Pedemonte 2006 Cabernet Sauvignon Rutherford, Napa Valley - 3 Pack

Pedemonte 2006 Cabernet Sauvignon Rutherford, Napa Valley - 3 Pack
$59.99 + $7.00 shipping
PRODUCT: 3 2006 Pedemonte Rutherford, Napa Valley Cabernet Sauvignon
CT link above

Winery website

Previous offer

I’d really like to know the story behind mill.

pH and alc. % lead me to believe that this will be very New World in style and more drink alone vs. food friendly. Not a bad thing at all if this is what you’re into (like I currently am).

You and me, both, brother.

Take a tour of some fine Napa offerings from the comfort of your own well upholstered armchair.

The WS tasting notes:
Firm, intense, tight and full-bodied, showing aromas of spice, cedar and black cherry, with a touch of plum jam. Turns elegant, ending with chewy tannins and a burst of fruit. Drink now through 2016. 320 cases made. –JL

Release Price: $39

The pH is pretty high and TA is pretty low, aren’t they?

Edit: Oh, Kyle beat me to it, sort of. Yeah, Rutherford or not, between that, the alcohol, and the somewhat high (though not extraordinary) Brix levels, all seems a bit much.

Relative question. For a food friendly wine? Yes. For a fruit bomb? No. What’s your poison?

Hmm. $22 and change for a Rutherford Cab, shipped? I may have to get some of this.

That all depends, I suppose. I’m not adverse to a good bomb on occasion, though my understanding was that Rutherford Cabs are a little more restrained and elegant than most. I have too much Cab already, so this doesn’t tempt me either way.

Also, what was the deal with the 2006 vintage in Napa? I’ve seen conflicting impressions, but it’s seemed to me that most 2006s pale in comparison to their 2005 counterparts.

As to your first question, I would say that the more restrained is probably a fair assessment when compared to other Napa bombs. Still very fruit-forward but perhaps not to the extreme.

As to your second question, hopefully the winery, RPM, and/or SB chime in.

This one scores a 91, where as tasting notes that I have seen on the 2005 put it between 88-92. You can make your own determination from there.

Hey everybody, off topic but wanted to ask my most trusted woot friends some opinions, of which I know there is no shortage of around here. I am heading up to the Willamette Valley this weekend with camping and wineries in mind and was wondering if anyone has any experience there or has any recommendations, I would really appreciate it. Messaging would be great so as not hijack this thread, thanks everyone.


Well, with a little sleuthing, you can find his email address, and then you could email him.

Don’t expect an answer, though.

The last post of the previous offer is a review of their 06’ cab. I am unsure if it is the same bottle but the poster loved it.

pH seems in the middle range for modern wines, but that TA is pretty darn low. Under 5 g/L is quite far down there. I’m usually happier getting towards the 6-7 g/L range, sometimes more.

That reviewer also said he ate it with fish and that it went great…

Your right! It was a review of the utmost quality. He goes on to say it was also great naked. I would argue that most things are better naked.

Counterexample: Larry King