Ullage on new wine?

Partagas · Post by **Partagas** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:42 pm

I have just purchased a few St Henri and 389 but after closer inspection at home suspect they might be quite low in ullage for a current wine. Granted they are already pre-aged but think they might be pushing the envelope a bit. Opinions of where it should be would be great.

Sam

Alex F · Post by **Alex F** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:51 pm

If you are talking about the latest vintages it should be well into the neck. I would expect anything under 10 years of age to be into the neck as well...

Partagas · Post by **Partagas** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:04 pm

Sorry I should specify where it is (wish I could post photo). It is about 5mm under the bottom of the wrapper. So it is still above the neck but fairly exposed under the wrapper.

Red Bigot · Post by **Red Bigot** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:55 pm

Partagas wrote:I have just purchased a few St Henri and 389 but after closer inspection at home suspect they might be quite low in ullage for a current wine. Granted they are already pre-aged but think they might be pushing the envelope a bit. Opinions of where it should be would be great.

Sam

What vintages?

Deano · Post by **Deano** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:59 pm

One way to confirm volume is to weigh the bottle as whole; drink contents; re-weigh bottle (now empty); determine mass difference and apply density (g/mL...which i don't know the average rule of thumb...somebody from forum will know) to determine volume and allow for measurement of uncertainty errors with your scales and the regulatory tolerance of...say...+/- 5 % of 750mL...or get the measuring jug...and then drink it...either way it will be enjoyed!

Partagas · Post by **Partagas** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:46 pm

They are 2004 (St Henri) and 2005 (389).

Cheers Deano. Glad to see a drinker that doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t believe in keeping wine for future development. Keep on drinking hard son.

Red Bigot · Post by **Red Bigot** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:52 pm

My 389 2005 are in stelvin, my 2004 St Henri have a level 5-6mm below the capsule and look pretty normal fill levels to me. Some other producers use longer capsules which makes the wine level closer to or even under the capsule. And different bottle shapes...

Stop worrying. :-)

BillMac · Post by **BillMac** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:57 pm

Red Bigot wrote:Stop worrying.

Ditto

Davo · Post by **Davo** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:10 pm

Deano wrote:One way to confirm volume is to weigh the bottle as whole; drink contents; re-weigh bottle (now empty); determine mass difference and apply density (g/mL...which i don't know the average rule of thumb...somebody from forum will know) to determine volume and allow for measurement of uncertainty errors with your scales and the regulatory tolerance of...say...+/- 5 % of 750mL...or get the measuring jug...and then drink it...either way it will be enjoyed!

Surely it would be just easier to pour the contents into a clean measuring jug and then a decanter prior to drinking??

However I don't think I would bother as the fill level sounds normal in any case.

Mahmoud Ali · Post by **Mahmoud Ali** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:44 pm

Something I've been thinking about.

Whenever I buy wines I automatically look at the ullage levels and select the bottles with the highest levels. I assumed that bottles with the least amount of air would cellar longer.

Now, as I get older, I've been wondering if it would be better to start buying the bottles with the lowest fill. After all, if I'm still waiting for my '96 Bin 389s to mature, do I really want to maximize the longevity of my '04 and '05 Bin 389s.

Cheers......Mahmoud

Red Bigot · Post by **Red Bigot** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 8:02 am

Mahmoud Ali wrote:Whenever I buy wines I automatically look at the ullage levels and select the bottles with the highest levels. I assumed that bottles with the least amount of air would cellar longer.

I buy most of my wine from interstate e-tailers or wineries, so no opportunity to check and I never do in stores.

In modern-era bottlings it's probably CO2 or Nitrogen anyway.

Partagas · Post by **Partagas** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 10:59 am

Thanks Brian, answered my question with description of your bottles (mine are all cork). I actually wasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t that worried (as I guess some might have thought :shock:

), just thought it would be interesting to find out for sure with opinions and see if it is sometimes a factor. As you also mentioned, the wrappers quite possibly vary so thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s why different brand bottles of the same vintage can look like having different ullageÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s.

Cheers

Sam

Wayno · Post by **Wayno** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:16 am

Partagas wrote:I actually wasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t that worried (as I guess some might have thought )

I thought you were packing it.

Mahmoud Ali · Post by **Mahmoud Ali** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:04 pm

Brian,

I must be the only nutter around. When I pick a couple of bottles from the shelf to cellar I really do pick the ones with the highest levels. And if I choose an older bottle from the cellar to drink I pick the one with the lowest level. As a corollary, if a bottle of wine I'm cellaring hits the shoulder level I will accelerate my plans and open it sooner.

I don't know much about 'industrial-style' bottling lines but I didn't think that smaller to mid-sized wineries used any inert gas in the bottling process.

