How are 1997 California cabernet and merlot, twenty years later?

I still find them too sweet, ripe, and alcoholic for my palate.

Based on tasting which wines?

Just curious. I own few to none.

We have a few left, from the more traditional producers such as Montelena, Monte Bello, Dunn and Spottswoode, etc. Those do not seem too sweet for my palate. The last one I had was a Montelena a few years ago and it was excellent.

Thanks,
Ed

I had a ‘97 Hess Collection Cab last year that really showed nicely. It gets compared to 2007 frequently but I think even though it was a very ripe year things might have been a little more dialed back winemaking wise back in 1997.

The 1997 closest to my palate has been Laurel Glen. But it was still spoofy versus the 1996 and 1994.

Just a general question, is that Montelena Estate bottling or the regular cab? Does Montelena’s regular cab have that aging ability to go 20 years?

So you tried one wine and damned a vintage?

Victor - I’ve always taken spoofy/spoofulated to mean over-manipulated which means it refers to a wine-maker’s heavy hand, which would be irrespective of vintage. Do we understand the term differently or do you mean that because of vintage conditions the wine-makers intervened more and perhaps more clumsily?

FWIW, I’m sitting on one 1997 Seavey Cab, hoping that it will be a nice 21st birthday celebratory wine for my son.

Harlan is nasty. Two out of two bottles that I have drunk, but I understand there is some bottle variation.

Could be either vintner technique or vintage conditions, or both.

I wouldn’t damn the vintage based on Harlan, either. I think Bob is the only person to have drunk a good bottle of it. Almost every one else agrees with your tasting note … nasty.

It’s been about 18 months since I’ve had a '97. The last one we opened was a '97 Caymus Special Selection and it was singing. Not too sweet or overripe to our palates. Many of the others that we’ve enjoyed have already been mentioned - BV, Dunn (both Napa and Howell Mtn), Monte Bello, Opus One, and Spottswoode.

Brian Stotter wrote:
Just a general question, is that Montelena Estate bottling or the regular cab? Does Montelena’s regular cab have that aging ability to go 20 years?

Brian, I have the Estate. Birthyear for our daughter. I have not tried to age the regular cab for 20 years. I usually drink the regular cab within the first 10-12 years.

Thanks,
Ed

A 1997 Dehlinger Bordeaux Blend (50% Cab, 50% Merlot, I think) we drank last Sunday was fantastic. Yes, it’s from Sonoma but the OP wasn’t Napa-specific.

This is unfair. If you drink wines from producers like Montelena and Ridge, the wines are all good and you don’t have as much ability to complain. [winner.gif]

I’ve enjoyed plenty of '97 Cali Cabs (from various regions). Looking at my notes from CT and I enjoyed all of the following wines immensely:

  • '97 Dominus
  • '97 La Jota Howell Mtn & Anniversary Release (also this vintage of Petite Sirah and Cab Franc is fantastic)
  • '97 Mondavi Reserve
  • '97 Beringer Private Reserve
  • '97 Monte Bello
  • '97 Kathryn Kennedy
  • '97 Phillip Togni
  • '97 Behrens & Hitchcock Merlot - Bought as a flier on WineBid and was pleasently surprised.

Victor, I thought you enjoyed the '97 Laurel Glen???
1997.PNG

I had a 97 Cardinale not long ago. Fruit was bright but not too huge. Tannins were resolved for the most part. Have one more left and I suspect it’ll be very good.

Dunn Howell Mountain Cabernet 1996 and 1997 were both wonderful and not sweet at all. Took a while to get them to open up but quite rewarding. Tasted in June 2017 at Dunn dinner.

For Vinous subscribers, Stephen Tanzer did a 1997 Napa Valley Cab vintage retrospective tasting only a month or two ago. In short, while some disappointed, many very doing very well. I will say, though, many of the scores I saw were in the high 80s to low 90s, with very few going above 93. I seem to recall original scores from Tanzer for the 1997s being around that same level if not a bit higher. [Please spare this thread the “don’t follow professional reviewers” and “points are meaningless” stuff].

interestingly, James Laube wrote in this month’s Spectator that the sweet spot for most California wines is six to ten years.