Aging St Peter's Shiraz

BobFoster · Post by **BobFoster** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 1:43 pm

I keep reading reviews and posts that talk about aging St Peter's shiraz for long periods of time--well over a decade. But I have yet to see a tasting note on a really old St Peter's bottle. Has anyone had actually experience with a bottle that was 10 or 15 years old?

DaveL · Post by **DaveL** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 1:57 pm

I'm way too young to have had a chance to try the Great Western shiraz with any serious bottle age. But I have a few bottles of the 93 Great Western Shiraz last year, and with 11 years age it was showing beautifully. One of the most enjoyable parts of my relationship with wine is how my palate has changed.

I started off chasing the Penfolds/Wynns/d'Arenberg wines. I wanted my wine to taste like the books said wine would taste. I've tried to enjoy wine with a fair whack of bottle age, but I just don't understand it properly. I have no doubt that I'm drinking the wrong stuff and I cannot make any claims about the quality of its storage, the wine just doesn't make sense to me.

Except, I love and adore and at least somewhat understand the way that Great Western Shiraz builds complexity as is ages, replacing dark spicey fruit with this wonderful meaty complexity, how the tannins soften, and the savoury leather and espresso coffee flavours start to turn up.

Luckily for me my local sells the stuff with a fair whack of age, so the current release is the '97 there. I'd be pretty confident in saying that Seppelt's Great Western Shiraz is currently my favourite wine.

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 2:04 pm

Bob,

After the 97 vintage(?), Seppelt changed the name of the wine from Great Western Shiraz to St Peters. It is the same wine, just packaged differently.

I had the 1985 GW Shiraz earlier this year, an impressive wine that weighed in around 12% alc/vol. Leather, Mulberry, Earth, softly spicy and aromatic, at its peak. The 97 GW Shiraz I had last year was still quite primary and evolving, it needs time and on present form will easily see out 15 years.

Hope that helps.

Cheers

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 5:31 pm

Grant wrote:Bob,

After the 97 vintage(?), Seppelt changed the name of the wine from Great Western Shiraz to St Peters. It is the same wine, just packaged differently.

I had the 1985 GW Shiraz earlier this year, an impressive wine that weighed in around 12% alc/vol. Leather, Mulberry, Earth, softly spicy and aromatic, at its peak. The 97 GW Shiraz I had last year was still quite primary and evolving, it needs time and on present form will easily see out 15 years.

Hope that helps.

Cheers

Grant, that wouldn't be the one bottled as a 1985 Great Western Hermitage would it? I remember seeing it in a bottleshop. Thanks.

Aa

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 7:37 pm

Thats the one. It is quite a unique wine, in that it has a nose that current winemaker Arthur O'Connor described to me as "unripe mulberry", quite similar to the 2000 St Peters when tasted side by side. I have to say that I have thought on more than one occasion that the 2000 was brett affected, however, on this occasion I found myself reconsidering that opinion due to the comparison. I think it is a factor relative to the two vintages, as I havn't seen that character in any other GW's or St Peters since.

Worth buying, but only if you are sure of the provenance.

Cheers

George Krashos · Post by **George Krashos** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 9:14 pm

I had the '95 Great Western a couple of months ago and it was superb and had plenty left in the tank. Vinfanticide. It was so good, when I stumbled onto a bottle at a wine shop the other day, I bought it without hesitation.

-- George Krashos

707 · Post by **707** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 8:18 am

The St.Peters, formerly the Great Western Shiraz/Hermitage has been a standout line for a long time.

The 1985 is legendary, every time it's done blind we're voting cool climate Cabernet!

Had a couple of bottles recently, it still looks youthful and is drinking wonderfully, plenty of years left in good bottles.

As always for cellaring, buy your wine as soon as it's released and tuck it away in suitable conditions so they look their best (tree bark allowing) when you finally broach them.

DJ · Post by DJ » Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:32 am

The joys of friends going to the auctions meant that in about 2000 I had the privilege of helping drink 2 bottle of 1963 - stunning, perfect balance, length, fruit well and truly still alive.

My brother-in-law has had the 1966 (his birth year) and it was mean to be in the same short of condition.

Pretty sure Halliday has written up earlier ones as being in the outstanding leave (but of course I'm writing this at work and don't have any books to double check).

I'm hoping the 2002 will be a great birth year wine to drink with my son in 20+ years - presuming I can keep my hands off them that long :wink:

707 · Post by **707** » Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:36 am

Not that I hold any store in the JWT which along with the Stoddart is a silly award but I reckon the 1963 Seppelt GW won a JWT from memory.

I had a bottle in the 80s (yes I know that's a long time ago and I'm showing my age) but it drank superbly. It was so impressive I kept the empty, just can't remember where I've hidden it to check the label but I'm sure someone will know the details.

Brucer · Post by **Brucer** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:30 pm

I am still confused over Seppelt Great Western Shiraz and St Peters.

In 97 and 98, Seppelt released a Reserve Great Western Shiraz, which I thought became St Peters, and I dont know what happend to the standard Great Western Shiraz after that?

I thought Reserve became St Peters with the 99 vintage, but in the Langtons Melbourne auction catalogue M230, they list both
98 St Peters Great Western Shiraz and
98 Great Western Reserve Shiraz as well as
96 St Peters Great Western Shiraz,
so stuffed if I can figure it out.

Brucer

Vickie · Post by **Vickie** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:37 pm

Hi Brucer,

In 1998, there were 2 St Peters - a standard and a reserve.

Cheers,
Vickie

Brucer · Post by **Brucer** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 9:51 pm

Hi Vicki,

But I have the 98 Great Western Reserve Shiraz, no mention of St Peters.
So, which is better/ St Peters 98 or Reserve 98, or are they just from different vineyards?

Brucer

qwertt · Post by **qwertt** » Thu Jul 28, 2005 10:08 pm

Great Western became St Peters. The Reserve was the Great Western with more oak treatment to get attention at shows. Arthur Godfrey did not like this idea and the "reserve" was abandoned. A lot of people on the forum were not great fans of the reserve because of the oak treatment. Campbell Mattinson covered this issue in WinefrontMonthly some months ago in a big and very readable feature on Seppelts.

markg · Post by **markg** » Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:19 am

I opened a 1995 last night with our meal. Very nice, with heaps of tannins, acid and fruit, although I found it quite dry with the acid showing through on the finish.

707 · Post by **707** » Fri Jul 29, 2005 11:01 am

Have a look at n4sir's TNs from the Blacktongues recent Shiraz. The 2001 St.Peters rated very highly, technically the winner on the night.

I loved it.