I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at some
recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused on
synthetic versus cork.

I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different answer.
The cost are very similar at these stores.
One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term storage.
The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The longer
natural corks are the best for long term storage.
The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.

Joe

I'll bet you get a lot of differing opinions from members here, just like you
did at the supply shops. I have used mainly agglomerated and synthetic for
years with no troubles. I've heard about the agglomerated good for only short
time(?) but I have them in bottles several years old. I have had agglomerated
from different manufacturers, and some I wouldn't use at all.

On 12/14/03 7:21 AM, in article ,
"Joe Ae" > wrote:

> I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at some
> recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused on
> synthetic versus cork.
>
> I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
> agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different answer.
> The cost are very similar at these stores.
> One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term storage.
> The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The longer
> natural corks are the best for long term storage.
> The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
> manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.
>
> Joe


The important thing is to not use cheap corks. I find the standard ones
available as the least expensive in the winemaking stores to be inferior and
tend to crumble apart.

Actually, I have tried a few different kinds of corks and have recently
settled on using the sandwich type corks. These have an agglomerated middle
and disks of natural cork on the ends. I have been using these for over a
year now and find them to seal great. I also find the ends of the corks are
smoother and more blemish free than typical natural corks.

I usually order them from Grape and Granery - not that I am specifically
endorsing their site over others, but here is a link to their web page with
a picture of the corks.

http://www.thegrape.net/browse.cfm/4,9679.html


--
Greg Cook
http://homepage.mac.com/gregcook/Wine

(remove spamblocker from my email)

"Joe Ae" > wrote in message
news
> I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at some
> recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused on
> synthetic versus cork.
>
> I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
> agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different answer.
> The cost are very similar at these stores.
> One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term storage.
> The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The longer
> natural corks are the best for long term storage.
> The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
> manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.

The jury is still out on this issue, and confusion reigns supreme.

Natural cork is great - except for two things:
1) TCA (cork taint) problems. Even the most expensive corks, which can run
as high as 50¢ each, have the potential to ruin the wine they are supposed
to be protecting. There's no way to know in advance either. You find out
eventually when you open the bottle.
2) Co$t. Natural corks run at least double, and can be as much as 5x the
price of synthetics or agglomerates.

Synthetics are gaining popularity rapidly. The cork taint problem doesn't
exist with them, but they have other issues, such as being either too hard
to extract from the bottle and/or corkscrew or too easy, which can result in
"self-extraction". The most worrisome (to me) issue with full synthetics is
that they don't seem to protect the free SO2 in the wine very well. This is
being worked on by the manufacturers, but they aren't there yet, so in
general synthos are mostly used for wines that aren't intended for long term
aging.

Agglomerated corks are something of a mixed bag. Some of them seem to be
better than others, and the best of them are the so called 1+1 style, which
has a disk of natural cork glued to each end of an agglomerated cork. This
is a reasonable compromise in terms of cost and quality, but from what I've
heard they have the potential of having TCA problems because of that slice
of natural cork.

All in all, I'd say the best promise for the future lies in Stelvin
screwcaps - but these are obviously not for the home winemaker.

Tom S

>
> All in all, I'd say the best promise for the future lies in Stelvin
> screwcaps - but these are obviously not for the home winemaker.
>

And what are these?

I heard part of an interview with a winemaker on the radio a few months ago.
He was talking about the poor quality of cork these days and said that if it
was up to him he'd use screw-on caps for all his white wines (he still
thought that corks mighe be contributing something to reds, maybe it was a
factor of how long the wine was expected to stay in the bottle). Problem is
that the public won't accept it, as (in the US anyway) screw caps are
associated with cheap fortified wines mostly drunk by smelly men living
under bridges.

--arne

> Tom S
>
>

The Australian Wine Research Institute has been doing a large closure trial
for a few years now, and, surprise, surprise, have really found that nothing
is perfect!

However, the best solution here I think is the 1+1 corks. My experience
with hand corking with these though is that they tend to crease a bit at the
bottom, thus exposing the agglomerate.

Professionally, I have found them really good to use.

