The Auswine Forum

Posted: **Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:30 pm**

Just as a side point, I've seen a number of aged bottles in Dan's stores with the Langtons "L" sticker on them which makes me believe they've been through the auction process in some capacity. Certainly raises questions around provenance, although sounds like Dan's are at least prepared to return/exchanbe in this case. Would be interested to know whether this bottle was one such example?

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:11 am**

Pat wrote:I enjoy your different take on some things, but to say an 83 Grange isn’t ready is surely taking the piss? From now to infinity how much more development are you expecting?

Hi Pat,

I've owned this vintage of the iconic Australian wine since 1993 and have occasionally monitored its progress with critics and reviewers. It seems that over time the drinking window of the 1983 Grange moves further and further away. The last Jeremy Oliver drinking window I read, from his 2016 guide, had the drinking window at 2023 - 2033, hence Tigger's tongue-in-cheek remark about the drinking window always being five years down the road.

Regarding how much development I wish to have from this bottle. My primary consideration, and this is in no small measure due to owning only one bottle, is to drink it at it's prime. The cognoscenti of Grange say that it needs extensive cellaring to show its true greatness and I intend to take their advice to heart.

Mahmoud.

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:21 am**

Haven't had the 83 for ages, but the 86 has years of development ahead of it. I had a bottle last year, and it wasn't the only bottle on the table that could have done with more time; the 86 Mouton, although stylistically different, also has many years of development left in front of it.
I don't think it's an unreasonable statement to claim more time, even after 35 years.
(And honestly, the mouton needs the time even more than the Grange.)
Graeme

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 6:50 pm**

As for provenance, I bought it a few months ago from Dan's, so who knows.... When I tried to return it, they told me in store that they can't for old vintages and that they do buy them from auctions.

As for the sweetness I picked up, whether it's more Sherry or Port-like I'm not sure, but how does one tell if it's oxidised, been overheated or just old? Is the cork a good thing to go by for the overheated option and if so, how does that translate to a screwtop?

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:48 pm**

Nick Wine Guy wrote:As for the sweetness I picked up, whether it's more Sherry or Port-like I'm not sure, but how does one tell if it's oxidised, been overheated or just old?

A wine can be oxidised to varying degrees. It will result in loss of colour, aroma and flavour. If severe enough, the wine will taste of vinegar. All wines will eventually turn to vinegar. Tasting notes from others (wine critics, forums, CellarTracker, etc.) are a good way to identify how a wine is tracking and how long it should last (some even include suggested drinking windows). Obviously, every bottle is different (cork, storage), so it's only a guide. I find CellarTracker most useful here, particularly for popular wines where you get lots of frequent tasting notes.

Nick Wine Guy wrote:Is the cork a good thing to go by for the overheated option and if so, how does that translate to a screwtop?

The cork might tell you about poor storage in an extreme case, but in other cases it may tell you nothing about an abused bottle. Screwcaps will tell you nothing at all.

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:13 pm**

Nick Wine Guy wrote:As for provenance, I bought it a few months ago from Dan's, so who knows.... When I tried to return it, they told me in store that they can't for old vintages and that they do buy them from auctions.

As for the sweetness I picked up, whether it's more Sherry or Port-like I'm not sure, but how does one tell if it's oxidised, been overheated or just old? Is the cork a good thing to go by for the overheated option and if so, how does that translate to a screwtop?

That doesn't sound right, as you are paying a premium over std retail for the item, so you should be assured that the bottle is of merchantable quality. (they cannot absolve themselves of Consumer Law as a result of this as you purchased the goods in a retail setting NOT at an auction)

From their website

'Our goods come with guarantees that cannot be excluded under the Australian Consumer Law.
You are entitled to a replacement or refund for a major failure and for compensation for any other reasonably foreseeable loss or damage. You are also entitled to have the goods repaired or replaced if the goods fail to be of acceptable quality and the failure does not amount to a major failure.'

