The Durand corkscrew

[LGTrotter]

First two posts of this thread moved by jdaw1 from It's good when a plan comes together....


The Durand looks rather pricey, is it worth it? I seem to be breaking every cork at the moment. What's different about the worm, if anything, from a screwpull?

[djewesbury]

The Durand looks rather pricey, is it worth it? I seem to be breaking every cork at the moment.

My thoughts exactly. I stopped using my Screwpull, it seems to break everything. I now use a Waiter's Friend with a lot more reliability. I have a couple of Ah-Sos but don't seem to get round to using them; I only seem to drink really old things with you lot. But I drink things that are 40ish years old here and that's old enough for the cork to break.
I see the Durand available for about £83...

[jdaw1]

Previous two posts moved by jdaw1 from It's good when a plan comes together....

[jdaw1]

Official website: TheDurand.com.

[AW77]

What is so terrible about a broken cork? Use a coffee filter and everything is fine again.
No need to spend 83 Pounds on such a gadget. That money is better spend on wine.

[jdaw1]

The Durand’s ‘Press Room’ quotes Roy Hersh thrice, and links to this thread.

[PhilW]

First two posts of this thread moved by jdaw1 from It's good when a plan comes together....


The Durand looks rather pricey, is it worth it? I seem to be breaking every cork at the moment. What's different about the worm, if anything, from a screwpull?

The worm is essentially the same as on a screwpull, though you are not using the Archimedes' screw effect to raise the cork. Comparing the Durand against my specific screwpull, the worm goes about 1cm deeper into the bottle.

Is it worth it? I guess that will be an individual choice. Would I normally prefer to extract a cork whole, undamaged and unmarked? Yes. If you know in advance that the cork may break, the middle may pull out or whatever, then if you don't mind the scoring down the side of the cork from the Ah-so part then you might choose to use the Durand to extract quickly and whole (also avoiding the need to filter if you prefer to free pour until sediment is seen).

I've found it to work well when I've wanted to use it, this weekend was a good example (several minutes attempting to get each cork out unmarked and whole with screwpull, vs 20s each out whole with the Durand - though with scoring down the side of the cork).

[Glenn E.]

The spiral on the worm is looser and longer than a typical corkscrew. It is also coated with a non-stick substance so it's very easy to insert.

The Ah-So part of the Durand isn't any better (or worse) than any other Ah-So that I have used, but when paired with the worm it works extremely well.

Even so, I don't always use it. It's a bit more of an operation to use, and a lot of corks will extract just fine with a waiter's friend. I typically make the call on which to use after I've removed the capsule and can get an idea of what the cork is going to be like.

Mine was a birthday gift.

[DRT]

Mine was a birthday gift.

I was already thinking of that and you have convinced me. I'll send Mrs T the link

[djewesbury]

What is so terrible about a broken cork? Use a coffee filter and everything is fine again.
No need to spend 83 Pounds on such a gadget. That money is better spend on wine.

Mine was a birthday gift.

I was already thinking of that and you have convinced me. I'll send Mrs T the link

This seems to be how they get bought. Phil can confirm. André, get that birthday list written.

[LGTrotter]

I turn my back for a minute and this happens, a new thread. Unaccustomed as I am...

Well I can't get the quote thing together thanks to a splash more Glenmorangie than is good for me but somebody said (Glenn I think) that the worm on the Durand is non stick. So is the screwpull. And I would appreciate some specifics about the width of the worm. I think I am with Andre that the money is better spent on two decent bottles of port. I have (as has been discussed previously) been addicted to the idea of getting a decanting cradle, however like the Durand when the time comes for me to put my hand in my pocket I just can't. My heart sinks when I am confronted by the naked awfulness of 'gifts for wine lovers' and I fear the Durand may be one of these things.

And what on earth is with all this coffee filter stuff (surely a steady hand will suffice without the need for the dead hand of paper on your port) and why is Julian using plastic funnels on port? Has the world gone mad?

[LGTrotter]

The Durand’s ‘Press Room’ quotes Roy Hersh thrice, and links to this thread.

Thrice? Surely this is more than emphasis, this is conspiracy.

Thrice. I bet this is a word Julian has used before. At least thrice.