Rob L
"Joe Ae" > wrote in message
news
> I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at some
> recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused on
> synthetic versus cork.
>
> I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
> agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different answer.
> The cost are very similar at these stores.
> One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term storage.
> The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The longer
> natural corks are the best for long term storage.
> The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
> manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.
>
> Joe
>
>

I like the 1 +1's also, but after a year or so they are sometimes hard
to extract. I think if you want to use them in other than a floor
corker you may want to lube the jaws with glycerin, they are stiff.

I tested Supremecorq and liked them, with the qualification you should
bump your SO2 at least 10 PPM. I lost that within 3 months, but it
stayed constant over 5 years.

I am testing Guardian, they go in loose and kind of scare me because
of that. It seals though...

I am testing NomaCorc, so far so good. (But it's early.)

I would much rather use naturals that were decent, but they are over
$0.30 each in lots of 1000 here and I think that is ridiculous. (I'm
willing to pay $0.20 for a good number 9 at 1 3/4", but >$300/1000 is
getting to be too much.)

I have tried a lot of naturals with some being gawd awful and some
being great. I squeeze them; if soft, they are decent, hard, I leave
them. The color should be very light tan, not dark.

Regards,
Joe






"Robert Lee" > wrote in message >...
> The Australian Wine Research Institute has been doing a large closure trial
> for a few years now, and, surprise, surprise, have really found that nothing
> is perfect!
>
> However, the best solution here I think is the 1+1 corks. My experience
> with hand corking with these though is that they tend to crease a bit at the
> bottom, thus exposing the agglomerate.
>
> Professionally, I have found them really good to use.
>
> Rob L
> "Joe Ae" > wrote in message
> news
> > I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at some
> > recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused on
> > synthetic versus cork.
> >
> > I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
> > agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different answer.
> > The cost are very similar at these stores.
> > One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term storage.
> > The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The longer
> > natural corks are the best for long term storage.
> > The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
> > manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >

"Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message
m...
> I tested Supremecorq and liked them, with the qualification you should
> bump your SO2 at least 10 PPM. I lost that within 3 months, but it
> stayed constant over 5 years.

Joe -

Just so that I'm clear on what you said above, does that mean that the free
SO2 dropped 10 ppm initially and no farther after that, holding steady for 5
years? I'm considering using Supremecorqs on my wine this year.

One of the others I've looked at is NuCorq. The data I've seen on SO2
retention for them is good, but the strong wording of the disclaimer on
their website has me worried.

I agree that the price of natural corks is ridiculous, but 'taint my primary
motivation from moving away from them. ;^)

Tom S

Tom,
I use Nomacorcs, and I have them on about 25 cases that I bottled three
years ago. I would say that the few that I have tested averaged about 10-15
ppm in SO2 loss in that time. I would attribute some of this to the bottling
process to, and I have been very happy with the product. Extraction is just
as good as the day I put them in, and the seal is quite good. The only
"problem" I have had are 2 things: If you dont compress the cork and drive
it rapidly (with a floor corker) you get a pronounce dimple. My work around
for this has been a quick dip in a sulphite solution as I place the cork in
the corker. This really makes the corks slide in like magic and they look
great. I think the small addition of sulphite cant hurt either. The other
issue I had was the jaws from my corker leaving lines in the side of the
corks that looked like a leak could develop. I sanded the sharp edges with
wet/dry sandpaper and it solved that issue although I have never had a
leaker. HTH
John Dixon
"Tom S" > wrote in message
. com...
>
> "Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message
> m...
> > I tested Supremecorq and liked them, with the qualification you should
> > bump your SO2 at least 10 PPM. I lost that within 3 months, but it
> > stayed constant over 5 years.
>
> Joe -
>
> Just so that I'm clear on what you said above, does that mean that the
free
> SO2 dropped 10 ppm initially and no farther after that, holding steady for
5
> years? I'm considering using Supremecorqs on my wine this year.
>
> One of the others I've looked at is NuCorq. The data I've seen on SO2
> retention for them is good, but the strong wording of the disclaimer on
> their website has me worried.
>
> I agree that the price of natural corks is ridiculous, but 'taint my
primary
> motivation from moving away from them. ;^)
>
> Tom S
>
>

