Penfolds Bin 389 1998

[markg]

Great wine, although a little dissapointing.. a bit young perhaps ?

[LawrenceM]

I have a bottle of this that I was going to open soon. What was wrong with it?

[markg]

Nothing wrong with it.. I was just expecting more.. it was a fine wine, great structure, blueberry liquorice (to borrow a term from Ian) & fine red berry flavours..

I would drink it again, take it to dinner, happily cellar it ... but.. it was a bit boring thats all

[AndrewCowley]

I had a bottle of this recently and thought the same. A very good wine no doubt. But I think after having read all the reviews over the years my expectations were too high. If you have multiple bottles then you need not rush your way through them. It will easily go another 3-5 years. Mine was still quite primary which perhaps was my main dissappointment. It was my only bottle.

I suppose also there is some bottle variation to be expected as well. So you just never know your luck.

[odyssey]

Yep totally with you on that one Mark. I don't see it as bottle variation. Have opened one every 3 years and all much the same.

[graham]

Got six on release, still in the cellar. Wasn't going to drink for a number of years, still young me thinks.

[markg]

.. But I think after having read all the reviews over the years my expectations were too high. .

Yes, thats right Andrew.. Expecting too much. I have had this in the past and thought it just needed time. But, more time perhaps and it will blossom..

[Mike Hawkins]

I'm convinced - maybe incorrectly - that some of the shiraz grapes that went in to 389 up to 1996 go into RWT......

[Wayno]

I had a bottle of mine about two years ago and it was blocky, a bit closed and heavy hitting. I vowed not to touch the rest for a few more years. Must say i had the 96 several years ago and it was sublime. 98 was nowhere near the same. Much 'bigger'.

[AndrewCowley]

Interesting, 96 vs 98 Penfolds. I've recently had St Henri from these two years and found the same as is being mentioned here about the Bin 389. The 96 was just 'right' at the moment whereas the 98 was harder to appreciate.

[Waiters Friend]

Has anyone tried the 1999? Apart from the fact that I have 99 in the cellar (not 98), I recall some discussion over the last 10 years over which year would hold up better in the longer term.

[George Krashos]

That's just the 98 vintage. In my experience it tastes the same now as it did a year after release. Good drinking but little potential for developing nuances. I've found most 98s to be like this.

-- George Krashos

[Gavin Trott]

.. But I think after having read all the reviews over the years my expectations were too high. .

Yes, thats right Andrew.. Expecting too much. I have had this in the past and thought it just needed time. But, more time perhaps and it will blossom..

I was drinking this with Mark, and must agree. We both looked at each other and thought ... what's the fuss??

Blocky, still quite 'liquorishy' (if that's a word), no real development yet, and well, a tad clumsy and boring frankly.

Will it come around, well, it will age, will develop, will soften ... will it be great, not for my money (or in this cae Mark's money).

Also seemed, well, old fashioned kind of, very Penfolds, but not in the good Penfolds way.

.

[rooman]

Interesting reactions. I have had two bottles of the '98 out of my cellar so far. I think there are 2 6 packs knocking around. The first bottle I opened about 2 years ago to take to a lunch with a friend of mine. I tried it on opening and was too embarrassed to take along, choosing instead a '98 St Peter. Anyhow I recorked the bottle and tried some the next night, still finding it thin and slightly awkward. On the third day I decided to finish off the bottle and it had evolved into a wine of must greater complexity and depth. Savory rather than fruit dominated. I tried a second bottle a couple of weeks ago.This time I brought it up from the cellar the day before and opened it in the morning.When I drank it that evening I was more than happy with the result. I liked the way the tannins have softened and integrated into the fruit. I am definitely over fruit dominated wines at present and found this wine quite elegant (which really surprised me) with red rather than dark berry fruit.

The only observations I would make on the comments above is that time and time again nowadays I find there is a massive difference in wines that I bring up into the lounge from the wine fridge the day before I drink them compared with wines that are brought to the table a mere hour or so before drinking. I also regularly pull the cork on these older wines in the bottle and just let the bottle sit.

[daz]

I had a couple of bottles of this, the first at 9-10 years after vintage, the second 12-13 years. Not a memorable wine.

[GraemeG]

Seven notes over ten years have given me this:

1998 Penfolds Bin 389 - Australia, South Australia (7/4/2011)
NobleRottersSydney - Revisiting the '98 cellar (Alio's, Surry Hills): [cork, 14%] Still with elements of ruby about the colour, ol’ faithful is in fine form tonight. The classic 389 nose of meat, earth, raspberries, blackberries, coconut, chocolate & vanilla is all on show. It’s no longer young, but there’s still great tightness to the powdery tannins, great vibrancy to the fruit, and presence along the palate. Medium-full body, with a long finish, and everything is so nicely balanced here. There’s a real sense that its peak is quite some way off yet; there’s little true secondary development to the flavours; but everything promises to turn out well. Doesn’t need to be touched for another 5 years at least. Has also been brilliantly consistent over the last few years. Triumphant.