[Andy Velebil]

For ease of getting older corks out in one piece the Durand rocks. I love mine and use it regularly on my older bottles. Worth every penny, especially for those of us who open old Ports regularly. I highly recommend it and that is coming from someone who was very skeptical at first, until I got one and started using it.

[DRT]

a splash more Glenmorangie than is good for me

"Like"

[PhilW]

And I would appreciate some specifics about the width of the worm.

Picture below. The two seem identical apart from the length, as mentioned earlier; pic below.

20150121_073408.jpg (43.83 KiB) Viewed 13737 times

20150121_073318.jpg (38.62 KiB) Viewed 13737 times

As seen in the first image, the worms are the same width (just under 10mm diameter thread); the worm on my Durand appears darker in colour but whether this is simply that the screwpull has seen a lot more use I cannot say. However, if you look at the second picture - the corkscrews are positioned so that the line on the wood is where the corkscrews would sit on top of the bottle neck - this shows that the Durand will penetrate much further (about 14mm further) into/through the cork.

Incidentally, the screwpull would work a lot better for port if (a) the worm was 10-15mm longer, allowing it to start pulling the cork only once the worm had fully penetrated the longer corks, and (b) the lugs at the base of the plastic where the unit rests on the bottle neck where slightly less prominent (by 2mm or so), as they often drag against the side of the cork being extracted which encourages tearing. I'm sure there are other potential improvements (one could argue about the worm diameter in particular), but I think the two changes mentioned would make a significant improvement for use of the screwpull with port, while making minimal/no difference for use with standard wine corks.

And what on earth is with all this coffee filter stuff (surely a steady hand will suffice without the need for the dead hand of paper on your port)

Given your feelings on filter paper, I would then suggest using the Durand as the quickest (maybe) and most reliable method to extra the cork whole provided that you do not mind the scoring down the side of the cork; this seems to give the best chance of avoiding cork in the wine and hence need to filter, if you prefer free pouring.

[PhilW]

Mine was a birthday gift.

I was already thinking of that and you have convinced me. I'll send Mrs T the link

This seems to be how they get bought. Phil can confirm.

Confirmed, mine was also a present; though I would add that it was an item that Mrs W. knew I wanted, not just an "ooh look, a present for a wine/port geek".

As per Glenn, I don't use it all the time; roughly:
- If bottle is young, I use screwpull (simple and in the draw)
- If bottle is young and cork looks like it might tear, I may switch to Durand, though this doesn't always work if the damage has been done.
- If bottle is old, but known and/or have seen cork before, I use Durand
- If bottle is old and unknown, tong or push in and break bottle to recover cork
I can now also add to that list:
- If bottle is an imperial, I use just the worm part of the Durand

[LGTrotter]

I think that has answered everything I needed to know about the Durand. Thank you Phil, most helpful.

I wonder if I just took the plastic gubbins off the bottom of the screwpull whether that would reach as far as the Durand worm, but would leave a straight pull rather than the levering action. The other possibility would be to saw half an inch off the top of the plastic gubbins. Or I could give in and add a Durand to my Christmas/birthday list, which might be simpler. Especially as I have been assured that it rocks.

To filter cork crumbs I use a decanting funnel, which seems to work fine. I do have a piece of muslin in the box with it but have never had to use it.

I was a bit surprised by the report that because of the shape of the inside of the neck that you hardly moved the cork on the imperial before it was free. I suppose that the capsule does most of the work.

[PhilW]

I was a bit surprised by the report that because of the shape of the inside of the neck that you hardly moved the cork on the imperial before it was free. I suppose that the capsule does most of the work.

I think it was probably more to do with the shape of the cork rather than the neck; I think the neck was fairly straight, while the cork was heavily tapered, so only gripping with a faction of its length.

[flash_uk]

I was a bit surprised by the report that because of the shape of the inside of the neck that you hardly moved the cork on the imperial before it was free. I suppose that the capsule does most of the work.

I think it was probably more to do with the shape of the cork rather than the neck; I think the neck was fairly straight, while the cork was heavily tapered, so only gripping with a faction of its length.

Julian brought the bottle along to the Fonseca tasting on Monday, and the neck does have a slight taper to it, but it sounds like the neck taper and cork taper were nevertheless slightly mismatched, resulting in only a partial grip on the cork.