Tom,
I used the 1 3/4" supremecorq and 1 3/4" naturals as controls; the
supremecorq lost on average, 12 PPM more than the natural controls,
worst case was 18 PPM. That number stayed constant over the 5 years,
I did not test the first one until 3 months. It was a Chenin Blanc,
all the same lot, 25 bottles. (I used titrettes, I know a lot of
people prefer aspiration techniques, but it was a white and the same
method was used on both...) Worst side effect was more browning,
(deeper tint of yellow), probably due to the lack of SO2. That was
noticable to me at around 3 years, more pronounced at 5. (I am no
expert...)

I don't have a vacuum corker, that's what supremecorq suggests to get
around this. My headspace was between 1/2" and 3/4", I drove the air
in just like I do with a natural. Sparging with inert gas may help
this too. To be honest, if I used these I would use the 1 1/2"'s;
there is no good reason to waste the plastic and the longer ones look
a little goofy in a burgundy bottle, they do not expand enough at the
base...

I know Bully Hill quit using them a few years back, but they were
upset with the extraction force. Supremecorq had changed from using a
screen printing ink to a laser applied toner and the toner absorbed
all of the lube; Bully Hill was stuck with 2 million corq's that were
nothing but aggravation and fighting with Sumpremcorq at the time. (I
forget whether they made it right or not, to be honest.) Supremecorq
wants them used as shipped; no washing or wetting, they want that lube
to stay in place.

Who is NuCorq? I'll look them up. I like the look of these
Nomacorq'a I'm playing around at now. I have some in bottle close to a
year so I guess it's time to look them over soon.

Hope that helps.
Best regards,
Joe



"Tom S" > wrote in message .com>...
> "Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message
> m...
> > I tested Supremecorq and liked them, with the qualification you should
> > bump your SO2 at least 10 PPM. I lost that within 3 months, but it
> > stayed constant over 5 years.
>
> Joe -
>
> Just so that I'm clear on what you said above, does that mean that the free
> SO2 dropped 10 ppm initially and no farther after that, holding steady for 5
> years? I'm considering using Supremecorqs on my wine this year.
>
> One of the others I've looked at is NuCorq. The data I've seen on SO2
> retention for them is good, but the strong wording of the disclaimer on
> their website has me worried.
>
> I agree that the price of natural corks is ridiculous, but 'taint my primary
> motivation from moving away from them. ;^)
>
> Tom S

"Joe Sallustio" > wrote in message
om...
> Tom,
> I used the 1 3/4" supremecorq and 1 3/4" naturals as controls; the
> supremecorq lost on average, 12 PPM more than the natural controls,
> worst case was 18 PPM. That number stayed constant over the 5 years,
> I did not test the first one until 3 months. It was a Chenin Blanc,
> all the same lot, 25 bottles. (I used titrettes, I know a lot of
> people prefer aspiration techniques, but it was a white and the same
> method was used on both...) Worst side effect was more browning,
> (deeper tint of yellow), probably due to the lack of SO2. That was
> noticable to me at around 3 years, more pronounced at 5. (I am no
> expert...)
>
> I don't have a vacuum corker, that's what supremecorq suggests to get
> around this. My headspace was between 1/2" and 3/4", I drove the air
> in just like I do with a natural. Sparging with inert gas may help
> this too. To be honest, if I used these I would use the 1 1/2"'s;
> there is no good reason to waste the plastic and the longer ones look
> a little goofy in a burgundy bottle, they do not expand enough at the
> base...
>
> I know Bully Hill quit using them a few years back, but they were
> upset with the extraction force. Supremecorq had changed from using a
> screen printing ink to a laser applied toner and the toner absorbed
> all of the lube; Bully Hill was stuck with 2 million corq's that were
> nothing but aggravation and fighting with Sumpremcorq at the time. (I
> forget whether they made it right or not, to be honest.) Supremecorq
> wants them used as shipped; no washing or wetting, they want that lube
> to stay in place.
>
> Who is NuCorq? I'll look them up. I like the look of these
> Nomacorq'a I'm playing around at now. I have some in bottle close to a
> year so I guess it's time to look them over soon.
>
> Hope that helps.

