Today we’re reviewing two Zinfandels that you’re likely to see on the shelf at your local grocery store. While I often encourage readers to shop at their local wine shops versus grocery stores I realize that you may not have a convenient wine shop and sometimes you’re just in a hurry.
In addition to being two grocery store wines another thing these have in common is that they are both cheap… under $7. There’s something I like about these already.
Fetzer Valley Oaks Zinfandel 2004
The first wine is from Fetzer, a name you’re sure to see on most grocery store wine shelves. At a high level, I would describe this wine as a muted Zinfandel. It has the characteristics you would expect from a Zinfandel, but those characteristics are lacking intensity and are just kind of dull.
There is a bit of jamminess with cherry and raspberry aromas. The mouth-feel is smooth from the tannins with a spicy kick on the finish. There is a bit of earthiness, a good amount of fruit and peppery spice. Again, it’s everything you would expect only with a very sterile / safe composition. There are no specific faults but there’s also nothing to get excited about. There is a general lack of intensity.
The score came out to an 80 (drinkable, but nothing to be excited about). There’s not one area in which this wine was incredibly off balance, rather the 80 was a result of not scoring excessively well in any of the 16 criteria I use to rate wine.
Wine: Fetzer Valley Oaks
Variety: Zinfandel
Vintage: 2004
Alcohol: 13.5%
Rating: 80
Price Paid: $6.99
Find Fetzer Valley Oaks Zinfandel on Snooth
Pepperwood Grove Old Vine Zinfandel 2005
The second wine is the Pepperwood Grove Zinfandel, which is part of the 3 Loose Screws family of wine brands from Don Sebastiani & Sons.
The 2005 Pepperwood Grove Old Vine Zinfandel is a great wine for the price. It’s well balanced and quite enjoyable. If you want to pay more you can easily find a better Zin, but this is a great deal. The bouquet features a strop of leather with blackberry and cola aromas. On the palate it’s nicely acidic and has lots of blackberry and spice. Plus I picked up a little sour apple flavor that I don’t usually find in reds, but it was an interesting twist. The medium-length finish is spicy and crisp.
The bad news is that it looks like they are going non-vintage after 2005 which is a move I strongly oppose. Vintage is highly important in selecting wines and without one on the label, I can’t recommend a wine. If you find the 2005, it’s a good deal. If there is no year on the label, good luck.
Wine: Pepperwood Grove Old Vine Zinfandel
Variety: Zinfandel
Vintage: 2005
Alcohol: 13.5%
Rating: 85
Price Paid: $6.49
Find Pepperwood Grove Old Vine Zinfandel on Snooth
The Pepperwood Grove is only $6.50!?! I haven’t had this wine in 4 or 5 years but I seem to remember it being more expensive. It seems like it’s pretty much impossible to get any kind of wine from the US this cheap.
The prices posted reflect what we paid. Prices will vary by region, store, etc.
What would be the advantages of going non-vintage? Why wouldn’t a winery put a date on the bottle? Is this to pass off lesser wines to an unsuspecting public that has no way of verifying the year and therefore, not able to compare it to other brands?
The importance of vintage is a disputed topic. Arguably, vintage is more important on more expensive wines that are meant to be aged versus inexpensive “drink now” wines.
Reasons a wine producer may go non-vintage include: 1. They are blending wines from multiple vintages. 2. They believe growing seasons to be consistent from one year to the next and hence the wines they produce to be consistent from year to year.
I believe there are variations in vintages and prefer a vintage label so that I know what I’m getting. Although with some mass producers you may find bottle inconsistencies within a vintage making that mark irrelevant.