1/26/2010 - dom418 wrote:

not bad, just blah.

11/1/2009 - dom418 wrote:

Very good, don't remember details.

4/12/2009 - dom418 wrote:

Very light, more dry than expected. Plesant, but unimpressive.

4/12/2009 - dom418 wrote:

Still very good, a little softer and more mellow than last time.

12/29/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Light, pleasant flavors, slightly more acidic than expected. Was hoping for a little more fruit. Muted nose, little mineral, little apple. Enjoyable.

6/16/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Good solid bottle, nothing spectacular. Little on the lighter side for aussie shiraz. Very pleasant.

6/9/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Nice nose, strong berries. Oaky/woody on the palette, pleasant lingering finish. Good flavors, enjoyable wine.

5/16/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Not quite as good as previous bottles/vintages.

5/11/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Still very, very good. Very smooth. Great QPR.

5/1/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Not as good as last time, decanted 1 hour. Decent, not great.

4/13/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Little muted on the nose, but still pleasant, dominated by Red Fruit. Mouth Feel was thin and light for a Cab, felt like Juice in your mouth. Flavors were very, very enjoyable although not very bold. Reminder me a little bit of a Pinot actually. Finish was shortish but good. Certainly ready to drink now.

4/11/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Popped & poured at restaurant, no detailed notes. Deep dark Color. Very fruit forward, smooth on the palate, finish lingered reasonably well, still very young. Extremely enjoyable!!

3/30/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Thick, jammy nose.. good solid fruit. Full-bodied shiraz, very smooth & pleasnt mouthfeel. Great QPR.

3/31/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Very Good bottle, big & full bodied. Don't have specific notes but was very unique and difficult to describe the specific smells & tastes, but was fruit forward for sure. Very different & enjoyable.

4/5/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Just OK. Peachy, medium bodied. Very average Riesling, not worth $18 to me.

4/2/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Very, very pleasnt nose, very fruity... Berries, asst red fruit, little Oak. Taste was pleasant, blue/black berries, little thin, shortish finish, a bit hot on the palatte. Decent wine for $15.

3/30/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Typical NZ Pinot. Light red color, not opaque, little funk mixed with dark red fruit on the nose. Llight bodied, fairly fruity with a little earthiness mid-palate. Moderate finish. Not worth $29.99 to me.

3/25/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Bursts with apricot & grapefruit, low acidicity, flavorful finish. Soft sweetness.

3/18/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Consistent with previous notes. Wine has proven to be better w/Food.

3/15/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Decaned 1.5 - 2 hours

Nose was wonderful.. typical of a CA cab, bold red fruit, some oak, and a surprising touch of heat.

Flavor was very pleasant, much of the nose held through to the taste as well as the surprising touch of heat. Good berry fruit, but all flavors seemed a bit muted, good mouthfeel although a touch on the thin side (2000 vintage to blame?). Smooth, but lacked the silkiness of some of the best CA cabs (or vintages?). Incredibly long finish though, much longer and better than I expected. Wine just didn't have enough power to it to bump up into a 90's score.

3/11/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Had some green citrus on the nose. Little Zingy (tart?) on the palate, tastes of lemon, lime, & other citrus. Good flavors, much more enjoyable on the 2nd glass. Finish was non-existent.

3/3/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Decanted 2hrs+

Wine had a slight brownish tint o it. Nose was a little cedar, touch of spice, not all that much fruit. Could smell some alc. heat.

Taste was pleasant, pretty smooth. A bit thin. The heat from the nose did NOT come through on the taste. Decent wine, prefer a more fruit forward style though.

3/1/2008 - dom418 wrote:

A little less Crisp and Acidic than I remember from last time. Still a nice fresh, refreshing Sav Blance, especially for the money.

2/22/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Pleasant, a little thin/light, decent fruit. Simple. Not much of a finish. Good QPR for $7 though.

2/29/2008 - dom418 wrote:

consistent with past TNs. Perhaps a little more tannic than I remember.

2/19/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Color- Wine had a nice bright red color too it.
Nose- Pleasant Red Fruit, touch of heat.
Taste- Bright, ripe, red fruits.. mainly cherries & assorted Red Berries. Very fruit forward wine consisting of pleasant red fruit flavors. BUT, the heat was a little overwhelming, you could really, really taste the 15.3% alcohol on this wine. The heat really took away from the enjoyability of the fruit flavors.
Weight- Fairly heavy mouthfeel, decent weight for a Pinot.
Finish- Short to Moderate, unfortunately dominated by the heat though.
I really enjoyed the fruit forward style and pleasnt flavors on this but the heat took a lot away from it. It would have easily been a >90 pt if not for that. I think for $29 there are better options available.

2/14/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Drank on Valentine's Day. Wine was Outstanding.

