Now that I have started a shiraz Crushendo kit, what should I expect
(after suitable patience and care), that I would not get from a
non-crushendo selections estate series shiraz?

Me too!
Hopefully it will be truer red wine without the ( or with much reduced )
"off" flavours that kit red wines suffer from. Hopefully a good balance of
tannins/fruit to give an astringency to balance off the fruit that I like to
find in my reds.

I have just tried my first bottle of Selection Estate Lodi Old Vine
Zinfandel which I started in September 2003. It was OK but I shall leave it
in bottle for another few months, ( I bottled it at the end of October).
Still it is just not 25% better than the standard Selection kits ( it is 25%
more expensive)

To be honest I find that the Crushendo Syrah, with a 35% price hike over the
Selection Estate wines, is more than a tad expensive and it is going to have
to be a vast improvement for it to be a repeated experience. At £100 for the
kit I reckon that it works out at about £4/bottle when all the side issues
( washing,cleaning bottles/labels/closures/caps and time) are taken into
account
But it is going to be a year before I do my first real assessment and
probably another year after that before I bottle it.
I have been making red wines of all kinds for many years and in recent
years more kits as my available storage space has reduced drastically. More
and more I returning to commercially produced red wines which are just so
much better than even the best kit reds. I am only allowed one bottle a week
at normal times so I like it to be a really pleasurable experience.
Let's hope that Winexpert have taken a good step forward in the development
of red kit wines (and 18 litres of "concentrate" has got to be better). I
wish it well!

--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire, England
Remove "PSANTISPAM" from my address line to reply.
All outgoing mail is scanned by Norton
Anti Virus for your protection too!
"Ron White" > wrote in message
...
> Now that I have started a shiraz Crushendo kit, what should I expect
> (after suitable patience and care), that I would not get from a
> non-crushendo selections estate series shiraz?

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:57:53 GMT, "pinky"
> wrote:

>Me too!
>Hopefully it will be truer red wine without the ( or with much reduced )
>"off" flavours that kit red wines suffer from. Hopefully a good balance of
>tannins/fruit to give an astringency to balance off the fruit that I like to
>find in my reds.
>
>I have just tried my first bottle of Selection Estate Lodi Old Vine
>Zinfandel which I started in September 2003. It was OK but I shall leave it
>in bottle for another few months, ( I bottled it at the end of October).
>Still it is just not 25% better than the standard Selection kits ( it is 25%
>more expensive)
>
>To be honest I find that the Crushendo Syrah, with a 35% price hike over the
>Selection Estate wines, is more than a tad expensive and it is going to have
>to be a vast improvement for it to be a repeated experience. At £100 for the
>kit I reckon that it works out at about £4/bottle when all the side issues
>( washing,cleaning bottles/labels/closures/caps and time) are taken into
>account
>But it is going to be a year before I do my first real assessment and
>probably another year after that before I bottle it.
>I have been making red wines of all kinds for many years and in recent
>years more kits as my available storage space has reduced drastically. More
>and more I returning to commercially produced red wines which are just so
>much better than even the best kit reds. I am only allowed one bottle a week
>at normal times so I like it to be a really pleasurable experience.
>Let's hope that Winexpert have taken a good step forward in the development
>of red kit wines (and 18 litres of "concentrate" has got to be better). I
>wish it well!

ok... 5 lines to answer the question and 21 lines to rant.

Can we please stick to the question?

I have added this impolite poster to my blocked senders list. His response
was rude and uncalled for and will now be ignored in future.

--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire, England
Remove "PSANTISPAM" from my address line to reply.
All outgoing mail is scanned by Norton
Anti Virus for your protection too!
"
<snip><snip>
>
>

I have added this impolite poster to my blocked senders list. His response
was rude and uncalled for and will now be ignored in future.

--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire, England
Remove "PSANTISPAM" from my address line to reply.
All outgoing mail is scanned by Norton
Anti Virus for your protection too!
"
<snip><snip>
>
>

Trevor,

I'm with you - I don't get his response - you were just sharing your
experience with these kits and your hopes for the new one. How can anyone,
but WE, know how these will turn out since they're a new product. You can
only hope that they'll turn out well and worth the money.

Good luck with this one!

Ed



"pinky" > wrote in message
. uk...
>I have added this impolite poster to my blocked senders list. His response
>was rude and uncalled for and will now be ignored in future.
>
> --
> Trevor A Panther
> In South Yorkshire, England
> Remove "PSANTISPAM" from my address line to reply.
> All outgoing mail is scanned by Norton
> Anti Virus for your protection too!
> "
> <snip><snip>
>>
>>
>
>

Trevor,

I'm with you - I don't get his response - you were just sharing your
experience with these kits and your hopes for the new one. How can anyone,
but WE, know how these will turn out since they're a new product. You can
only hope that they'll turn out well and worth the money.

Good luck with this one!

Ed



"pinky" > wrote in message
. uk...
>I have added this impolite poster to my blocked senders list. His response
>was rude and uncalled for and will now be ignored in future.
>
> --
> Trevor A Panther
> In South Yorkshire, England
> Remove "PSANTISPAM" from my address line to reply.
> All outgoing mail is scanned by Norton
> Anti Virus for your protection too!
> "
> <snip><snip>
>>
>>
>
>

Come on now Trevor, I have read 30 some thousand headers in this
group. I have seen hundreds of your posts - you can't throw any
stones.

Was it unreasonable to expect someone to just answer a simple question
without the extra noise?

