TN: Penfold's Grange Vertical

WINE TALK
1

A tasting of 15 vintages of Penfolds Grange. Tasted on
2-26-00. Special thanks to Howard and Rhoda Sherry for organizing this
tasting and hosting it in their lovely home. Not everyone is brave
enough to open 15 bottles of Grange from their personal collection let
alone have 24+ people in their home for hours drinking and chatting.
The vintages were 1977 throught 1994 with 1978, 1980 and 1984
missing. The wines were poured from oldest to youngest and were
decanted two to four hours in advance of pouring. The wines were
poured in flights of 3 from oldest to youngest. They were therefore
not served blind.

  1. 1977 Penfold’s Grange
    light dusty, chocolate, dusty, chocolate reminiscent of Banyuls nose
    full body, light earth, meaty, cherry, HUGE finish, chocolaty,
    vanilla, medium tannins
    Score: A

  2. 1979 Penfold’s Grange
    dusty cherry, light tobacco, hint of chocolate and earth,
    cranberry?, strawberry, some light corkiness nose
    full body, light olives, strong acid, tea, musty, cardboard,
    tart cherry
    Score: B- (but corked)

  3. 1981 Penfold’s Grange
    chocolate, light vanilla, WOW! nose
    huge body, chocolate, chocolate, vanilla, medium-tannin, dark
    cherry, chocolate, light meaty, huge finish
    Score: A+

  4. 1982 Penfold’s Grange
    chocolate, very reserved, light vanilla, light cherry nose
    medium body, acid, cherry, elegant wine, better with food I
    suspect
    Score: B

  5. 1983 Penfold’s Grange
    CORKED

    \

  6. 1985 Penfold’s Grange
    light dusty, cherry, chocolate nose
    full-medium body, dusty chocolate, cherry, good tannin, long
    finish, balanced acidity, chocolate, light vanilla
    Score: A

  7. 1986 Penfold’s Grange
    cocoa, vanilla nose
    BIG/FULL body, vanilla, oak, char, chocolate, long finish,
    meat, medium tannins
    Score: A

  8. 1987 Penfold’s Grange
    vanilla, oak, dry chocolate, now light green pepper nose
    cocoa, hollow in the middle, light oak, tannic finish
    Score: C-

  9. 1988 Penfold’s Grange
    big cocoa, light toast, vanilla nose
    full body, cocoa, vanilla, tannins on finish, meat, good
    finish, long life ahead of it
    Score: A

  10. 1989 Penfold’s Grange
    cocoa, vanilla, raspberry, toast, very light eucalyptus nose
    BIG body, cocoa, tannin on finish, raspberry, sweet fruit,
    ripe
    Score: A+

  11. 1990 Penfold’s Grange (red UPC)
    cocoa, big, candied, raspberry nose
    HUGE, candied, cocoa, sweet fruit, WOW!!!
    Score: A++

  12. 1991 Penfold’s Grange
    dense, raspberry nose
    big cocoa/vanilla, balanced, smooth, good tannic backbone
    Score: A

  13. 1992 Penfold’s Grange
    light spice, oak, vanilla, light chocolate nose
    spice, vanilla, oak, chocolate, medium-light body
    Score: B+

  14. 1993 Penfold’s Grange
    fruity, blueberries, raspberry nose
    medium body, oak, blueberry, raspberry, tannic, out of
    balance? (retasted at end, not out of balance now, more air
    perhaps helped)
    Score: B

  15. 1994 Penfold’s Grange
    chocolate, char nose
    char, oak, full body, chocololate, rum, toasty oak, tannic,
    full, bit harsh, good potential, big tannic finish
    Score: A-/A

Commentary:

WOW!!! Indeed THE best red wine tasting I have EVER attended. Thanks
again to Howard/Rhoda for inviting me.

In general all these wines were YOUNG! None of them were showing any
hints of old age. Grange definitely deserves its reputation as the
“1st growth” of the southern hemisphere.

In general I found a cocoa/chocolaty theme throughout all the wines. A
lot had hints of raspberry but only as I got to the younger vintages
did I start to realize this. A LOT is going on in these wines. I was
suprised to not find more spicy characteristics. I often find lovely
spices in Oz shiraz and these wines didn’t have it. Was it hidden
under everything else or just perhaps not part of the Grange style?
Beats me and doesn’t matter, all wonderful wines.

The 1979 and 1983 were corked. The 1979 just lightly and the 1983 was
undrinkable. A shame but alas part of this hobby. I’m hoping to find
another opportunity to try these gems. The 1977 perhaps had the
biggest finish of the group with the 1990 in the running

The 1981, 1989, 1990 were by far my favorite wines. HUGE, lush, long
finishes. Amazing. The 1990 is my first A++ ever granted. I’ll
certainly open another on some special occasion sometime soon. I note
the 1990 has the red UPC symbol and no misprints on the label. There
were some counterfeit bottles of 1990 Grange floating around (see
http://nucalf.physics.fsu.edu/pfohl/Wine/grange.counterfeit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) and I
just had to verify this wasn’t one of the fake bottles. It was indeed
1990 Grange and is a “WOW” wine!