Some wines, like Chateau Musar from Lebanon, have always had low fills and it hasn't affected it's longevity, so perhaps my fussiness with levels is unwarranted.

Another thing, is if the corks are sitting a little high, as in pushing up against the capsule, it's often a sign that the wines might be heat affected. I'd be concerned about how the wine was handled/transported and would look for the wine somewhere else.

Cheers................Mahmoud

Partagas · Post by **Partagas** » Thu Dec 11, 2008 10:55 pm

Mahmoud wrote

And if I choose an older bottle from the cellar to drink I pick the one with the lowest level

Actually, I do the same thing. Seems logical enough to me.

Sam

Partagas · Post by **Partagas** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:17 pm

Well I just grabbed a 05 389 on the weekend and just realised last night that it is nearly at the shoulder edge. Way unacceptable ullage for a current wine. I did post a query about my other Penfolds wines recently that had below normal ullage but seemed the consensus was I was being fussy (they were 05 389 and 04 St Henri bottles under cork). This is definitely an error with out question and makes me wonder (ha conspiracy :idea:

) if our beloved company are purposely reducing the wine or is it some strange coincidence. The fact is I have never bought current wine before with these levels.

Wayno · Post by **Wayno** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:27 pm

There are conspiracy theories everywhere. Wine ullage levels are clearly no different.

Tim Smith · Post by **Tim Smith** » Thu May 07, 2009 1:30 pm

n.b fwiw: any wine bottled under cork at 20 degrees C should have a fill height being 12 mm below the bottom of the cork (fairly wide spread industry standard)-so work backwards from there taking into consideration the vintage of the wine. Also, as long as the wine is reasonably filled into the neck, the ullage is not really that much greater (volume of a cylinder and all that stuff I should have learned at school). And most good bottling lines do inert the head space with CO2, but it doesnt last long (diffusive properties of gases through the cork). If it did last, it would be almost like the ideal closure, the screwcap!!

Partagas · Post by **Partagas** » Thu May 07, 2009 2:52 pm

Thanks Tim,

Scientific, technical or other theory, these are definitely lower than I have experienced with any (and I mean any) other current vintage wines of any brand. The magnum is almost touching the shoulder so is centimetres away from normal and if sold on auction in a couple of years would be noted down as very high shoulder (for a 6 year old). I understand variation in storage when released from vineyard and other normal retail storage issues, but this is from the same shop, a reputable shop at that and only the same brand. So even if it is Ã¢â‚¬Å“acceptableÃ¢â‚¬Â, it is still pushing the limit of acceptability.

Bick · Post by **Bick** » Fri May 08, 2009 7:24 am

Partagas wrote:Thanks Tim,

Scientific, technical or other theory, these are definitely lower than I have experienced with any (and I mean any) other current vintage wines of any brand. The magnum is almost touching the shoulder so is centimetres away from normal and if sold on auction in a couple of years would be noted down as very high shoulder (for a 6 year old). I understand variation in storage when released from vineyard and other normal retail storage issues, but this is from the same shop, a reputable shop at that and only the same brand. So even if it is Ã¢â‚¬Å“acceptableÃ¢â‚¬Â, it is still pushing the limit of acceptability.

What's more, if the fill level is that low on your magnum, then any advantage of slow aging that usually results from the larger bottle having less air has probably been lost, which I imagine was the main reason for the purchase.

hmmm · Post by **hmmm** » Fri May 08, 2009 9:53 pm

Partagas wrote:Well I just grabbed a 05 389 on the weekend and just realised last night that it is nearly at the shoulder edge. Way unacceptable ullage for a current wine. I did post a query about my other Penfolds wines recently that had below normal ullage but seemed the consensus was I was being fussy (they were 05 389 and 04 St Henri bottles under cork). This is definitely an error with out question and makes me wonder (ha conspiracy ) if our beloved company are purposely reducing the wine or is it some strange coincidence. The fact is I have never bought current wine before with these levels.

there is only one way to handle this... drink the wine now and see if its still good!

Partagas · Post by **Partagas** » Fri May 08, 2009 10:16 pm

hmmm wrote:
Partagas wrote:Well I just grabbed a 05 389 on the weekend and just realised last night that it is nearly at the shoulder edge. Way unacceptable ullage for a current wine. I did post a query about my other Penfolds wines recently that had below normal ullage but seemed the consensus was I was being fussy (they were 05 389 and 04 St Henri bottles under cork). This is definitely an error with out question and makes me wonder (ha conspiracy ) if our beloved company are purposely reducing the wine or is it some strange coincidence. The fact is I have never bought current wine before with these levels.

there is only one way to handle this... drink the wine now and see if its still good!

hmmmmmmmmmmm

The Auswine Forum