Thanks for the info, Joe.

I think I misspelled that name. It's "NuKorc". They're in Australia, but
they have reps all over the world.

Did you have any extraction issues with SupremeCorqs?

As far as my application goes, the bottling line has a vacuum corking head,
and I know they're savvy enough not to wash the corqs prior to use. I'm
going to continue to lobby for a screw capper though, as I'm sure that's the
wave of the future.

Tom S

(Joe Sallustio) wrote in message . com>...

Hi Joe,

Nice experiment and write up.

> That number stayed constant over the 5 years, I did not test the first one >until 3 months.

When you say the number stayed constant over the 5 years, do you mean
the delta between the test and control groups was contant or the
measured loss of SO2 was constant? Or both?


> I like the look of these Nomacorq'a I'm playing around at now. I have some in > bottle close to a year so I guess it's time to look them over soon.
>

Same type of experiment with a control group? I hope you'll let us
know the results.

Thanks,

Andy

Most of my cork problems were caused by the corker. The Portugese
corker with the synthetic iris doesn't squeeze the corks tight enough,
often either puncturing them or creasing the sides. I switched to the
Italian floor corker with the brass iris and have had no problems. I
insert the corks dry, but store in a sulfite humididor.

Tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Robert Lee" > wrote in message >...
> > The Australian Wine Research Institute has been doing a large closure trial
> > for a few years now, and, surprise, surprise, have really found that nothing
> > is perfect!
> >
> > However, the best solution here I think is the 1+1 corks. My experience
> > with hand corking with these though is that they tend to crease a bit at the
> > bottom, thus exposing the agglomerate.
> >
> > Professionally, I have found them really good to use.
> >
> > Rob L
> > "Joe Ae" > wrote in message
> > news
> > > I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at some
> > > recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused on
> > > synthetic versus cork.
> > >
> > > I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
> > > agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different answer.
> > > The cost are very similar at these stores.
> > > One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term storage.
> > > The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The longer
> > > natural corks are the best for long term storage.
> > > The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
> > > manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >

Until recently I insisted on the traditional, natural corks. I felt it not
only added to the esthetics but since cork is a type of oak it probably adds
something to the wine.

For the first 20 plus years of my winemaking I had no trouble. But in
recent years I have had trouble with what I am attributing to cork taint in
any of my wines that get over 2 or 3 years in bottle.

They now have a test for cork taint and the big wineries can by corks
guaranteed to be taint free. Unfortunately these are not offered for
general consumption and no one admits what is done with the corks that fail.
I suspect they may reenter the market to people who do not buy tested cork.
For instance home winemakers.

I thought of the agglomerated but they still have cork and may be tainted.
Screw caps are not a good option for home winemaking.

This last year I have been using synthetic. One year is not much of a test
in terms of protecting from taint but I have not had any trouble inserting
or removing the ones I have used. My one complaint is that if I remove one,
drink part of the wine and then try to reinsert it by hand -- No Way! They
expand back to their original size which requires a good corker. My
solution is to replace with tasting corks for this but this, of course, adds
to cost.

Ray

"Joe Ae" > wrote in message
news
> I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at some
> recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused on
> synthetic versus cork.
>
> I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
> agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different answer.
> The cost are very similar at these stores.
> One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term storage.
> The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The longer
> natural corks are the best for long term storage.
> The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
> manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.
>
> Joe
>
>

