Page 1 of 1
1992 Fonseca Vintage Port
Posted: 17:07 Sun 26 Aug 2007
by jdaw1
Fonseca 1992 tasted on 1st September 2007 in St. Helens. Tasted that evening were Fonseca
1920,
1963,
1966,
1970,
1975,
1977,
1980,
1983,
1985, 1992, and
2000. Also see
the review describing the evening as a whole.
From the cellar of
Uncle Tom, for which he took the paltry amount of £36.
Posted: 00:13 Mon 27 Aug 2007
by DRT
Posted: 12:17 Sat 01 Sep 2007
by DRT
Decanted at 07:00 - starting to lose colour and quite a lot of sediment for a wine of this age. Cork fell apart and was reconstructed prior to this photograph being taken.
Posted: 23:24 Sun 02 Sep 2007
by RonnieRoots
No TN on this one?
I didn’t like it, but had nothing particular to say.
Posted: 07:49 Mon 03 Sep 2007
by jdaw1
I didn’t like it, but had nothing particular to say.
Posted: 09:42 Mon 03 Sep 2007
by uncle tom
I have my doubts about the '92 vintage.
I'll start a new thread for this.
Tom
That thread on the 1992 vintage
Posted: 15:49 Mon 03 Sep 2007
by jdaw1
That thread on the 1992 vintage.
Edit: Alan has just scanned and email me my tasting note sheet, which said “Bright red† (eye §); “Not liked† (nose §); and “tannins not showing† (mouth §).
Posted: 01:59 Wed 05 Sep 2007
by DRT
My TN reads:
Light in the mouth. Quite an astringent taste - should have been in an earlier flight.
Derek
Posted: 10:47 Sat 08 Sep 2007
by John Danza
I hate to be a contrarian, but I think the 1992 Fonseca is doing just fine at its age. I decanted a bottle last night and drank it tonight. The bottle was part of an original case that I bought as a future and have owned since delivery. It was served tonight when I had some friends over for a cheddar tasting.
The wine was very deep, opaque ruby. The flavors were all spot-on with a wine of this youth, dominated by dark plums. The nose was pretty much closed, even after 24 hours. Overall, I don't see a problem with this wine at this point.
All the best,
John
Posted: 14:18 Sat 08 Sep 2007
by KillerB
John - we couldn't actually spot a flaw in the bottle, it was just disappointing. It's possible that it was completely outshone by the company that it was keeping.
Posted: 16:12 Sat 08 Sep 2007
by John Danza
Hi Alex,
I'm sure you're right, because that was a pretty stellar lineup that you had.
I also should have noted that the alcohol was still a bit hot after 24 hours in the decanter. Unfortunately, I can't tell if it would have burned off with nore time, because it's all gone.
All the best,
John