Moderators: Jenise, Robin Garr, David M. Bueker
Peter May
Pinotage Advocate
3812
Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:24 am
Snorbens, England
Jeff B
Champagne Lover
2160
Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
Jeff B
Champagne Lover
2160
Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:01 pm
Michigan (perhaps more cleverly known as "The Big Mitten")
Howie Hart
The Hart of Buffalo
6389
Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:13 pm
Niagara Falls, NY
Steve Slatcher
Wine guru
1047
Sat Aug 19, 2006 11:51 am
Manchester, England
Peter May
Pinotage Advocate
3812
Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:24 am
Snorbens, England
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.
Peter May
Pinotage Advocate
3812
Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:24 am
Snorbens, England
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.
Howie Hart
The Hart of Buffalo
6389
Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:13 pm
Niagara Falls, NY
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?
Peter May
Pinotage Advocate
3812
Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:24 am
Snorbens, England
Howie Hart wrote: believe the glue (natural latex?) prevents (or hinders) the wine from migrating through the layers.
Peter May
Pinotage Advocate
3812
Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:24 am
Snorbens, England
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.
Peter May
Pinotage Advocate
3812
Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:24 am
Snorbens, England
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.
Hoke
Achieving Wine Immortality
11420
Sat Apr 15, 2006 1:07 am
Portland, OR
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!
Howie Hart
The Hart of Buffalo
6389
Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:13 pm
Niagara Falls, NY
Steve Slatcher
Wine guru
1047
Sat Aug 19, 2006 11:51 am
Manchester, England
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?
Paul Winalski
Wok Wielder
8032
Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:16 pm
Merrimack, New Hampshire
Peter May
Pinotage Advocate
3812
Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:24 am
Snorbens, England
Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot, Amazon35, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 6 guests