Doug,
I have to admit I’m no expert. I’ve had the red Estate bottling in half a dozen vintages, the oldest probably in the 12 - 15 year range, the last time probably close to 10 years ago. I find quality and style comparable to a top Bordeaux Cru Bourgeois or decent Medoc Classified. I would love to try at least one vintage with more bottle age, will try to pick one up. What do you recommend?
Dan Kravitz
The best I’ve had were 1981 and 1980. For something less expensive but still in a great place now, I’d recommend 1995 or 1999. @Kirk.Grant and @Otto_Forsberg have a lot more experience than me, so maybe they’d like to chime in. Otto has posted a lot of notes, and Kirk has notes on CT from the most extensive vertical tasting I have ever heard of (not sure if he posted them here or not).
Or 1991. Musar was amazing in 1991.
I don’t know if it’s very different over there, but I find the pricing very reasonable. Can’t think of any other wine that I’d count among the greatest reds of the world that can be had for 35-40€.
It really depends on which vintages are available. I see no point in listing all the great vintages if none are available. 
Haven’t had a red 1991, but I can believe it is great. 1989 and 1987 are some of the best vintages I know. And the trio from 1997 to 1999 is also nothing short of excellent.
Which Cru Bourgeois or Medocs are anywhere near as complex and interesting as a good Musar?
Lanessan, my staple for half a century. Sociando-Mallet, Haut-Marbuzet, Pontoise-Cabarrus. I drink much less Bordeaux than I used to but these are all wonderful wines that improve for at least two decades.
Dan Kravitz
This is not at all what I meant by stating that about quality. I of course agree that the “off the beaten path” list is where we find many of the greatest QPRs, but a wine is not simply on or off. There are varying degrees, plus a grape might be off the beaten path, or a region might be, or even a producer. For most of the world Vietti’s Timorasso is off the beaten path, simply because Timorasso is to them, but then we have Timorasso from Vignetti Massa, or Oltretorrente, or La Colombera… My intention was a bit more nuanced. It is certainly a critique, but not an attack.
I agree completely. The “classic” lists have impacted the way the world sees wine, and doubled down on narrowing its scope. Grapes have been uprooted or gone extinct even, in order to make more space for Cabernet and Merlot and I can only imagine how great some of those wines might be, if they had the number of producers competing to make the best wines with it that they have in say Bordeaux or even Montalcino. I think this is arguably the worst thing to happen in the world of wine, and I am not happy to see those lists still around. Quality does not appear to be their main focus either.
The “geeky” lists on the other hand are a breath of fresh air for that reason. They are much less common overall I believe, but they are still quite common at restaurants in Brooklyn NY today, plus there are many more stores who’s inventory looks like this now as well. I am glad they exist as a counterpoint to the other lists you reference, but I personally think we should critique both.
Chianti being ignored on a list at an Italian restaurant doesn’t seem like a coincidence. There are dozens of high QPR Chianti both on and off of the beaten path and scattered among subzones and styles.
I’ve been thinking more about this list of wines you find comparable to your Musar experiences. I’m sure I like Bordeaux less than some people, but I do enjoy the wines and sometimes am impressed by them. That said, the best Musars I’ve had were, in my opinion, better than any Bordeaux I’ve had, including some big names in big vintages and many wines similar in stature to the ones you’ve mentioned, with some maturity.