Ray,
Do you have any idea what company guarantees their corks to be taint
free? I was not aware of any companies making such a claim, and might be
interested in further information. The biggest question if this is true is
how is this achieved? Is it through just testing the corks, or are they
treated in some way as has occurred in the industry causing other problems.
Thanks for any info you might have.
John Dixon
"Ray" > wrote in message
m...
> Until recently I insisted on the traditional, natural corks. I felt it
not
> only added to the esthetics but since cork is a type of oak it probably
adds
> something to the wine.
>
> For the first 20 plus years of my winemaking I had no trouble. But in
> recent years I have had trouble with what I am attributing to cork taint
in
> any of my wines that get over 2 or 3 years in bottle.
>
> They now have a test for cork taint and the big wineries can by corks
> guaranteed to be taint free. Unfortunately these are not offered for
> general consumption and no one admits what is done with the corks that
fail.
> I suspect they may reenter the market to people who do not buy tested
cork.
> For instance home winemakers.
>
> I thought of the agglomerated but they still have cork and may be tainted.
> Screw caps are not a good option for home winemaking.
>
> This last year I have been using synthetic. One year is not much of a
test
> in terms of protecting from taint but I have not had any trouble inserting
> or removing the ones I have used. My one complaint is that if I remove
one,
> drink part of the wine and then try to reinsert it by hand -- No Way!
They
> expand back to their original size which requires a good corker. My
> solution is to replace with tasting corks for this but this, of course,
adds
> to cost.
>
> Ray
>
> "Joe Ae" > wrote in message
> news
> > I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at some
> > recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused on
> > synthetic versus cork.
> >
> > I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
> > agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different
answer.
> > The cost are very similar at these stores.
> > One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term
storage.
> > The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The longer
> > natural corks are the best for long term storage.
> > The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
> > manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
>
>

"J Dixon" > wrote in message et>...
> Ray,
> Do you have any idea what company guarantees their corks to be taint
> free? I was not aware of any companies making such a claim, and might be
> interested in further information. The biggest question if this is true is
> how is this achieved? Is it through just testing the corks, or are they
> treated in some way as has occurred in the industry causing other problems.
> Thanks for any info you might have.
> John Dixon

John - I don't mean to speak for Ray here but I can tell you, if a
cork is made from natural material, whether regular solid cork or
agglomerate, there are no guarantees and there is no company that will
offer such a guarantee. There have been many attempts over the years
to address the problem trying everything from gases to radiation of
various sorts but none has ever succeeded in completely eliminating
the problem and I doubt anyone ever will, frankly. The problem I see
with going to synthetic stoppers is that many of them seem to allow
premature oxidation. Supremecorq, the market leader, for example has
essentially recognized this by introducing a new sulfite-impregnated
model that is intended to release sulfite into the wine to replace
that being eaten up through oxidation. So I fear in going from
natural to synthetic cork we're going from a situation where between
2% and 10% (depending on whom you believer) are corked to where 100%
are going to be prematurely oxidized. That doesn't matter, of course,
if you drink the wine quickly.

- Mark W.

Wow a lot of shared experiences with cork usage!
It sounds like technically screw caps are becoming more important for whites
(not sure about reds). But since they are not easily available to homewine
makers, we need to make sure we get quality (natural or agglomerated or 1+1
or synthetic) corks and a good corker. I have an Italian floor corker and
it seems to work well.
Making sure you get quality corks does not seem like a simple task. Other
than visually checking for imperfections and softness I guess all you can do
is try them out and wait. I have never expierenced TCA, oops now that I
have mentioned it I better check it out.

thanks for all the suggestions

Joe



"Mark Willstatter" > wrote in message
om...
> "J Dixon" > wrote in message
et>...
> > Ray,
> > Do you have any idea what company guarantees their corks to be taint
> > free? I was not aware of any companies making such a claim, and might be
> > interested in further information. The biggest question if this is true
is
> > how is this achieved? Is it through just testing the corks, or are they
> > treated in some way as has occurred in the industry causing other
problems.
> > Thanks for any info you might have.
> > John Dixon
>
> John - I don't mean to speak for Ray here but I can tell you, if a
> cork is made from natural material, whether regular solid cork or
> agglomerate, there are no guarantees and there is no company that will
> offer such a guarantee. There have been many attempts over the years
> to address the problem trying everything from gases to radiation of
> various sorts but none has ever succeeded in completely eliminating
> the problem and I doubt anyone ever will, frankly. The problem I see
> with going to synthetic stoppers is that many of them seem to allow
> premature oxidation. Supremecorq, the market leader, for example has
> essentially recognized this by introducing a new sulfite-impregnated
> model that is intended to release sulfite into the wine to replace
> that being eaten up through oxidation. So I fear in going from
> natural to synthetic cork we're going from a situation where between
> 2% and 10% (depending on whom you believer) are corked to where 100%
> are going to be prematurely oxidized. That doesn't matter, of course,
> if you drink the wine quickly.
>
> - Mark W.