[djewesbury]

Where was that comment from the Symingtons about not bottling larger than double-magnums because they don't trust the corks to hold? Seems to be relevant in this case. Phil / Julian, was it your impression that that cork would have held if the bottle had been cellared for much longer?

[Glenn E.]

For ease of getting older corks out in one piece the Durand rocks. I love mine and use it regularly on my older bottles. Worth every penny, especially for those of us who open old Ports regularly. I highly recommend it and that is coming from someone who was very skeptical at first, until I got one and started using it.

I, too, was quite skeptical at first. In fact if my mother-in-law had not needed to find something memorable to get me for my 50th birthday, I probably still would not have one. (Buying me birthday gifts presents a terrible problem. I am a relatively simple person with sufficient means, so I already have just about everything I really want.)

But like Andy, now that I have one and have started using it, I really like it. It does an amazing job extracting old corks, though with the side effect that any Ah-So has which is damage to the sides of the cork where the prongs are inserted. If you need to read the cork to figure out what's in the bottle, then tonging is probably a better option. But if you know what's in the bottle and just want to get an old/feeble cork out, the Durand works amazingly well.

And I would appreciate some specifics about the width of the worm.

Picture below. The two seem identical apart from the length, as mentioned earlier; pic below.

As seen in the first image, the worms are the same width (just under 10mm diameter thread);

Hmm... to my eye it looks like the diameter of the Durand's helix is slightly wider than that of the Screwpull. But I suppose that could be an optical illusion.

[jdaw1]

Where was that comment from the Symingtons about not bottling larger than double-magnums because they don't trust the corks to hold? Seems to be relevant in this case.

The Symingtons still bottle imperials, but not larger:

However a comment of Dominic Symington should give some pause: “If a very large bottle is lying horizontally, there is excessive constant pressure on the cork, and for a long time. Additionally the greater the diameter of the neck the larger the cork has to be, compromising its ability to compress and create a decent seal. There is also the problem of capillary action. Which is why SFE has recently decided no longer to bottle larger than an imperial.” I wondered whether bottles could be stored at 45°, but Dominic observed that it might still be “too much of a risk, particularly in transit when the wine is sloshing around inside the bottle”.

[AW77]

And what on earth is with all this coffee filter stuff (surely a steady hand will suffice without the need for the dead hand of paper on your port)

My standard procedure when decaning any wine is simply pouring it through this tea filter:
http://www.cilia.eu/en/Tea-Filter-M-64.html
I use the tea filter holder too as this is even more convenient:
http://www.cilia.eu/en/Tea-Filter-Holder-72.html (you put the holder and the filter on top of the decanter or jug and then simply pour).
With this method there is no need to stand bottles up and every drop of the wine can be savoured. And as mentioned before, broken corks are no problem at all. As the filter is not bleached, you don't taste the paper in the wine (or in your tea).

[jdaw1]

http://www.cilia.eu/en/Tea-Filter-M-64.html
…
http://www.cilia.eu/en/Tea-Filter-Holder-72.html

Currently available in: Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Russia, Sweden, Belgium

Can we order by post?

[djewesbury]

Ooh thank you for specifying the correct size Andre. I saw the website but was unsure.

[djewesbury]

Additionally I have to inform you that I can't find anyone who supplies these in the UK.

[AW77]

http://www.cilia.eu/en/Tea-Filter-M-64.html
…
http://www.cilia.eu/en/Tea-Filter-Holder-72.html

Currently available in: Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Russia, Sweden, Belgium

Can we order by post?

PM me your adress and I will send you a sample (filter and holder). You could distribute them to the team when you next meet for a tasting and everyone can test them for themselves.

[PhilW]

Hmm... to my eye it looks like the diameter of the Durand's helix is slightly wider than that of the Screwpull. But I suppose that could be an optical illusion.

Looking at the photos, the Durand looks wider in one to me, the screwpull wider in the other; In real life if I hold one above the other I can detect no difference. I do not have any vernier calipers handy to verify this more formally.

[djewesbury]

Hmm... to my eye it looks like the diameter of the Durand's helix is slightly wider than that of the Screwpull. But I suppose that could be an optical illusion.

