2010 Quickfire Cabernet Sauvignon

Central Coast, CA
13.8% alc.
$8 at Kent, WA (purchased 4/21/14)

20140422_180506_resized (2)Clear and medium red in color. Dark berries very prominent in the nose and a light tapenade in the background. Very fruit forward on the palate with blackberries, raspberries, and some blueberries. Fine smooth tannins, medium acidity, very light on the oak, and a kiss of brown sugar in the finish. Clean flavors that were at first a bit one dimensional, but after about an hour gained more complexity with nuances of smoke, tar, and light vanilla. Very pleasant wine without all the caramel oak you often find.

As with the Chardonnay, the back label says these wines are refined, well balanced and food friendly. I second that with a thumbs up. A decent wine at a decent price.


12 thoughts on “2010 Quickfire Cabernet Sauvignon

  1. Expat

    On this site I pay close attention to the description details and the tastes of the reviewer and much less to the bottom line “Thumb rating”. i think Pope Valley Cab was rated as Thumbs Down but it sounded like a style I liked, and sure enough I thought it was terrific so I stocked up. Point systems have their own shortcomings so i don’t see any reason to change how things are handled here. I really appreciate the reviewer given their personal preference info and trying to define the style of the wine in their review. For me, I like Old World style and have little appetite for big fruit but know there are some quality big fruit wines that deserve a Thumbs Up because they are well made versions of that style. I think the times for a Thumbs Down is when it’s a seriously flawed wine and personal preference is not the issue.

    1. PW

      That’s how I look at them too. If it sounds like the descriptions I favor, I’ll try it regardless of the final rating.

    2. bin5 Post author

      Thanks for all the great replies on the ratings on this site. It’s good to know that the descriptions are more important than any final “rating”. Wine is so personal and how you enjoy it is shaped by so many factors. This blog has a great group of followers.

      1. Expat

        Thanks lim13. I truly believe this site has the most effective rating/review structure of most sites out there because it is a true community. With regular reviewers and “commenters” I get to know everyone’s tastes and can better understand the perspectives I’m reading. Also, so many people here speak a clear, descriptive wine language with no pomposity or self indulgent, flowery descriptions. Bravo, friends!

    3. BargainWhine

      Hi Expat. Your statement makes my blogging day, too. That’s exactly how I hope readers interact with this site.

  2. Expat

    I thought this was a pleasant, “safe” wine but not interesting enough for me to re-buy. Not enough structure or tannins to give it real character and a little too much softness for my palate. It was a big step up from the easy drinking marshmallow wines that are so prominent but not in the league with some of the interesting cabs GO gets in at times (Pope Valley, Yokayo, Orsianna, Sausal, etc). So in my world I would just give it a “drinkable”.

    1. bin5 Post author

      Hi Expat – Thanks for weighing in, I would agree with your comment that this wine is not in the same league as some of the bigger wines that roll through GO. I gave it a thumbs up because I think it is worth a try if someone likes a softer, less oaky wine occasionally. I suspect that “drinkables” often get past by, but I guess I don’t really know. Interesting question for the blog – How often do you try a wine after reading a review here that is rated drinkable?

      1. jwc

        Bin5, that’s a good point, drinkable can mean different things to various people, frankly it’s not specific, an extremely generic term. Almost like, what are you willing to put up with? Usually during a tasting note, I’ll try and differentiate by going with a drinkable + or -, I am also a fan of the 100 point system, as it enables a wine to be measured to some generally agreed upon standards, although in the final analysis, its all subjective. To answer your question, finally, a wine that is rated drinkable, I’ll generally pass on, unless I recognize the producer, and figure it’s worth a gamble. There’s enough duds at GO, and this site does enable the readers to avoid them, for the most part.

      2. lim13

        If the descriptors are thorough and I feel I know the tastes of the reviewer (through experience), I pay absolutely no attention to the rating. And as we know…even one individual’s Thumbs Down can be another’s Thumbs Up (whether due to personal taste or the dreaded GO bottle variation). I am not a fan of scores. I suppose I might feel differently too if I was paying $20 and more per bottle, which is why even a loser at GO doesn’t result in a huge loss of money (and can be returned for a refund).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s