere near MSRP.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Better than previous example, shook vigorously to help aerate which resulted in a much more approachable wine. Still had the herbaceous notes but with this bottle the fruit stood out, with cassis, plum, and other black fruits standing up nicely to the rough tannins. Some oak on the close. All-in-all, I still believe that this needs more time and should the tannins melt, the resulting wine will provide much more pleasure than at present..
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
Popped and poured. Red-purple hue. Initially the nose was quite reticent and showed what appeared to be a synthetic aroma (plastic?). A quick taste showed thin flavors, very muted. Drying tannins, less concentration than in the Grand Estates bottling. After about 2 hours aeration, the synthetic aroma blew off and revealed aromas much more typical of Columbia Crest, black cherry, plum, raspberry, toasty oak and a touch of chocolate, flavors mirrored on the now more generous palate. However, herbaceous, green flavors matched by the austerity from the tannins show that this young wine needs further time in bottle. Heat on the finish doesn't help. Will check back in a couple of months. Score as of now: 83-85?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No
/ Comment
4/20/2020 - wtianseter wrote: 86 Points
Well past its prime but still has good basic flavors with a touch of age. Medium body with a short but smooth finish
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/22/2013 - wtianseter wrote: 85 Points
This bottle was good but a bit tired. Fruit flavors were nice and full but the oak that I remember from past bottles was light and too understated to enhance the balance. It lacked much of a lingering finish. A day later it was going down hill big time
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/26/2011 - Tickman wrote: 82 Points
Is there fruit in this wine? Dark in color, light on the nose. Nose smells oaky. Dry and mildly sour. Dry finish. No need to get again...ever.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
3/23/2011 - Cobbster wrote: 88 Points
Luscious and full. Great value.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/24/2010 - valecnik wrote: 87 Points
Dusty dark berry, coffee, mocha. Good structure and decent balance. Not special but, like all CC bottlings I've had, a solid well-made wine that's a fine everyday drinker. The next level beyond the Two Vines and Grand Estates designations.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/24/2010 - bin905 wrote: 85 Points
Fruit forward with reasonable tannins. Pleasant but fairly simple.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
10/13/2010 - Xfactor wrote: 81 Points
Bottle opened up after an hour. Slightly better now. Fuller.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/13/2010 - Xfactor wrote: 79 Points
Blueberry through and through. Mild, acetone nose, palate is oaky blueberry, palate is short with a hint of acetone on the fnish. Nothing memorable, nothing structured, mild.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
7/27/2010 - jeffal66 wrote: 85 Points
I bought this pretty much knowing what I'd get. As Columbia Crest's second (third?) label, you can expect some leftover grapes. It's no great shakes, not over-the-top, everyday type drinking. Some dark fruit, chocolate, blah blah blah.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/2/2010 - boyajian Likes this wine: 86 Points
Nothing very pronounced here except maybe the finish. Nose is fine, a little dull but black cherry. Rather plain in the palate, a little tannic and somewhat heavier bodied than I was expecting. Finish is a combination of tannin and velvet, it's the most interesting part of this wine. Theres nothing wrong with this, it's a good drink but I think I like the (cheaper) Columbia Crest Grand Estate Merlot better
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/28/2010 - chrwhite wrote: 86 Points
Eh, nothing special. This wine was a dark, inky purple, almost back in the glass. I was hoping for more on the nose: it was fruit forward, but more generic fruit than anything specific. Spice and oak showed up as well. This wine was medium bodied on the palate, and seemed a little off. Oak, spice and cherry predominated, but the wine was chalky on the back of the palate leading into a finish that tasted a bit like fortified wine. Nothing bad, but not something I would seek out again, necessarily.
1 person found this helpful, do you? Yes - No / Comment
2/24/2010 - Cobbster wrote: 86 Points
Big flavors upon opening, fades some after a couple of hours.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/17/2010 - WineontheBarrelhead wrote: 78 Points
Very lean, with aromas of black fruits and dried herbs followed by clipped flavors of bittersweet chocolate and roasted tomato, and hints of singed toast. In my experience, Columbia Crest's H3 reds have been earthy, loamy and somewhat herbal, but tend to lack concentration. This wine is indicative of that profile, with a light-medium bodied frame and an abrupt finish. Not recommended.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
2/12/2010 - Bicycler52 wrote: 85 Points
not impressed at all, nothing interesting about this wine
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/26/2010 - WY Leonidas wrote: 80 Points
Nose had some decent cocoa, cola, cherries. Medium bodied, the flavors start with dusty cherries and blackberries, as well as a bitter cocoa. However, a rough astringent oak dominates the palate and nearly hides the rest of the wine. It's unfortunate that this is so overoaked, because it is otherwise a well balanced smooth wine.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
1/7/2010 - ethralls wrote: 85 Points
Very funky, wet and mushrooms on the nose at first but eventually blew off to smokyand slight black fruit but not much else. Blackberries and blueberries on an otherwise uneventful palate
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
12/3/2009 - df1962 wrote: 87 Points
Very forward brambly, smoky nose with hint of treacle toffee. Refreshing blackberry blueberry flavour with lingering flavours and a smoky hint of vanilla. Nice balance. Not as flsehy as other vintages but also works better with food. Opended up over the course of a few hours. Tasty mid-week house wine at a great price.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/4/2009 - *Vine* wrote: 81 Points
Popped and poured. Medium-plus red/purple hue. Aromas of toasted oak with a touch of fruit. Medium to medium-plus body. Has really devolved from a somewhat palatable Merlot with little merit to what is now simply an oak-laden mess. Palate simply shows spice from the oak additives...what little fruit is underneath comes across as green and under-ripe. Technically not flawed, hence the low rating (showed best on release). Drink now.
