homeabout kottke.orgarchives + tagsmembership!
aboutarchives + tagsmembership!
aboutarchivesmembers!

The buzz about Two Buck Chuck, the

posted by Jason Kottke   Jan 15, 2004

The buzz about Two Buck Chuck, the little wine that could.

Reader comments

HarryJan 15, 2004 at 1:07PM

Fabulous wine for the price, especially if you’re fortunate enough to grab it by the case.

The nickname has got to go, though. Two, buck, and chuck are three words that should never be spoken together in the English language. If one must put a cutesy moniker on it, how about something just as silly, but slightly more nose-upturned, like “Eight Quarter Charles.”

Try saying it with the affect of a nasal, British monarch.

RaphyJan 15, 2004 at 1:37PM

This wine is nasty - I won’t drink it for free.

KarlJan 15, 2004 at 8:33PM

I agree. This wine is horrible! If you want to chug wine, OK, but if you want to enjoy wine, spend a couple of extra bucks and get something worth drinking. There are some great wines from Chile, Australia and even from right here in the US from only $5 and up. Above all, buy what you like, so good out and try a different bottle now and then!

KFJan 16, 2004 at 12:02PM

The wine isn’t great, and it’s really uneven, bottle to bottle. The guy who’s producing this stuff is the guy behind Franzia — the box wine. There’s something of a backlash against the stuff here in California now because of the sense that he’s flooded the market with an underpriced, low-quality product in an attempt to drive some of his competitors out of business. It’s the Microsoft of wine.

AndrewJan 16, 2004 at 1:03PM

“Two Buck Chuck” is a bit of a misnomer — at the TJs I’ve been to, it’s been more like Three Buck Chuck.

As far as the wine goes, yes, it’s pretty lousy, but I’ve had bottles of lousy wine that cost a lot more than $3, so it’s still a deal. Hell, Wild Irish Rose is hard to find at that price.

padraiginJan 16, 2004 at 2:02PM

My understanding is that outside of California (and maybe Arizona?) it’s Three Buck Chuck.

It’s not great, but it’s a good “we’ve already blown through the decent wine and everyone’s still thirsty” wine, and a terrific cooking wine. We buy it by the case and then I pour generous quantities of the stuff into everything I cook for a month.

But for a couple dollars more, you can drink excellent Australian wines. And hell, Trader Joe’s often has other $2-3 wines from other producers, that are far superior to $2C.

Jonas!Jan 16, 2004 at 11:31PM

the new york times dining section actually did an article on this a year ago, i don’t know if anyone can find it. i recall them saying it’s mediocre, and good for stuff like corporate parties.

padraiginJan 17, 2004 at 2:15PM

Oh, and it’s virtually ended the practice of serving wine in boxes or jugs at art openings, at least here in SF.

MDFeb 07, 2004 at 6:14PM

Where I live, the wine stores don’t sell wine for cheaper than $5 a bottle. What makes Two Buck Chuck such a draw is that not only is it affordable, it’s not sold in huge quantities (living alone, I couldn’t possibly go through a jug or box of wine before it turned into vinegar), and it’s not so sweet like those jug and box wines which aren’t only cheap but unpalatable. Two Buck Chuck may not be as good as $10 wines out there, but I can’t afford to drop $10 on a bottle of table wine. For an everyday table wine Two Buck Chuck is where it’s at.

This thread is closed to new comments. Thanks to everyone who responded.

We Work Remotely