SKU: 70650218213

Greywacke Marlborough Wild Sauvignon Blanc, 2021, New Zealand

Sale price$26.10 Regular price$29.00
Save 10%

Pay in installments of $7.25 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Aug 3 - Aug 8

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

Greywacke Marlborough Wild Sauvignon Blanc, 2021, New ZealandOur View: Greywacke was created in 2009 by Kevin Judd, the person responsible for the ground breaking early wines produced in Marlborough, including at Cloudy Bay. The name 'Greywacke' was adopted by Kevin for his first Marlborough vineyard, located in Rapaura, in recognition of the prevalence of rounded greywacke river stones in the vineyard's soils. Greywacke's signature Wild Sauvignon is arguably Kevin Judd's flagship white wine. Fermented in old

Our View:

Greywacke was created in 2009 by Kevin Judd, the person responsible for the ground-breaking early wines produced in Marlborough, including at Cloudy Bay. The name 'Greywacke' was adopted by Kevin for his first Marlborough vineyard, located in Rapaura, in recognition of the prevalence of rounded greywacke river stones in the vineyard's soils. 

Greywacke's signature Wild Sauvignon is arguably Kevin Judd's flagship white wine. Fermented in old oak barrels using wild yeast, this is an alternative intricate style -  a textured wine with a lingering savoury finish of tarragon and lightly smoked tea.

A sauvignon of considerable depth and opulence, created by fermenting Sauvignon Blanc with naturally occurring yeast for an extended period, sometimes for almost a year after harvest.

The Wine:

Fruit was sourced from various vineyard sites in the Southern Valleys and the central Wairau Plains, specifically in Woodbourne, Renwick and Rapaura. Soil types vary from the young alluvial deposits of Rapaura and Renwick, which contain high proportions of greywacke river stones, to the older and denser clay-loams of the Southern Valleys. A high percentage of the vineyards were trained using the divided Scott Henry canopy management system, with the balance on two- or three-cane VSP (vertical shoot positioning).

Some vineyards were harvested by machine during cool (often cold) nighttime conditions and others by hand during the day. The grapes were lightly pressed to yield a modest volume of high-quality juice, which was then cold-settled prior to racking into French oak barriques, a small percentage of which were new. The juice was allowed to undergo spontaneous indigenous yeast fermentation, the tail end of which continued for well over six months. The wine had occasional lees stirring and approximately two-thirds underwent malolactic fermentation. It was transferred out of oak prior to the following harvest and left on yeast lees for a further six months. The wine was bottled in September 2022 with alcohol 14.0%, pH 3.19 and acidity 6.1 g/l

Tasting Note:

Picture a shortcrust pie, loaded with quince and yellow apple, a layer of juicy gooseberries and topped with caramelised lemon slices. Served with a good dollop of vanilla custard and sprinkled with lightly toasted fennel seeds. Complex and textural, Greywacke Wild Sauvignon is a feast for the senses. Fermented with wild yeast, it’s a hands-off style of Marlborough sauvignon blanc, with a succulent palate that finishes crisp and long.

Sustainable, vegetarian, vegan.

The Facts:

Wine

Marlborough Wild Sauvignon Blanc

Vintage

2021

Style

White Wine

Grape Variety

Sauvignon Blanc

Alcohol Content

14.0%

Closure

Screw cap

Bottle Size

750ml

What the critics say:

93 Points - Christina Pickard, Wine Enthusiast

‘Typically reductive and a little funky in style, the 2021 Wild strikes a fine balance with the fruit. Sure, the sulfuric struck match and salted nut characters are prominent, but they’re tempered by more varietal notes of passion fruit and lime. There’s lovely texture to the palate, with zippy acidity and a salted citrus finish.’ 

93 Points - MaryAnn Worobiec, WineSpectator.com

‘Distinctive, aromatic and complex, with honeysuckle, candied ginger and a drizzle of wildflower honey. Reveals ripe melon, dried fennel and yellow apple notes that mingle with marmalade, tangerine and a touch of mango on the juicy finish.’ 


.’