1998 Penfolds Bin 389 - Australia, South Australia (5/11/2010)
At A$85 on a restaurant wine list, this was a no-brainer. Developing nose; meat, chocolate, and that characteristic Penfolds part-tar, part-oak, mostly red-fruit rich aroma. The palate isn't quite youthful, but is hardly aged; there are fine dusty tannins which arrive at the end of the finish; the tongue is evenly coated with flavour. Medium-full bodied - looking good at the moment but with many years left to show true secondary characters. Three bottles drunk; refreshingly consistent tasting experiences.

1998 Penfolds Bin 389 - Australia, South Australia (3/3/2008)
NobleRottersSydney - Penfolds &/or 1988 (Alio's, Surry Hills): {cork, 14%} Following all these wines [Grange, St Henri] is a tough ask for a humble Bin 389, but this offering from an acclaimed vintage makes a good fist of things. A clear ruby colour, it smells youthful and stuffed with liquorice, milk chocolate and ripe fruit aromas. The palate is showing a bit more development – only a touch – but offers big richly upholstered fruit, massive dusty tannins, terrific intensity of fruit flavour, with solid balance of structural components running the length of the palate. Highly impressive, although a long way from integrated, this ought to provide great drinking in another 15 years. All that said, it lacked the refinement of the next wine [96 Grange]…

1998 Penfolds Bin 389 - Australia, South Australia (2/6/2006)
NobleRottersSydney - Old Penfolds night (Guillaume at Bennelong): {cork, 14%} A deep red/blue colour. Nose is predominantly coconutty oak here, with spicy black fruits underneath. The acidity is the first noticeable thing about the palate; it’s quite aggressive, and hogs centre stage until the tannins lumber in from the wings. The weight of the wine is towards the mid-palate; at present the whole thing feels a bit disjointed and in need of time to mesh together properly. It wasn’t quite as big a wine as I was expecting. Generally excellent, presuming that the passage of time will see the overt oakiness tamed eventually...

1998 Penfolds Bin 389 - Australia, South Australia (10/3/2005)
NobleRottersSydney - Revisiting the '98 cellar (Lucio's, Paddington): {cork, 14%} A rich, meaty, tarry nose. Squarely in the mainstream of Penfolds house style. Powerful palate, slow development. Still very young. Rich balanced fruit predominate on the mid-palate. Good length of finish. Leave in the cellar!

1998 Penfolds Bin 389 - Australia, South Australia (6/3/2002)
NobleRottersSydney - Launching the '98 cellar (2) (Darling Mills, Glebe): No cork problems here. Stunning nose that just screams Penfolds. Tar, bitumen and meat aromas battle with strong tannins & acid on the palate. This wine has stuffing! Way too young to drink – tannins do predominate on the finish, but the palate feels is very good. I do have a bias toward Cab-Shiraz blends I must admit. Great wine.

1998 Penfolds Bin 389 - Australia, South Australia (3/5/2001)
NobleRottersSydney - Penfolds prior to 95 + 1998 Bin releases (Darling Mills, Glebe): A vast wine, and clearly the pick of the new releases. Lots of red and black berry flavours – primary fruit flavours certainly hit you, and there’s a large dollop of tannins as well. I wasn’t particularly aware of acid standing out, but I don’t feel it could be labelled unbalanced. At the table, many commented how drinkable it is now. To me its very un-integrated, and needs years to meld together. Drinking it now is wasting 80% of it’s potential. I suspect I’m becoming a member of a minority group! Even at the new, extortionate price, it’s one to buy.

...which seems to square somewhat with the opinions here as far as development goes. Although I'm inclined to give it lots more time, notwithstanding the fact I don't think it'll ever match the heights of 96.
Anyway, the Rotters have a vertical lined up in August, I believe; vintages 88-98 are planned for, so I expect to have abother data point soon.
And I still have an untouched half-dozen in my cellar as it is!
cheers,
GG

[Brucer]

My bottles went to auction last week.! Too many disappointments caused by cork problems, and I am over it. 96 went as well.

[RogerPike]

Shape up or ship out.

I like your style Bruce.

Roger

[rooman]

well this wine definitely split the troops. I'm sticking with Graeme G.

[Mark Jappe]

I had this wine last night, served blind. I tought that it was a cracking wine, if maybe a little young. It had surprisingly good acid for 1998, causing me to mis-guess it as a 1996. The only negative I had was that as the wine breathed the oak became more obvious, causing the wine to be a little unbalanced.