The Auswine Forum

I've been a long term fan of this wine, for its great value for money, and its surprising longevity in the cellar. I still have a magnum of 2001 awaiting its demise .....

This 2006 is still deep purple in colour. The nose promises a degree of richness and concentration, with dense dark plums, black cherries, dark chocolate, vanilla and cedar, and a touch of earthiness. The palate is medium weight, but still offers fruit sweetness, tannic grip and a little alcohol heat. Medium to long finish and all in all a satisfying wine - looking very good at 11 years old.

I have no doubt it will hold for another couple of years at least, and it's well worth the modest investment.

Cheers

Allan

Waiters Friend wrote:I've been a long term fan of this wine, for its great value for money, and its surprising longevity in the cellar. I still have a magnum of 2001 awaiting its demise .....

I am still waiting on a couple of bottles of the 1998, a purchase based on value for money and expected longevity. Hoping to have the kind of success that you had with this bottle. Appreciate the note, thanks.

Mahmoud.

PS: Has the packaging/label improved? Wasn't keen on the diminutive label on my bottles.

Thanks Allan, I have been cellaring Chalambar since the 2000 vintage. I was disappointed with the 2005 vintage due to having no fruit or substance but I bought few due to loyalty. I was once again disappointed with 2006 hence none in my cellar, and was interested in your notes. 2007 raised my interest, with me continuing my collection up till now. I have recently tried the 2005 vintage and has come to life - developing nicely - what a change. I recently tried the 2007 which I loved on release - however slightly disappointed - maybe needs another few years. For a sub $20 wine it's fun to go on the ride and see how things develop. It's also interesting to see the vintage variation.

I was a regular of drinker of Chalambar in the 90's and enjoyed the style with its cool climate variations.

I bought a six pack of 2005 and have just revisited it. I have given three away. It's a boring, boring wine that would have been better under cork or stored above the microwave. It's simple and unrelieved dark berry juice. I have a few bottles I brought up here to Hong Kong and I'll have another look.

I'm pleased Allan's note indicates 2005 may be an aberration and the label hasn't been put to the sword by corporate goons.

An update on the 2006. Still purple red in colour. Definitely into the savoury, tertiary development stages on the nose, with the earthiness and oak derived spice now dominating what's left of the fruit. The palate has more of the spicy tang (no doubt contributed to by acid) along with dark chocolate, and grippy tannins.

It's interesting to compare this to the St Peters of the same vintage. The Chalambar is reaching the end of its life, while I reckon the St Peters is just entering its window.