Professional reviews have copyrights and you can view them here for your personal use only as private content. To view pro reviews you must either subscribe to a pre-integrated publication or manually enter reviews. Learn more.
Manage Subscriptions
Important Update From the Founder
Read message >
Label borrowed from 2006
Label borrowed from 2004
Label borrowed from 2006
Label borrowed from 2004
Label borrowed from 2006
Label borrowed from 2006
Label borrowed from 2004
Label borrowed from 2006
Label borrowed from 2006
Label borrowed from 2006
Label borrowed from 2004
Label borrowed from 2007
Label borrowed from 2003
Label borrowed from 2007
Label borrowed from 2003
Label borrowed from 2002
Label borrowed from 2002
Label borrowed from 2008
Label borrowed from 2008
Community Tasting Notes 229
-
Eric Wright Likes this wine: 93 points
April 11, 2024 - Solid nose. Big body. This is the earliest moment to enjoy. Improves with air. Long way to go
-
Montesquieu Likes this wine: 92 points
June 17, 2023 - Still drinking great if you have high tolerance for massive oak and creamy vanilla. Fresh and bright, despite its age. Others commented that it's like Caymus with all that oak, but this had quality and harmony, whereas Caymus does not.
-
smctipton Likes this wine: 93 points
June 16, 2023 - Still hanging in there. Somewhat muted nose, except for vanilla. Solid blackberry and pomegranate fruit with still clear but not excessive vanilla notes. The oak works here. Light integrated tannins carry to a medium finish. Will drink remaining bottle sooner rather than later.
-
bdeblank wrote: 92 points
January 14, 2023 - Very nice. Pop and pour and it was at a good point. Fruit, some oak/vanilla, but balanced.
-
vinole wrote: 92 points
June 10, 2022 - Opened at a restaurant without decanting, which was not needed in my opinion. Still retains most of the original rich high dark fruit levels, though the tannins are fairly soft, but still has pretty good structure, as acidity levels are also adequate. Better than I expected at this age, as is still quite nice and probably good for a few more years.
1 - 5 of 229
More notes
Pro Reviews 3
Add a Pro ReviewVinous
-
By Josh Raynolds
September/October 2007, IWC Issue #134 (link)(Bodegas El Nido Clio Jumilla) Subscribe to see review text.
RJonWine.com
-
By Richard Jennings
7/10/2010 (link) 88 points(Bodegas El Nido Jumilla Clio) Dark red violet color; oak, baked berry, tar, chocolate nose; tart berry, chocolate, chocolate milk, black fruit palate, lacking acidity, i.e., basically wine for school children (and Robert Parker); medium-plus finish
Wine Library TV
-
By Gary Vaynerchuk
Power Friday Tasting, Buckle Up!, Episode #376, 12/21/2007 (link) 91 points(Bodegas El Nido Clio) #3; COLOR-dark; NOSE-so much Oak; enormous amounts of Vanilla Cream; Strawberry Jam; smells like a dessert; viscous explosive dessert-like candy (you gain weight smelling this wine); TASTE-huge explosive New World fruit bomb; it somehow contains it's voluptuousness; loaded w/ obnoxious fruit, yet it's able to contain it in a classic way; a tad over-the-top; JR-93; GV-91
Wine Definition
- Vintage 2005
- Type Red
- Producer Bodegas El Nido
- Varietal Red Blend
- Designation Clio
- Vineyard n/a
- Country Spain
- Region Murcia
- SubRegion n/a
- Appellation Jumilla
- UPC Code 819451006505
Community Holdings
- Pending Delivery 8 (0%)
- In Cellars 1,501 (43%)
- Consumed 1,995 (57%)
Food Pairing
Community Recommendations
Steak, Tenderloin steak at Hal's in Atl - Dinner with the Belenky'sWho Likes This Wine
100% Like It 38 votes
More About This Wine
Articles
- FamilyBodegas El Nido Jumilla Clio
- ProducerBodegas El Nido
- VarietyRed Blend
- CountrySpain
- RegionMurcia
- AppellationJumilla
Add Articles
- Wine2005 Bodegas El Nido Jumilla Clio (add)
- FamilyBodegas El Nido Jumilla Clio
- ProducerBodegas El Nido
- VarietalRed Blend
- DesignationClio (add)
- CountrySpain
- RegionMurcia
- AppellationJumilla