Nose was very fragant (after it opened up), red fruit/berries.
Mouth feel was incredible, had good weight to it and was Silky, Silky smooth. The few years of age on this bottle have served it well.
Strong fruit forward taste, not quite as big and up front as some younger Caymus's that I've had but still extremely delicious. Wine did have the typical Caymus hint of green earthiness on the finish. Tanins were light and pleasant, not overpowering at all, but still slightly noticeable. Couldn't even taste a hint of the 14.3% alcohol on it. Finish was moderate, but pleasant.

This 99' is drinking beautifully right now, but does need an 1hr+ to open up. Reminded me once again why I'm such a fan of Caymus! Only regret is I don't have any more 99's.

2/9/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Decanted for 1.5-2 hrs.

Nice, pleasant nose, not overpowering. Some muted fruit, a definite hint of mint, and maybe a touch of earthiness.

Initial taste is hard to describe, some "freshness" followed with very nice berry fruit on mid-palate, not long lasting. Pretty short on the finish.

Wine has very, very good mouthfeel, has a certain "thickness" to it. Wine is extremely smooth, at no point was there even a hint of any alcohol. It approached the silkiness of some of my favorite CA cabs but did not get there. A touch of tannins on the aftertaste but not an offensive amount by any stretch.

Consided going a point or two higher because it's obvious the wine is very well made, but I just didn't *love* it. Thought about going lower because I prefer a more fruit forward Cab.

2/7/2008 - dom418 wrote:

As smooth, delicious, & enjoyable as ever. Powerful nose, little mocha & red fruit. Nice mouth feel, almost zero heat. One the best QPR out there. I hope 05 turns out to be as good as 04.

2/3/2008 - dom418 wrote:

OK flavors, pleasant nose, little mocha and red fruit. However taste was just "off" somehow, seem disjointed & unbalanced. Hard to describe.

2/3/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Big hit at the Superbowl party, the Ladies loved it!! Sweet, light, and very pleasant. Extremely enjoyable!

2/2/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Good smooth flavor, started out a bit harsh, but really smoothed out nicley after about an hour or so. Very Enjoyable. Good QPR

1/26/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Had some sour Cherry/Raspberry flavors. Not too much depth or complexity, a bit hot. I hope this does better in 6-12 months as most Cameron Hughes wines seem to. Pleasantly drinkable, but not impressive.

1/28/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Very Fruit forward, strong berry aromas. Smooth, balanced, (fruity with a touch of tannins on the finish). Only knock would be the thin mouth feel, but I still think it's the best $18 Cali Cab I can find. Still a favorite everyday drinker!!

1/23/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Not quite as good as last time I had it, I think it was because I popped & poured, I really think this wine still needs some time to open up. Fruit flavor was still very good, but it didn't seem as smooth as I remember - little harsh & little tannic. I will let the next bottle decant for before drinking. Seems like this wine still has quite some time left in it's drinking window.

1/21/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Fruit was good. Not a long finish. Smooth after about an hour and the heat started to fade.

1/19/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Good berry flavors. Not as smooth as 2004, should imporve that with more time.

1/15/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Muted Nose, decent fruit flavors up front, but aftertaste was harsh & unpleasant. Wine was not smooth at all. Think there are better buys out there in the $19-$20 range. Won't buy again.

1/11/2008 - dom418 wrote:

decent nose, weak flavor,hardly any finish. Lots of sediment.

1/6/2008 - dom418 wrote:

i really hope the bottle was flawed.. Wine was extremely bitter, sour, etc. Smelled OK, but taste was terrible. I'm chalking it up to a bad bottle. (otherwise would be a 50pt'er.)

1/6/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Little Stinky, mild flavors. Good enough.

9/15/2007 - dom418 wrote:

acceptable, decent light flavors for the price

1/1/2008 - dom418 wrote:

Better than when I had 11 months ago, tannis lightened up. Pretty decent on the flavor, mild fruit, little pepper, little leather on the finish. Short finish. Still seems like a great value for $15-$16.

12/25/2007 - dom418 wrote:

Good Fruit Flavor, not all that complex, but very pleasant and enjoyable. Little short on the finish.

8/26/2007 - dom418 wrote:

Good flavor & nose, but wayyyyy, wayyyyy too much Heat!!!! the alcohol was extremely overpowering even after decanting for an hour or so.

7/10/2007 - dom418 wrote:

Not impressive, not smooth. Decent flavor.

5/21/2007 - dom418 wrote:

Crisp, refreshing, the perfect summer "patio" wine, hard to pass up for $11.

5/14/2007 - dom418 wrote:

Still a nice value for the money. Very light bodied, decent fruit flavor.

4/24/2007 - dom418 wrote:

Good crisp flavor, light and refreshing. Great outdoor/summer wine. Good value for $8.

4/21/2007 - dom418 wrote:

Even a little better than last time. Still think it's one of the best for the money. Enjoyed the fruity flavors & smoothness. Not much of a finish, but not many $12.99 bottles do.