The 1982 is a more supple/elegant wine. Not the big in your face style
but perhaps a better food wine than by itself. There is nothing wrong
with it, the B rating should not imply that, but instead stood out
because it wasn’t big. I’d certainly match it with a roasted meat for
a very nice dinner and I’ll bet it shows wonderfully. It was just
overpowered by the wines around it this evening.

The 1987 has me worried. I hope this was an off bottle although it
showed absolutely NO signs of heat damage or corkiness. But the hollow
middle was a big let-down. And the slight veggie nose bothers me. I’m
quite sensitive to veggie components in wines I must admit, and I
consider it a bad thing (or at the very least I realize it is not my
favorite characteristic in wine). But the veggie aside the palate was
seriously lacking. This is NOT an elegant wine like the 1982 but
rather a wine missing some vital component. The only wine in the
tasting I won’t seek out again.

The 1993 is putting on some weight. I had this wine about 1 year ago
with some friends in Seattle. It was lighter then, more forward
fruits, bright, perfumed. It is now getting darker and more
tannic. The fruit is perhaps shutting down allowing the structured
backbone to show more now. I loved it early and feel it may need some
time to rest before opening another bottle. At least 5 more years.

The 1994 on the other hand is a bit more approachable than it was on
release. On release it hadn’t integrated at all and scoured your
tongue with tannins. While still showing a bit harshly it is now
possible to evaluate it a bit although a lot is going on and it is
hard to pin it all down. Great potential but certainly not something
you need to consider opening for 7-10 years.

2

I’ve recently opened the 1990 with Bernard Roth when he visited from Santa Barbara. It is nice, but needs lots more time. We popped and poured as I wanted to give Bernie the run of my cellar, this is what he came out with which was great. We just didn’t have decant time.

The 1981 continues to impress. It is one of my “showoff” wines. When I want to REALLY wow (a date helps!), this is my “go to” older bottle along with some 1968 and 1970 Gran Reserva Riojas. It has only let me down 3 times, 2 were corked, and one was at Totoraku in LA where the subtleties were lost in all the smoke in the room and the bigger, bolder wines on the table.

The 1991 was super in July 2001, young but showing all sorts of exciting things. Have not had one again.

The 1993 I had a year ago seemed to be heat damaged. So i’ll need to open another soon.

P.S. I’m posting some of these older TNs because I no longer maintain my own web non-work homepage and thought a few good TNs here would make up for my back/forth with Rick Gregory over in Asylum.

3

Jeff, I’ve had 2 bottles of the 86 Grange and they were fantastic, but I’ll tell you right now that the 98 (in 10 years) will blow the 86 out of the water. I’m still buying the 98, it will probably outlast me.

BTW, I wish I was at your tasting, sounds wonderful.

4

Any thoughts on the '92 improving? I have a lone bottle that I have had since release when I first got heavily into wine. Would like to have it sooner rather then later if it isn’t getting better.

5

Bill, I have 5, so when you get here in March I will open one… [drinkers.gif]

6

The 1992 will improve and you should be in no rush to drink it. Still a baby. Of course that depends on if you like your wines on the younger or older side.

7

Thanks for the notes

8

Hi Bill
Hillarious you are here as well. We sure had fun in the Prem Rawat thread on Mark Squires didn’t we [haha.gif]

9

I remember buying 81 and 82 on release. 81 cost $46.95 and I was upset, but bought anyway, the 82 at the usurious price of $59.95. Still have a couple bottles kicking around; they’ll never die. FWIW, 82 has been a stellar wine, better than your bottle. Thanks for the report.

alan

10

Jeff,
Date check, please? This was 2000 or 2010?

11

Not Jeff, but it was 2000 notes that he posted back in 2009.

12

I’m sure you know this but the folks at Penfolds add liquid tannin to the juice during fermentation to lengthen the ageability of the wine.

13

Hope you have a source for this.

14

'm sure you know this but the folks at Penfolds add liquid tannin to the juice during fermentation to lengthen the ageability of the wine.

What is liquid tannin?

15

My source is Daryl Groom, former red winemaker at Penfolds.He made a number of vintages of Grange. He’s repeated this statement publicly many times. He tells me it is a powder derived from plants that they get from France (as best he remembers) they mix it with water and then add it to the must. This helps explain why the young Granges are so tannic.

16

We had that with The Freak back in May as well with the '96 and '85.