If in the event your purchase is faulty, damaged, wrongly described or breaches a consumer guarantee we will cheerfully refund your money or exchange the product upon presentation of your proof of purchase

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:18 pm**

Agree with Dave, it's sold from a retail store, there's no information displayed that buying an 'old wine' excludes you from the consumer guarantee. Whether it was actually fairly normal or not I can't say, but if it's faulty, they have to refund or replace.

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:15 pm**

It does say in that paragraph further down that product does need to be in a saleable condition. That said, the manager did refuse to accept the return as she said they buy them at auction... But did say if it was a current vintage wine that was faulty, it would be different.

Either way, I've written them an email saying I was misled by customer service and that I still want a refund.

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:52 pm**

Nice one on the email. Where they source their wine from has no effect on your rights as a retail purchaser!!

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:00 pm**

Interesting interesting
I know exceptionally well a Dan’s fine wine manager
He always tells me
Buy any of the old stuff out of the fridge
WE WILL HAPPILY REFUND YOUR MONEY IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED

sorry to shout

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:07 pm**

Nick Wine Guy wrote:As for the sweetness I picked up, whether it's more Sherry or Port-like I'm not sure, but how does one tell if it's oxidised, been overheated or just old? Is the cork a good thing to go by for the overheated option and if so, how does that translate to a screwtop?

There is a big difference between sherry and port. While a red wine may appear porty, often because of over-ripe grapes and residual sugar, it should never be sherry-like. If you get baked, maderized, sherry-like qualities you can be fairly certain that the wine has suffered heat damage. I can also see poor storage affecting the wine to the point where a porty quality could appear more prominent. The 1990 Eileen Hardy Shiraz was lovely when it was a few years old but at close to 15 years I found it ocerbearing, sweetish and flabby, and I could see a person describing it as porty.

So far as I can make out, from your limited description and uncertainty about how an old wine should taste and smell (you have not mentioned the nose as far as I recall), there may be nothing particularly wrong with the wine. Please don't get me wrong, I am not doubting you, just that it is difficult to make an assessment without clear and precise descriptions on your part. Also, I do understand that you are a beginner and cannot be expected to know, so please forgive me if I have crossed any red lines.

By the way, something was said about vinegar and I should mention that in normal circumstances no wine should turn to vinegar. For a wine to turn to vinegar it will require bacteria and plenty of oxygen. This means total cork failure, with either wine seeping out of an old bottle lying on its side or an upright bottle with a dry and shrunken cork that falls into the bottle.

Mahmoud.

Posted: **Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:37 pm**

Nick Wine Guy wrote:It does say in that paragraph further down that product does need to be in a saleable condition. That said, the manager did refuse to accept the return as she said they buy them at auction... But did say if it was a current vintage wine that was faulty, it would be different.

Either way, I've written them an email saying I was misled by customer service and that I still want a refund.

The manager's comment raises another valid ACL issue in that if they are sourcing these bottles on the secondary market and then passing them off (implied or otherwise) as having been 'cellared' by Dan's themselves then there's a degree of misleading conduct as to the question of provenance.

Posted: **Tue Mar 19, 2019 12:38 pm**

Mahmoud Ali wrote:By the way, something was said about vinegar and I should mention that in normal circumstances no wine should turn to vinegar. For a wine to turn to vinegar it will require bacteria and plenty of oxygen. This means total cork failure, with either wine seeping out of an old bottle lying on its side or an upright bottle with a dry and shrunken cork that falls into the bottle.

That was my statement about wines eventually turning into vinegar. I was referring to the extreme case of oxidation, which as you've correctly pointed out would require a total cork failure. Given enough time, all corks will eventually fail catastrophically.

Posted: **Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:04 pm**

Not to be rude, but it sounds like the bottle is sound and you just may not like or be used to old wine yet?

Posted: **Tue Mar 19, 2019 4:05 pm**

Thinking laterally given what we know of Nick, his descriptor of Porty probably relates to std tawny type ports and not Oporto VP styles. So to me if it is like that it means either oxidised or heat damaged (he also mentioned bricking). Aging 389 doesn't go through a 'porty' stage, it softens, the fruit profiles soften and retract and are not so in your face. At 20 years it is still a youthful wine for 389.

