The Auswine Forum

Brutal stuff. Kalimna fruit blended with other monstrous Shiraz from around SA.

Colour dark cherry red with slight bricking. American oak, masses of black fruits on the nose. Powerful, full bodied palate with excellent depth of sweet fruit, tonnes of toasty oak and warming alcohol. Although the alcohol is stated at 14.5%, it sure feels more like 15.5!!!
Dark cherries, blood plums, chocolate mixing with spice and fine acid structure on the finish with some bitter oak. Needs time, this is a long haul monster that’ll need at least 12 years in the cellar and will last well beyond that. After the thin and unbalanced 2000, the savoury and one dimensional 2001, this is a seriously well built Bin 28 that’ll become one of the best and longest lived examples ever. The simple and pleasant 2003 or the diluted 2004 certainly won’t measure up.

It is a chunky, very rich but fairly rustic, over the top wine with plenty of fruit, oak and alcohol. I just realised that I no longer prefer wines like this but for those who do: 93 points. A bargain at $25 if you can still find it.

Cheers,
Attila

Tasted: October 2007

Yep. I found this quite solid and well put together but just uninteresting.

Wayno wrote:Yep. I found this quite solid and well put together but just uninteresting.

I largely agree but I thin it will gather interest with time. I think we can often expect too much complexity in young wines.

I think the 2002 is a very good wine, and will improve in the cellar. It has plenty of structure and fruit. I have a handful tucked away.

The 2004 isnt too bad but doesnt seem as serious as the best vintages. Funny that now I buy the odd one for a friday night quaff. They used to be better than that.

Of the 2002 standard bin range this was the only one I purchased to cellar. Haven't purchased any since...

Monghead

Of the 02 range, I found the Bin 128 very bland and uninteresting, the Kalimna serviceable and a little bit safe (this may change in time) but the 389 was pretty impressive for mine. I had a bottle as part of my bucks show amongst a host of impressive beasts including Wolf Blass Platinum and a range of very fine Italians and it stood up pretty well (from memory). I think that will prove to be a decent 389 in time as, hopefully will the 28 as I too, have some stashed away, given the heavily discounted prices it was going for at the time!

Wayno wrote:I had a bottle as part of my bucks show amongst a host of impressive beasts including Wolf Blass Platinum and a range of very fine Italians and it stood up pretty well (from memory).

Whilst skimming the posts I only read the first half of this sentence. Needed a second take!

cheers

Carl

I have four or five of these tucked away, will be interesting to see how they develop.

Someone referred to the 2004 as diluted - I think that's an odd description. The 2004 I have found to be a typical, generous, ripe Barossa shiraz, on par with the 2002 for drinking now but probably not so good for cellaring. Coincidentally I opened a halfie of the 2004 tonight and it was corked . Not stinky or anything, just the magical disappearing fruit kind of corked.

Wayno wrote:Of the 02 range, I found the Bin 128 very bland and uninteresting...

** The 02 Bin 128 was riddled with Brett. Or at least the bottle I purchased was.

Stuart

griff wrote:

Wayno wrote:I had a bottle as part of my bucks show amongst a host of impressive beasts including Wolf Blass Platinum and a range of very fine Italians and it stood up pretty well (from memory).

Whilst skimming the posts I only read the first half of this sentence. Needed a second take!

cheers

Carl

It felt weird writing it too.

I initially read Attila's review as more critical of 2002 (perhaps focusing on the first and 2nd sentences of the last paragraph).

Well, that may be a fair review as to how it sits now but for my tastes in decent vintages the bin 28 hits its straps from about 7-8 years and drinks beautifully at around 8/9-11.

There are freaks like the 1986 that just improve for at least the first 15 years and then plateau for another 5+ years, but they are few and far between.

I have not opened a 2002 bin 28 since tasting a number on release, but I am content that they will represent excellent drinking from about 2010 based on previous tastings (and excellent value).

Although it lacks the structure of CS, the bin 28s do improve enormously with mid+ cellaring, and change fairly dramatically as they mature: sure the Penfolds lineage will always be noticeable and no one is going to confuse a bin 28 with cool climate shiraz. PArt of the problem is that the American oak tends to stand out too firmly until it is fully integrated - and that takes at least 7 years in my experience. However, although I am not keen on too much American oak, I think that the oak does suit this fruit when fully integrated.

Oddly enough Penfolds think that the 2004 will take longer to peak than the 2002: that was not my impression on release, and I am inclined to agree with Attila on the relative merits (2000 was just ugly, 2001 had more VA than usual and was simple by bin 28 standards whiel 2003 was frankly disappointing).

As my current quaffers include the 1994, 1996 and 1998 bin 28s, all of which are drinking superbly albeit quite differently) I am content with the likely progress of the 2002 but will not taste a bottle from my cellar until 2010 (which was the date I first marked it for tasting - with consumption planned from then until 2013 albeit confident that it will last a considerable number of years thereafter).

regards

I had the a couple glasses of the Bin 28 Kalimna Shiraz 2002 yesterday. I'd recently bought this from a small drive-through, no doors, non-AC cellar (that probably cook the wines they offer all through summer) in my neighborhood that had advertised it along with several other "good buys". They claimed that all the bottles had been stored properly until this sale, when the wine had been transported to the local storage room of the cellar (a week before my purchase).

When removing the cork seal, it was clear that wine had seeped through the cork. The cork seemed in good condition so my guess would be improper storage. If drinking a "cooked" wine, what characteristics would I expect?

The colour of the wine was dark red. Delightful aroma of dark fruits, but slightly overpowered by the American oak in my opinion. Taste: abundant ripe fruit flavours, well integrated with the oak (still a bit too much though). Good structure and fine tannins. Not an interesting wine, but still very enjoyable....at least until I started noticing a bitterness on the aftertaste that was a bit too much for me. My wife didn't have the same sensation, so I guess I'm just a bit sensitive to bitterness (I have experienced this several times lately). I'll have another glass today to see if the wine has developed for the better and if my notes are consistent.

BTW - regarding these drive through cellars that cook wine all summer. Do you guys buy wine in such cellars?

Gustav wrote:BTW - regarding these drive through cellars that cook wine all summer. Do you guys buy wine in such cellars?

No! Why would you?

Red Bigot wrote:

No! Why would you?

OK, stupid question. Winemakers must be heartbroken to know a good % of their "babies" get incubated at 35C through the summer after being so carefully looked after the first couple of years of their life.