 



Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 70650218213

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.6 ★★★★★
Based on 21 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
P
Verified Purchase
paige alexander
Fort Morgan, US
★★★★★ 5
Tasty
Yummy.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 7, 2026
S
Verified Purchase
slimwriter
Omaha, US
★★★★★ 2
Not sour
Not really sour at all so it’s a pretty disappointing candy.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 6, 2026
M
Verified Purchase
Moon Riley
Houston, US
★★★★★ 5
Sugar free
Tastes great
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on April 21, 2026
M
Verified Purchase
Mr. Paul A. Ackermann
Houston, US
★★★★★ 5
Dude, it's not just a horror novel
Format: Paperback
This is to the previous reviewer (C. Scanlan). If this is just a horror novel, it failed miserably. It is not exactly a blood ’n gore thriller. Compared to Stephen King, it is pretty tame. What puts the horror in this book is that it is social commentary. Mary Shelly is not just trying to scare us. It is more than just a “Friday the 13th” movie. Mary Shelly is delivering a message. It seems that everyone understands this except this reviewer. There have been several different interpretations of the novel (see [...] for 10 different meanings of the novel). ICE takes the interpretation that Shelly is saying science can go too far. This is a perfectly valid interpretation. One can disagree with this interpretation but let’s not resort to name calling and personal attacks – that those who hold such an interpretation are doing a “low level attempt to cash in on home schooling Christian paranoia and fear of health care” or believe that “AIDS [is] the fruit of sin”. My wife and I are Catholic parents and we sent our children to public schools He mocks the idea of a secular fundamentalist but then demonstrates what that is. A religious fundamentalist sees anyone who disagrees with him as being of the devil. A secular fundamentalist sees anyone who disagrees with him as guilty of “brainwashing” others. In both cases, true dialogue is impossible. Another thing that a fundamentalist does is that he sees things in opposite extremes. If you are warning of the dangers of trusting too much in science then you must be against science. There is no middle ground for the fundamentalist. If you see that science can sometimes go too far then that means you are against health care. But this is a non-sequitur. Nielson writes “Frankenstein’s placing of the creation of life within the scientific method first destroys the unrepeatability and systematically eliminates the other elements [of hope, love, beauty, creativity and sacrifice]”. Nielson is not criticizing the scientific method in total. He is only criticizing it in the creation of life. The reviewer writes “He thereby easily and explicitly condemns the whole process and philosophy of the scientific method”. But Nielson is not condemning the whole process of the scientific method. He is only condemning it in the creation of life. The reviewer then mocks the credentials of the critics in the book - “So who are these essayists superior to Norton's and Oxfords and free of deconstructionist feminist secular fundamentalism, experts so august Ignatius should want them mentioned on their product page yet are nowhere to be seen?” But this game can be played both ways. What are the credentials of this reviewer? Is this reviewer so august as to challenge these essayists? Again, this is merely an ad-hominem attack. I really do not care who has the best credentials. What matters is who makes sense. Sometimes intellectuals can make the dumbest claims. Read Paul Johnson’s book, “Intellectuals” (http://www.amazon.com/Intellectuals-Marx-Tolstoy-Sartre-Chomsky/dp/0061253170/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1421862888&sr=8-1&keywords=intellectuals). He compares the essayists unfavorably to “good solid Roman Catholic moral theology” from the likes of Richard A. McCormick S.J., who “is the renowned leader of Roman Catholic Moral Theology in the field of bioethics in the USA.” He overlooks the fact that A. McCormick S.J. has dissented from teachings of the Popes Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI over contraception. The “renowned leader” in the Catholic Church in morality is first and foremost the pope. Since Richard A. McCormick has contradicted the popes, he cannot be a good solid Catholic theologian. Mary Shelly lived right after the Enlightenment – man is the measure of all things. She lived at a time when people believed that science will solve all our problems. This is called scientism. ICE contends that Shelly is saying that we may be expecting too much from science. It does not mean that Shelly was saying that we should reject science. And it does not mean that Shelly believes that we should go back to the Catholic faith. In fact, ICE acknowledges that Shelly was an anti-Catholic. But the Church believes that the kernel of truth can be found in others, even in anti-Catholics. This is part of the Catholic tradition. St Augustine learned from Plato and St Aquinas learned from Aristotle. ICE would take that kernel of truth and expound that with the fullness of the Catholic faith. You may disagree with the Catholic faith, or with ICE looking at Shelly’s book from a Catholic perspective. But this is at least as a legitimate an interpretation as any other. In fact, this interpretation seems closer to the truth than the others. This interpretation is the traditional interpretation, which means that it goes back further to Shelly’s time than the modern interpretations, and is therefore less likely to be in error. BTW, the reviewer wrote that “Opus Dei right wing publishing (or reprint) house is selling this novel is to milk the home school market and to support its own bizarre bio-ethical ideology”. This is factually wrong. The company that publishes Opus Dei’s books is Sceptre. But the publisher of ICE is Ignatius Press.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 22, 2015
R
Verified Purchase
RC Mom
Waukegan, US
★★★★★ 5
Good experience
Format: Paperback
It was all good.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 24, 2025

recommand products