We had a flight of the 389 about 5 years ago and all agreed they were way too young (96,98, 02, 04)
http://forum.auswine.com.au/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13077

Then a 91 not too long ago
"This was followed by a 1991 Penfolds Bin 389 wonderfully aged Shiraz Cabernet, showing Penfolds can make a wine that ages gracefully apart from Grange, for the ‘rest of us’. Dark fruits, with some herbaceous notes from the cabernet coming through. Really soft and supple on the palate"

Posted: **Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:05 pm**

dave vino wrote:Thinking laterally given what we know of Nick, his descriptor of Porty probably relates to std tawny type ports and not Oporto VP styles. So to me if it is like that it means either oxidised or heat damaged (he also mentioned bricking). Aging 389 doesn't go through a 'porty' stage, it softens, the fruit profiles soften and retract and are not so in your face. At 20 years it is still a youthful wine for 389.

Excellent lateral thinking Dave, you may be on the right track. The only old Bin 389 that I've had was an '89 sometime in the mid-2000s and porty would not have been a descriptor. I'm still waiting on my 1996 Bin 389 as I don't believe they are ready.

Posted: **Wed Mar 20, 2019 9:22 pm**

I agree that perhaps I am not used to old wine and perhaps my descriptors at this point aren't accurate enough.

I guess I'll just need to drink more old wine!

I'll let you guys know how it goes with DMs.

Posted: **Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:40 am**

Well, here you go. I've exhumed all my notes on 1998 Bin 389, although there may be a few missing from the early 2000s!
I see back in January I described it as a bit porty. And it is getting unreliable now in my experience...
Graeme

[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=6929814]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (5/02/2018)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=37988]NobleRottersSydney - Penfolds at 10 20 30 years (360 Bar & Dining, Sydney)[/url]: {cork, 14%} [Kim]
Brickish colour, brown tinges. Big vanilla and chocolate nose, aged, but with a rotting, earthy aspect. Dry, with medium/high gritty tannins and medium acid showing a hint of volatility. Not fresh on the palate; it’s about roasted, aging fruit; ripe but too astringently tannic. Baked. Weak back palate. On the downslope on this occasion; but experience with this label is now very inconsistent, and that from bottles decently stored. Not showing its best, but that’s typical!
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=6797946]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (8/01/2018)
{cork, 14%} Well into the realm of bottle variation, from recent experiences, but this was singing. Tertiary aromas of typical Penfolds meat and tar, along with vanilla oak, and ripely sweet black-tinged fruits. Tastes just like it smells. Looks every bit of 20 years old, but quite glows in the glass. Is picking up a bit of a porty character, but the powdery tannins remain quite strong, even in the context of this medium/full-bodied wine. Finishes medium-long, dry, a touch astringent, and just a bit warm. Very good, but needs drinking soon.
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=5698192]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (21/05/2016)
{cork, 14%} Opening to confirm-or-otherwise the somewhat disappointing bottle a couple of months ago. And, this wasn't a lot better. Still dark in overall colour, but with distinct brick/orange round the rim. The nose is aged, with lots of typical aged Penfolds tar and oak and sweet red fruit, but also with a malty, raisined character which is a bit more polarising. The palate pretty much follows the nose; the tannins are now very soft and blurry; it's medium/full-bodied, but with a hollowness at its core despite the ripe fruit, and the finish is a bit disjointed and on the short side of medium. On this tasting, my opinion shifts firmly to a drink-up recommendation, whatever the reputation of the label (or Rewards of Patience) might say.
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=5572381]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (7/03/2016)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=30961]NobleRottersSydney - Penfolds Bin 389 1998-07 (360 Bar & Dining, Sydney)[/url]: {cork, 14%} (Stephen) Padthaway (30%), Bordertown (25%), McLaren Vale (20%), Barossa Valley (19%) and a small component from Clare. Fading garnet with a touch of brick. Lots of aged vanilla aromas, sweet tar, liquorice. It’s warm and developed, but seemingly oak-driven. The palate is a touch hollow and short, however. Gradually the palate becomes sweaty and acetic, sharp and a touch volatile. Tannins have faded to a dusty softness. This is not convincing. It’s been totally reliable up to now, this wine, but maybe not much longer. Cellaring was fine, so who knows?
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=4714273]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (7/12/2014)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=26791]NobleRottersSydney - Christmas Lunch 2014 (Greg's place)[/url]: {cork, 14%} Black and tarry. Astringent and baked. Overly oxidised; shouldn’t be like this. First faulty example of this I’ve had. Sad. NR (flawed)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=4088000]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (7/01/2014)
Still dark in colour. Developing nose; meat, tar, stewed blackberries. Seems more shiraz than cabernet; dense and not terribly fresh. Was double-decanted 2 hours prior; think the air helped; it’s dry, with moderate dusty tannins. Medium/full-bodied. Seems a bit in-between just now; it’s not especially attractive but I’ve hopes for the future based on previous bottles. Cork was immaculate.
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=2167265]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (4/07/2011)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=14681]NobleRottersSydney - Revisiting the '98 cellar (Alio's, Surry Hills)[/url]: [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.
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=1504377]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (11/05/2010)
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.
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=1122222]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (3/03/2008)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=8147]NobleRottersSydney - Penfolds &/or 1988 (Alio's, Surry Hills)[/url]: {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]…
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=1133835]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (6/02/2006)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=8238]NobleRottersSydney - Old Penfolds night (Guillaume at Bennelong)[/url]: {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...
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=1121191]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (3/10/2005)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=8137]NobleRottersSydney - Revisiting the '98 cellar (Lucio's, Paddington)[/url]: {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!
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=1193376]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (3/06/2002)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=8729]NobleRottersSydney - Launching the '98 cellar (2) (Darling Mills, Glebe)[/url]: 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.
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/note.asp?iWine ... te=1194522]1998 Penfolds Bin 389[/url] - Australia, South Australia (5/03/2001)
[url=https://www.cellartracker.com/event.asp?iEvent=8738]NobleRottersSydney - Penfolds prior to 95 + 1998 Bin releases (Darling Mills, Glebe)[/url]: 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.

