Critics Average score from professional wine critics and publications.
89
/100
Reviews
5
professional
Vintages
No vintages
NV
Community Reviews
77
Reviews
88.6
Avg Score
92
Highest
Taster #3386
· Dec 25, 2023
Drinks very well and being tawny, quite durable after opening.
1992 vintage
Taster #9371
· May 9, 2019
92/100
Typisk på alle måter, mer kompleks enn ventet.
1992 vintage
Taster #1737
· Feb 4, 2019
92/100
No idea about the bottling date. Pale to medium-deep amber color. Not big nor particularly sweet, but very nuanced and layered nose with aromas of golden raisins, rich rancio, some caramel, a little bit of smoke, light notes of dried peaches, a hint of burnt sugar and a touch of nuttiness. The wine is sweet, intense and quite oily on the palate with complex and quite concentrated flavors of dried apricots, pineapples, some golden raisins, a little bit of burnt …
1992 vintage
Taster #1994
· Jul 27, 2015
87/100
A wee bit sour, but not half bad.
1992 vintage
Taster #4858
· May 30, 2009
84/100
I don't have much to say about this port, which is a testament to how exciting it was. Resembles a common 10 year tawny port with nothing that sets it apart and makes it worth the extra $10 or $15 they charge for it. If you like 10yr tawny, you'll probably enjoy this but why spend the extra bucks?
1992 vintage
Taster #1713
· Jun 17, 2007
Good but I'd like to try it heads up against Dow's 10 yr tawny. Somewhat simplistic. At about the same price I'd put my money on the 10yr tawny.
1992 vintage
Taster #9573
· Feb 14, 2007
88/100
Monthly Tasting Group HWS #021; Port wines. (By AW) : Not so many notes. Almonds and currants were there. A bit alcoholic in the finish. Nevertheless a nice port wine.
1992 vintage