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:20:51 GMT, "pinky"
> wrote:

>I have added this impolite poster to my blocked senders list. His response
>was rude and uncalled for and will now be ignored in future.

Could Trevor just have answered to question? Of course he could.

That's not an unreasonble expection is it?

I'm not trying to pick on Trevor personally.
I've read hundreds of his posts - he has thrown his share of stones.
I just thought he could catch one, and realize that this was at the
same level of many of his posts.

He has also answered hundreds of posts very well.
On balance I think that he is definitely an asset to this group.

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:29:24 -0500, "Ed Marks" >
wrote:

>Trevor,
>
>I'm with you - I don't get his response - you were just sharing your
>experience with these kits and your hopes for the new one. How can anyone,
>but WE, know how these will turn out since they're a new product. You can
>only hope that they'll turn out well and worth the money.
>
>Good luck with this one!
>
>Ed
>
>
>
>"pinky" > wrote in message
.uk...
>>I have added this impolite poster to my blocked senders list. His response
>>was rude and uncalled for and will now be ignored in future.
>>
>> --
>> Trevor A Panther
>> In South Yorkshire, England
>> Remove "PSANTISPAM" from my address line to reply.
>> All outgoing mail is scanned by Norton
>> Anti Virus for your protection too!
>> "
>> <snip><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Could Trevor just have answered to question? Of course he could.

That's not an unreasonble expection is it?

I'm not trying to pick on Trevor personally.
I've read hundreds of his posts - he has thrown his share of stones.
I just thought he could catch one, and realize that this was at the
same level of many of his posts.

He has also answered hundreds of posts very well.
On balance I think that he is definitely an asset to this group.

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:29:24 -0500, "Ed Marks" >
wrote:

>Trevor,
>
>I'm with you - I don't get his response - you were just sharing your
>experience with these kits and your hopes for the new one. How can anyone,
>but WE, know how these will turn out since they're a new product. You can
>only hope that they'll turn out well and worth the money.
>
>Good luck with this one!
>
>Ed
>
>
>
>"pinky" > wrote in message
.uk...
>>I have added this impolite poster to my blocked senders list. His response
>>was rude and uncalled for and will now be ignored in future.
>>
>> --
>> Trevor A Panther
>> In South Yorkshire, England
>> Remove "PSANTISPAM" from my address line to reply.
>> All outgoing mail is scanned by Norton
>> Anti Virus for your protection too!
>> "
>> <snip><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

"Ron White" > wrote in message
...
>
> He has also answered hundreds of posts very well.
> On balance I think that he is definitely an asset to this group.
>
Trevor has received the Ron White Seal of Approval. There shall be dancing
in Yorkshire tonight, I would guess. ;-)

Brian

"Ron White" > wrote in message
...
>
> He has also answered hundreds of posts very well.
> On balance I think that he is definitely an asset to this group.
>
Trevor has received the Ron White Seal of Approval. There shall be dancing
in Yorkshire tonight, I would guess. ;-)

Brian

Brilliant Brian!!! ;-)

Cheers,

Ed


"Brian Lundeen" > wrote in message
...
>
> Trevor has received the Ron White Seal of Approval. There shall be dancing
> in Yorkshire tonight, I would guess. ;-)
>
> Brian
>

Brilliant Brian!!! ;-)

Cheers,

Ed


"Brian Lundeen" > wrote in message
...
>
> Trevor has received the Ron White Seal of Approval. There shall be dancing
> in Yorkshire tonight, I would guess. ;-)
>
> Brian
>

Thanks.
Thank you to all who gave good answers to try to help.
I apologize to all I have offended.
No excuses at all. I was a (fill in the blank as some of you have
already done).
I have been on usenet for many years and have never behaved badly.
Bad day. I don't know what my problem was.
I also was an ass on one beer post that day.
I have read 30+ thousand headers on both groups, I know you all.
You are largely great people on both groups.
I am not a trol - really just had a brain fart.
You all may flame me till you feel better -- I deserve it.
I will try (but am human) to just take it and shut up until it's
over).

Again I am sorry and there was no excuse for my behavior.


On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:00:39 -0600, "Brian Lundeen" >
wrote:

>
>"Ron White" > wrote in message
.. .
>>
>> He has also answered hundreds of posts very well.
>> On balance I think that he is definitely an asset to this group.
>>
>Trevor has received the Ron White Seal of Approval. There shall be dancing
>in Yorkshire tonight, I would guess. ;-)
>
>Brian
>

Thanks.
Thank you to all who gave good answers to try to help.
I apologize to all I have offended.
No excuses at all. I was a (fill in the blank as some of you have
already done).
I have been on usenet for many years and have never behaved badly.
Bad day. I don't know what my problem was.
I also was an ass on one beer post that day.
I have read 30+ thousand headers on both groups, I know you all.
You are largely great people on both groups.
I am not a trol - really just had a brain fart.
You all may flame me till you feel better -- I deserve it.
I will try (but am human) to just take it and shut up until it's
over).

Again I am sorry and there was no excuse for my behavior.


On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:00:39 -0600, "Brian Lundeen" >
wrote:

>
>"Ron White" > wrote in message
.. .
>>
>> He has also answered hundreds of posts very well.
>> On balance I think that he is definitely an asset to this group.
>>
>Trevor has received the Ron White Seal of Approval. There shall be dancing
>in Yorkshire tonight, I would guess. ;-)
>
>Brian
>