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:31 am**

You have inspired me to rip one out of the cellar. I think I'll open it tonight or tomorrow. I shall report back!

Posted: **Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:41 am**

Thanks for that, Graeme - sounds like I may have just opened it on the decline. Cellar Tracker indicates the drinking window was until 2018, but some recent reviews there still indicate it could have years in front of it. From your reviews, it sounds like it was going downhill by 2016. I figured the 389, especially from 1998 would last at least 20 years, not be over by then.

Posted: **Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:12 pm**

DJ1980, how did you go?

As a comparison, I opened a 97 Grange today (realising I need to buy a new corkscrew for old wine when this one crumbled) and after it's had a few hours of air (and 2-3 decants to filter out the sediment and broken cork) I am picking up slight porty-ness in the back palate but it's certainly pleasant vs the 389 which was basically all port. There is no bricky-ness in the colour.

As suggested before I think I just had a bottle on the decline vs faulty. Not sure if I can say whether this Grange is at its peak or needs more time but I definitely like it. Really puts overly spicy $20 Barossa Shiraz to shame haha.

Posted: **Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:07 pm**

Nick, best tool for old crumbly corks is an Ah-So, or the luxury version, Durand. Not uncommon to get dry crumbly corks on Penfolds wines (and 90's AU wines in general). Pleased you enjoyed the Grange, prob needs more time, but always a lottery with cork.

Posted: **Sun Mar 24, 2019 7:54 pm**

TiggerK wrote:Nick, best tool for old crumbly corks is an Ah-So, or the luxury version, Durand. Not uncommon to get dry crumbly corks on Penfolds wines (and 90's AU wines in general). Pleased you enjoyed the Grange, prob needs more time, but always a lottery with cork.