Joe Ae wrote "It sounds like technically screw caps are becoming more
important for whites (not sure about reds). But since they are not easily
available to homewine makers, we need to make sure we get quality......"

I've seen screw caps at my local homebrew/winemaking shop. Check out

Presque Isle has them in their catalog www.piwine.com


Bill Frazier
Olathe, Kansas

"Joe Ae" > wrote in message > ...
> I have never expierenced TCA, oops now that I have mentioned it I better
> check it out.
>

Hi Joe,

Many people (even people with a very sensitive sense of smell) are not
sensitive to the low levels of TCA found in wines. They can not pick
out the distinctive smell of TCA but just find the tainted wine
lacking its typical taste and smell.


Andy

John,

I read it within the last few months and I am sure it was discussed on this
site or on the winemaking site. I do not believe they provide a quarantine
in terms of repaying losses but they have developed a test that will catch
taint in the cork at exceedingly low levels. It was touted as something
that could save the cork industry. I think this is provided as a service to
large wineries. It is not used by any of the cork companies directly. I am
sure I am right about the test being available and being used. I am not as
clear on how it is applied. And like I said, I am concerned about what
happens to the bad corks. I am sure there are no laws forcing them to be
destroyed. I think that small and home winemakers may be seeing more than
our fair share of them.

Ray

"J Dixon" > wrote in message
t...
> Ray,
> Do you have any idea what company guarantees their corks to be taint
> free? I was not aware of any companies making such a claim, and might be
> interested in further information. The biggest question if this is true is
> how is this achieved? Is it through just testing the corks, or are they
> treated in some way as has occurred in the industry causing other
problems.
> Thanks for any info you might have.
> John Dixon
> "Ray" > wrote in message
> m...
> > Until recently I insisted on the traditional, natural corks. I felt it
> not
> > only added to the esthetics but since cork is a type of oak it probably
> adds
> > something to the wine.
> >
> > For the first 20 plus years of my winemaking I had no trouble. But in
> > recent years I have had trouble with what I am attributing to cork taint
> in
> > any of my wines that get over 2 or 3 years in bottle.
> >
> > They now have a test for cork taint and the big wineries can by corks
> > guaranteed to be taint free. Unfortunately these are not offered for
> > general consumption and no one admits what is done with the corks that
> fail.
> > I suspect they may reenter the market to people who do not buy tested
> cork.
> > For instance home winemakers.
> >
> > I thought of the agglomerated but they still have cork and may be
tainted.
> > Screw caps are not a good option for home winemaking.
> >
> > This last year I have been using synthetic. One year is not much of a
> test
> > in terms of protecting from taint but I have not had any trouble
inserting
> > or removing the ones I have used. My one complaint is that if I remove
> one,
> > drink part of the wine and then try to reinsert it by hand -- No Way!
> They
> > expand back to their original size which requires a good corker. My
> > solution is to replace with tasting corks for this but this, of course,
> adds
> > to cost.
> >
> > Ray
> >
> > "Joe Ae" > wrote in message
> > news
> > > I am curious what the folks on this forum think. I have looked at
some
> > > recent postings regarding corks. Most discussions I saw were focused
on
> > > synthetic versus cork.
> > >
> > > I have asked a couple of wine supply stores whether natural cork or
> > > agglomerated cork are the better and sure enough I got a different
> answer.
> > > The cost are very similar at these stores.
> > > One vendor claimed the agglomerated corks are only for short term
> storage.
> > > The natural corks can hold together for much longer storage. The
longer
> > > natural corks are the best for long term storage.
> > > The other vendor told me natural corks can have defects due to the
> > > manufacturing process he prefers agglomerated.
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>