Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker
Champagne Lover
2163
Wed Sep 10, 2008 8:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
Champagne Lover
2163
Wed Sep 10, 2008 8:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
Victorwine wrote:Hi Peter,
From the picture it looks like a natural cork. It started off as a straight champagne cork possibly approximately 1- 1/8 inches in diameter and 1- 7/8 or 2 inches long and chamfered or beveled on both ends.
Steve Slatcher wrote:I don't think it has exactly shrunk. The wet bit has just lost its elasticity a bit more than the rest of the cork.
Howie Hart wrote: amount of penetration by the wine under pressure, and that's where the cork would lose it's elasticity over time.
For a normal cork, yes. However, Champagne corks are compressed significantly. Also, they are composite corks, with layers glued together with grains running at angle to each other, like plywood. I believe the glue (natural latex?) prevents (or hinders) the wine from migrating through the layers.Peter May wrote:Going back to my idle query - isn't that the opposite of what is supposed to happen by keeping the cork wet?
Howie Hart wrote: believe the glue (natural latex?) prevents (or hinders) the wine from migrating through the layers.
Victorwine wrote: As for agglomerated corks (if used with an automated corking machine) they would have cork discs at both ends. If doing it the “old fashion way” then it is a different story.
Tom Troiano wrote:Don't forget that laying wine on its side is also much more efficient from a storage standpoint. Its not all about the cork.
Yes. The champagne cork changes from juponne to cheville because the cell structure of the cork (under pressure) begins to deteriorate over time, hence the 'drink within ten years' caveat.
As the cork becomes more peg-like, effervescence slowly escapes. Old bottles do not froth enthusiastically.
The condition of the cork is a good indicator as to how long a NV bottle has sat on the shelf!
Peter May wrote:Steve Slatcher wrote:I don't think it has exactly shrunk. The wet bit has just lost its elasticity a bit more than the rest of the cork.Howie Hart wrote: amount of penetration by the wine under pressure, and that's where the cork would lose it's elasticity over time.
Going back to my idle query - isn't that the opposite of what is supposed to happen by keeping the cork wet?
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests