'04 Columbia Crest Grand Estates Merlot

2004 Columbia Crest, Grand Estates, Columbia Valley, Merlot ($9.99). Alcohol level: 13.5%. Picked this up recently after have read a couple of very positive reviews on it. We both enjoyed it very much. Having said that, one wonders when buying from the “big guys” if the wine was made or manufactured. There is so much technical stuff they can do these days; where did that very purple color come from, etc.

Anyhow, it gave a strong fruity aroma to the nose, with lush red and black fruit on the tongue tip. In the middle the proverbial plums along a nice complexity of additional fruit, restrained oak and smooth tannin pleased the palate. The finish lingered. It was not soft at all, something we had expected to some degree, and were delighted to find the wine full bodied and robust.

Matched it with boneless sirloin steak charcoal grilled with hickory chips, Italian bread baked with roasted garlic from a great local bakery, and Italian green beans.

Carl, I think that the CC Grand Estates wines are some of this country's best QPR wines bar none. I remember about 3 years ago finding a bottle of 1995 CC merlot that had been lost in my wine cabinet, so it must have been 8-9 years old. The wine was still dark purple-red all the way to the rim, and tasted like a $25 bottle with 3-4 years on it. This was the regular bottle and not the Grand Estates. I am not sure about that nomenclature though. Is it a step up from the regular bottle of a few years ago, or is it made from the same grapes the regular was made from back then?

I may be wrong, but I think this is their regular bottling now. Haven't seen a lower tier from them in a long time.

[Jenise]

Carl, just a tip, but if you're into above average merlot at a below average price, I'm told the new release of Souverain Merlot out of California is a stunning value. Haven't tasted the wine yet, but will soon....

Bob, they also make a "two vines" label, which may well be the lowest line, and once made an "estate series" line, which I think was the highest. The Estate Series was a bit more expensive than the Grand Estates which, I believe, followed it. I recall buying some of the '96 Estate Series, an obviously unfiltered wine with a ton of sediment even in the first year. Hmmmm. I wonder if I still have a bottle of that sitting around???

Funny you should mention, Carl, because after the vintage in stock at my local Big Wine Store shifted from '03 to '04 a couple of months ago, I was delighted to find that CC Grand Estates Merlot's excellent QPR streak (going back to at least '01) was still intact. Now all of a sudden, my local Big Wine Store has the '05, with no '04s to be found. Guess what--the '05 is terrific too! The vintages haven't been identical (I think the '05 is more cinnamony-spicy than previous years, and I thought the '04 was marginally less balanced than the '03, etc.), but this has become a case buy for me year-in-year-out.

.

It was not soft at all, something we had expected to some degree

With the proviso that the wine is heavily oaked [you don't want to drink it next to a Riesling - trust me], it does have surprisingly good tannin structure & palate grip for this price range.

And, of course, very good fruit.

I wonder how much of the tannin structure is due to the oak [or even artificial tannins], and how much of it is natural skin/seed/stem tannin?
.

Carl, I think that the CC Grand Estates wines are some of this country's best QPR wines bar none.

Yeah, they get remarkably good fruit, given that their production runs tend to be in the range of a million cases or more.

Assuming that the fruit is more or less natural [i.e. not concocted in a laboratory], then I wonder what they could make if they [and their contract growers] were to make a serious attempt to classify the various vineyards, and separate out the really good stuff.

Or maybe somebody [other than, say Quilceda] is already doing that, and I just haven't heard about it.

.
With the proviso that the wine is heavily oaked

So much so that neither Kim nor I could finish a glass. The rest of the bottle may or may not have been contributed to the vinegar crock.

Just my 2 oz.,

geo

Carl, CC still makes a wine called two vines which OW speaks of just down the way. This is what I was writing about and it is a step below (in price at least the Estate label) about $2 per bottle. They have a reserve lineup that I have not tasted but will when I see it on the shelf.

.
With the proviso that the wine is heavily oaked

So much so that neither Kim nor I could finish a glass. The rest of the bottle may or may not have been contributed to the vinegar crock.

Just my 2 oz.,

geo

I had a few glasses this evening from a bottle that was opened two days ago [so this was Day 3].

The oak has blown off, and now it's just good fruit with outstanding mid-palate grip.

If you held a gun to my head, I'd guess that they were artificial tannins, but I figure that artificial mid-palate grip is better than no mid-palate grip at all.

Plus it's got a surprising amount of acid at this point - almost tastes... [GASP!]... like a French wine.

All in all, it's drinking phenomenally well for a $7.65 "grocery store" wine on Day 3.

BTW, I've had some luck in that regard with older Marquis-Philips wines - the coconut/butterscotch oak notes are nauseating on the first day, but on Day Two, the oak has largely evaporated off, and you're left with just the fruit [and Sparky Marquis, like Columbia Crest, always seems to have excellent fruit].

Nathan, of course you are correct ab out the amount of oak in this wine, (rather than wine in the oak) However I always find that the fruit can withstand the oak rather well. Of course we are still talking about a $10 wine, and I find it can stand a few years where the oak usually recedes, rather than overtakes the fruit. After praising this wine as I have, I must admit that I drink very little merlot now days.