Looking at the photos, the Durand looks wider in one to me, the screwpull wider in the other; In real life if I hold one above the other I can detect no difference. I do not have any vernier calipers handy to verify this more formally.

If you have a set of metric augers calibrated in millimetres you could drill a series of holes in a piece of plywood and see what fits where. Fun way to spend an evening?

[LGTrotter]

With this method there is no need to stand bottles up and every drop of the wine can be savoured. And as mentioned before, broken corks are no problem at all. As the filter is not bleached, you don't taste the paper in the wine (or in your tea).

I would be surprised if the wood pulp was not treated and washed in something. If it has any shine on it it is likely to have a filler in it, usually a clay.
Have you never heard of a libation? That little splash in the bottom that you throw away is just that. You may be drawing some terrible calamity upon yourself. All the tiles will fall off your bathroom I reckon.

[djewesbury]

I've used these (courtesy of André's generosity). The paper is not shiny. I don't think it's treated the way you mention - isn't it kaolin they use for that? I seem to remember something about that from art college. It seems very neutral anyway..
Drinking the sediment from a Port Society Quevedo Finest Unfiltered Reserve now.

[AW77]

With this method there is no need to stand bottles up and every drop of the wine can be savoured. And as mentioned before, broken corks are no problem at all. As the filter is not bleached, you don't taste the paper in the wine (or in your tea).

I would be surprised if the wood pulp was not treated and washed in something. If it has any shine on it it is likely to have a filler in it, usually a clay.
Have you never heard of a libation? That little splash in the bottom that you throw away is just that. You may be drawing some terrible calamity upon yourself. All the tiles will fall off your bathroom I reckon.

There is no shine on it, it's matt. If you're interested I could send you a sample. But no, you see the leftover splash as a libation. I wouldn't want to get you in danger. As I don't share your libation thing, I'll stick to my filter. But the remark about the tiles made me laugh.

[DRT]

I was a bit surprised by the report that because of the shape of the inside of the neck that you hardly moved the cork on the imperial before it was free. I suppose that the capsule does most of the work.

I think it was probably more to do with the shape of the cork rather than the neck; I think the neck was fairly straight, while the cork was heavily tapered, so only gripping with a faction of its length.

Julian brought the bottle along to the Fonseca tasting on Monday, and the neck does have a slight taper to it, but it sounds like the neck taper and cork taper were nevertheless slightly mismatched, resulting in only a partial grip on the cork.

The taper was not slight, it was quite pronounced. When I dropped the very tapered cork into the neck it was caught with only a couple of millimeters to spare - so much so that Julian warned me not to drop the cork into the bottle. The problem with the seal on this bottle had noting to do with the cork. It had everything to do with the fact that the top three inches of the neck had a waste like Betty Boo.

[djewesbury]

Waste?

[LGTrotter]

I've got an old 'T' corkscrew with a wide but quite fine worm, it does a better job of keeping the cork together than the screwpull but I find it hard to pull a cork out with a straight pull without shaking the bottle. Perhaps I do need a Durand.

[DRT]

Waste?

Waist. Oops.

[djewesbury]

Nothing to see here. Move along please.

[griff]

Just to comment on Phil's comprehensive method, should one wish to remove a cork that one has inserted into a bottle past the neck, after emptying, once can remove the cork without breaking said bottle by inserting cling wrap. Wash bottle first. After inserting the cling wrap, tilt the bottle down and allow the cork to fall into the neck against the cling wrap. Pull the cling wrap out carefully such that the cork travels through the neck with the cling wrap.

[JB vintage]

Those of you who has used the Durand corkscrew, is it worth the money?

[Andy Velebil]

Those of you who has used the Durand corkscrew, is it worth the money?

Worth every penny. I use mine a lot. Basically anything around 15-20 years or more gets the Durant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[g-man]

Another fan here and in the same boat as Andy.

I drink a fair bit of older clarets, the durand gets used often.

[differentdave]

Pretty much the durand is my go to opener. I used to use an ah-so most of the of the time so when the durand came out I thought it was a no brainer for me. Have had it for so many years and it has held up wonderfully thus far. Not a wine gadget guy (no aerators, nothing to help my wines open up/breathe but the durand and the coravin are two gadgets I would prefer never to be without again.