Durand +1

Posted: **Thu Mar 28, 2019 7:37 pm**

dave vino wrote:Yes sediment is fine.

But I will say this...mini soapbox...

Where are you based? I reckon attending a few offlines will do you a world of good. It is the absolute best way to learn about wines, understand wines and get experience with older wines. (and different styles). A 98 389 would have been a perfect bottle to take along, most would have experience with it and how it should taste. And I guarantee everyone would be more than happy to answer all your questions on the wines you try on the night, so don't let fear of not knowing stop you - wine tragics love sharing their knowledge and helping others learn and from my experience are pretty generous in doing so. By the end of the night instead of trying one 389, you would have experienced about 20 different bottles of wine.

People that attend are from all walks of life, IT, builders, truckies, sales, brokers, barristers, retired, doctors you name it - and you know what - all that gets left at the door and you all sit down as wine lovers. Where the barrister is listening intently and asking questions to the builder as he is an expert in that style of wine etc, etc The media might portray the whole wine wanker thing, but for me I've never met a bunch of more down to earth, generous, humble people than wine lovers. It is like they are just happy to have met others 'just like them' and are rejoicing in it as none of their friends/families 'get it' quite like they do.

off soapbox...

I totally understand if it is not your thing, but thought I'd put it out there anyway.

This is spot on and one of the things I love most about wine. The amazing people you get to meet from all walks of life. People you would never have dreamt you might associate with, you do through a shared interest in wine.

Posted: **Thu Mar 28, 2019 7:45 pm**

Graeme, how did your 389 go?

Given my 97 Grange had a slight Porty-ness in the back palate (albeit enjoyable), is this an old wine charasteric / something I'm misinterpreting in terms of flavour?

As for Dan's, after a few emails back and forth I got the refund back today.

Posted: **Thu May 02, 2019 9:48 pm**

I am so sorry its taken me so long to get back to you on this wine. Life getting in the way and trying to drink less. Anyway, sitting with a glass via coravin right now.

Definitely heading into aged wine territory. Bright red rim. Hazelnut oaky charectors leading the charge on open (pour). Spiced plum, overripe dark cherry and some rum/raisin on the nose.

Palate is still huge. Plum, blackberry and spice. Dusty, drying tannin but lacks acidity. Feels flabby. Looking very tannic. Raisin and dark chocolate notes on the finish.

Typical, massive 98 Barossa vintage. Not for me as much anymore. 91 if I was reviewing on this glass.

Posted: **Fri May 03, 2019 4:24 pm**

Typical of the 98 vintage. What you saw in 2001 on release is what you get now with a small nod to the effects of age. Never going to develop much in the way of complexity. 96 rains ordure down on it from a great height IMHO.

Posted: **Fri May 03, 2019 5:17 pm**

George Krashos wrote:Typical of the 98 vintage. What you saw in 2001 on release is what you get now with a small nod to the effects of age. Never going to develop much in the way of complexity. 96 rains ordure down on it from a great height IMHO.

Absolutely. 1996 is looking simply phenomenal at the moment. Not just for the 389 but a lot of Barossa Valley wine.

Posted: **Fri May 03, 2019 6:52 pm**

DJ1980 wrote:
George Krashos wrote:Typical of the 98 vintage. What you saw in 2001 on release is what you get now with a small nod to the effects of age. Never going to develop much in the way of complexity. 96 rains ordure down on it from a great height IMHO.
Absolutely. 1996 is looking simply phenomenal at the moment. Not just for the 389 but a lot of Barossa Valley wine.

I’m actually getting more and more disappointed with 96 from BV... St Hallett Old Block, Rockford Moorooroo, Orlando Centenary, Mt Ed (granted, technically not BV) and Turkey Flat shiraz have underwhelmed in recent months...

I used to have 91 and 96 as the pick from the decade, but I’m leaning more towards 1990 these days.

Posted: **Fri May 03, 2019 7:04 pm**

91 is fantastic. Better than 90 for me.

The Auswine Forum

1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?

Re: 1998 bin 389 - bad bottle?