2002 Viader vs. 2003 Flora Trilogy

[oostexan]

I have seen Viader mentioned on this sight and had not tried them. So last night I went out for a nice dinner and saw it on the list. Upon the first taste it reminded me lot of the Trilogy, so I checked the list and they happened to carry it as well. So I ordered both bottles and two glasses for each person to do a comparo.

So the 2003 Trilogy was very good, though not the best year I have had. It was dark ruby in the glass, lovely floral nose of blue fruits, then graceful and concentrated blue fruits and ripe cherry palate. Good long finish, though not as good as the 2002.

The 2002 Viader (51% Cab, 49% Cab Franc) had a little more open and lively nose. The nose was actually wonderful. The flavor profile was similary, but it had a little riper cherry fruit and a touch more concentration and finish. It was wonderful.

There were three of us tasing. The two people I was with were split - one preferred the Trilogy, one the Viader. I was the last one to vote, and I wanted it to be a draw becuase they are so close. They would not let me off the hook, so I broke the tie breaker by voting for the Viader. Honestly, I think it benefitted from being a better year than the Trilogy.

Both are excellent, well made wines. Ironically, I think the Viader retails for 85 and the Trilogy for 60, but the Trilogy was 150 on the list and the Viader was 130.

Both are highly recommended.

[wondersofwine]

Interesting notes.

[winoweenie]

Your choice would mirror mine. The vintage difference is the difference. WW

[oostexan]

Well WW, that is high praise. I would love to do the comparison with equally good vintages. Tbey were both fantastic though.

[Glass_A_Day]

I too am a fan of both and prefer the Trilogy I have the choice.