Palmer - 2005 vs 2016

WINE TALK
1

I have never had Chateau Palmer but have heard it is the most Burgundian of the left bank Bordeaux.

That makes me want to store it.

I am debating between 2005 and 2016 vintage. Seems in one case I need to wait out at ideally at least 5 more years and in other case ideally at least 15 more years.

I would love to hear any perspective/ feedback on these two vintages for Palmer.

Thanks a ton.

2

I haven’t had either of those, but it looks like 1989 is around the price of 2005, and it’s a super Palmer ready to drink. Have you considered going older?

3

Craig, I normally backfill in the UK. 1989 is 50% more expensive than 2005. 2005 I can get for $280 a bottle and 1989 is $420-$450 (not a lot of supply).

4

I see. 2005 looks expensive in the US.

1 Like
5

Palmer is generally regarded as an over performer in ‘off’ vintages and in those can be a ‘value’ play. Try the 98 or 99- both lovely versions with classic structure IMHO.

6

You could try the 1999, which is not a “famous” year but an excellent Palmer. While it will continue to evolve positively, you can have one now to enjoy and figure out whether you like Palmer. I have had neither the '05 nor the '16, and presumably you’ve checked critics notes in case one of those is a dud for the vintage etc, but all other things being equal I would take the older ('05).

7

That might have been the case at one time but I don’t think it holds up any longer. Palmer got pretty blockbustery in the 2000s. I might look to Brane-Cantenac for something more burgundian.

8

Thanks guys. At least from places I buy 1999 wasn’t all that much cheaper than 2005. So just bought 2005.