Really a shame for Columbia Crest to have ever released this Merlot when their example from the Grand Estates line scores at least in the mid eighties (not to mention the Two Vines Merlot, which is also generally much better)...hopefully just an anomaly with this vintage.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/1/2009 - markandsusanw wrote: 78 Points
Basic, serviceable Merlot; a little thin and not much fruit. The kind of thing I'd drink only as a last resort.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/18/2009 - kavitha and nick wrote: 90 Points
velvety smooth and long finish. Would buy again for price.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/2/2009 - foobarski wrote: 81 Points
Didn't decant or aerate, and found it to be kinda thin, and yeah, oaky.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/10/2009 - ccrida wrote: 84 Points
Flabby, fruity oak bomb. Big blueberry nose, jammy taste struggles to break through the vanilla. Easy enough to suck back, this would have been a good play when I was chasing girls in college but is too bit boring for adults at this price ($11).
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
7/26/2009 - DTWOB wrote: 88 Points
Consumed over three days with no discernible decrease in quality of taste. Nice deep dark color, full nose of dark berries, very approachable with very mild tannins more dark berries and a mild finish - great QPR.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/29/2009 - *Vine* wrote: 85 Points
Popped and poured. Medium-plus ruby/purple hue. Still has a strange "funk" on the nose somewhat reminiscent of fruit that is matched by aromas of well-toasted, spicy oak and alcohol (the oak component is especially disconcerting at this point, definite overuse). Medium body. On the palate, flavors of black cherry, plum, vanilla bean, and toasted oak are actually quite pleasant. Tannins are slightly drying. Seemed to improve with air, albeit slightly. This wine may never come together, the oak component seems to have grown. Drink up within the next 1-2 years before the fruit fades away.
***Quick commentary - Clearly this wine has been over-manipulated by use of oak chips and/or powder. The fruit that may have existed before the oak element was added could have actually led to a much better result. At this point, the always solid Grand Estates Merlot is a better wine and value.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
6/16/2009 - Quarked wrote: 85 Points
On opening had almost no aroma and very thin taste, though very smooth with nicely chewy tannins. I was thinking low 80's score, but after a few hours took a nice smokey, woodsy smell and a little more flavor. Still, even at this price point many better options.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
5/15/2009 - nwbackpacker wrote: 84 Points
This is my second bottle of this and I can't believe I didn't pick up before on the insane oakiness on this. This wine needs an hour or so to breathe to let the fruit aroma build up enough to even try to compete with the oak. Luckily the oak is fairly smooth and sweet and not horrendously overpowering, but I can't help but feel they really over oaked this. The fruit is actually decent once you get over the nose and let it sit in the glass/decanter for a while. Nice acid too, which really cut through the fat of the beef ribs I had with it.
Overall, fairly drinkable, but too much oak and I would have been pissed if I had bought this at anywhere near MSRP.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
4/20/2009 - nwbackpacker wrote: 87 Points
Pretty good! Nothing spectacular, but a well made and very drinkable wine. Good food wine, IMO.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
3/22/2009 - msilver wrote: 87 Points
Nice merot for pirce. Best if opened for couple of hours.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/22/2008 - vardaman wrote: 87 Points
good merlot for the price
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/20/2008 - zithelp wrote: 88 Points
Pleasant wine with good balance.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
11/10/2008 - *Vine* wrote: 85 Points
Better than previous example, shook vigorously to help aerate which resulted in a much more approachable wine. Still had the herbaceous notes but with this bottle the fruit stood out, with cassis, plum, and other black fruits standing up nicely to the rough tannins. Some oak on the close. All-in-all, I still believe that this needs more time and should the tannins melt, the resulting wine will provide much more pleasure than at present..
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
10/27/2008 - *Vine* wrote:
Popped and poured. Red-purple hue. Initially the nose was quite reticent and showed what appeared to be a synthetic aroma (plastic?). A quick taste showed thin flavors, very muted. Drying tannins, less concentration than in the Grand Estates bottling. After about 2 hours aeration, the synthetic aroma blew off and revealed aromas much more typical of Columbia Crest, black cherry, plum, raspberry, toasty oak and a touch of chocolate, flavors mirrored on the now more generous palate. However, herbaceous, green flavors matched by the austerity from the tannins show that this young wine needs further time in bottle. Heat on the finish doesn't help. Will check back in a couple of months. Score as of now: 83-85?
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment
8/4/2006 - VinLancaster wrote: 78 Points
Cloying black fruits, oaky and heat which never wore off. Plain, lacking core.
Do you find this review helpful? Yes - No / Comment