The Auswine Forum

Drank one of these on Saturday night.

What a cracker. Do they come better than this? 11 years old and still bursting with everything great about a wine.

I've had 1984 and 1975 Grange in the past few years. Both from "OK" vintages, but very good bottles. This Bin 389 was right up there.

Best part is that I have 5 left!

agree lovely wine

I used to cellar a lot of this and I agree that at its best it is a lovely wine. The price deters me somewhat these days, although I'm not quibbling about its value for money. I recently drank a '93 & a '96, both of which were over the hill. I have some '98 in the cellar at the moment so I might make a note to open one a bit sooner than I was planning.

underwraps50 wrote:I used to cellar a lot of this and I agree that at its best it is a lovely wine. The price deters me somewhat these days, although I'm not quibbling about its value for money. I recently drank a '93 & a '96, both of which were over the hill. I have some '98 in the cellar at the moment so I might make a note to open one a bit sooner than I was planning.

Over the hill?!? Was it cork failure? How were they cellared?

agree with Linc. Over the hill my ass

its got years left in it - probably 10+

Gregoire wrote:Drank one of these on Saturday night.

What a cracker. Do they come better than this? 11 years old and still bursting with everything great about a wine.

I've had 1984 and 1975 Grange in the past few years. Both from "OK" vintages, but very good bottles. This Bin 389 was right up there.

Best part is that I have 5 left!

Hi Gregoire - Snap, I had one of these on Friday night.
Agree totally - an amazing, amazing wine.
Deep colour, no hint of its age, drop dead gorgeous aromas (I love the aged aroma of American oak) and concentration plus in the palate with opulent fruit and liquorice/anise spices over a savoury, creamy oak backbone with a hint of mellowing showing on the finish. A bit of sediment to add texture as well. In a word, "brilliant".
Best 389 of the last 20 years, perhaps?

underwraps50 wrote:I used to cellar a lot of this and I agree that at its best it is a lovely wine. The price deters me somewhat these days, although I'm not quibbling about its value for money. I recently drank a '93 & a '96, both of which were over the hill. I have some '98 in the cellar at the moment so I might make a note to open one a bit sooner than I was planning.

A 1996 over the hill. Shame. My 1996 had a pristine cork and the wine had only coloured it about 2mm up the edges.

Keen to know how the '98 is when you open it. I did not buy due to corky issues, which were discussed in great deal on this forum at the time. Wasn't prepared to take the risk.

Hi Sue

I tried a 1998 recently and it is developing beautifully. It was a lovely wine but needs a bit more time methinks.

I drank a 1996 389 the night before and I felt that the 1998 wasn't quite as good as the (sublime) 1996 but if you give it a year or two it might just get there. They are both fantastic wines and why Bin 389 in a good year is still on my buy list.

Cheers

Martin

Martin Phillipson wrote:Hi Sue

I tried a 1998 recently and it is developing beautifully. It was a lovely wine but needs a bit more time methinks.

I drank a 1996 389 the night before and I felt that the 1998 wasn't quite as good as the (sublime) 1996 but if you give it a year or two it might just get there. They are both fantastic wines and why Bin 389 in a good year is still on my buy list.

Cheers

Martin

Thanks for your comments. I think most of us (apart from underwraps50) agree that 1996 is pretty gorgeous. Will you buy the 2004?

Cheers,
Sue

Bin 389 1996 "over the hill"? I'm thinking Rockhampton and cellared under the stairs. It was either faulty or poorly cellared, but no way was it over the hill. Only qualifier is that some drinkers would regard anything 10+ years old as "odd", perhaps "over the hill", because they are soooooo accustomed to young, over-ripe, over-oaked, alcoholic wines - but I'm assuming that's not the case here ...

Hi Sue

I probably will buy the 2004 given the rave reviews it's getting. I'm in Canada and have no idea when it will be released here, or more importantly, what the price will be. The 2003 is sitting above $30 and no chance of discounting in my State run monopoly store.

As long as the price is not too prohibitive I'll be buying.

Martin

Unless the 1996 Bin 398 was poorly cellared there is no way it can be over the hill. Even off-vintages will go for over a decade, like a 1989 that I opened in 2003. In fact a bottle of the 1989 Koonunga Hill opened in 2002 was in fine shape.

I won't even think about opening a 1996 Bin 389 untill I try one of my 1996 Koonunga Hill. According to the Penfolds Rewards of Patience (and Jeremy Oliver) both of these wines can last till about 2016.

Martin Phillipson, the Bin 389 sell for about A$40 in Sydney. If you can get it for anywhere near C$30 then it would be a good price.

Cheers............Mahmoud.

Some explanation clearly necessary. The '96 was corked - only one I've had in many years. The '93 was 'over the hill' but it wasn't my wine so I can't say how it was cellared - not well I would guess.
My comments were not meant as a negative in relation to the wine which I regard as a truly great Australian red - more a plea for sympathy.
Yes, Rockhampton's climate certainly makes 'cellaring' wine a challenge (without refrigeration or a real in-ground cellar) however I have had only a couple of losses in 25yrs and routinely cellar my better wines for 10yrs plus - and Yes, they are in a room under the internal stairs. ( The "loss" was 3 bottles of '71 Grange about 6yrs ago.)

This was, in retrospect, my wine of the year in 2006. Such beautiful flavours and characters, reminiscent of wandering through cellars in the Barossa, the tinge of oak barrels so pervading. Perhaps this is a touch florid but it was a wine that said "this is how they USED to do it" as opposed to the current vintages and their general variability. A technically solid wine with lots of flair and class to boot. Still youthful. About ten left so I'm counting down...

Statement - the 1996 is the last great Bin 389.

So much has happened in the wine world since then that I don't think Penfolds is capable of making another as good. They've lost so many contract growers vineyards to new labels and are having to use more fruit from other regions. What about volumes? are they making the same amount now as they did a decade ago? Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Nope, bigger volumes, more call for top end fruit for Grange, RWT etc, less high quality Barossa Shiraz available equals a lesser 389.

1998 was a good wine, so was 2002 and I haven't tried it yet but 2004 is getting some kudos but none of these are in the league of the 1996, even with time.

1996 longevity? another decade at least IMO.

707 wrote:Statement - the 1996 is the last great Bin 389.

So much has happened in the wine world since then that I don't think Penfolds is capable of making another as good. They've lost so many contract growers vineyards to new labels and are having to use more fruit from other regions. What about volumes? are they making the same amount now as they did a decade ago? Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Nope, bigger volumes, more call for top end fruit for Grange, RWT etc, less high quality Barossa Shiraz available equals a lesser 389.

1998 was a good wine, so was 2002 and I haven't tried it yet but 2004 is getting some kudos but none of these are in the league of the 1996, even with time.

1996 longevity? another decade at least IMO.

One thing you didn't mention above is change of winemaker.
As for fruit sources, the 2004 has so little Barossa and Mclaren Vale fruit, it doesn't even get mentioned in the official tasting sheet. Peter Gago's comments on the 2004 tasting sheet says, "Watch out 1996 and 1998, the 2004 approaches, accelerating in the overtaking lane. "

I don't think so.

707 - your statement is true. 1996 is the legacy to the greatest ever 389's.

SueNZ wrote: "Watch out 1996 and 1998, the 2004 approaches, accelerating in the overtaking lane. "

Peter Gago is a helluva nice bloke but I'm sure this stuff is written by the marketers and then his moniker stamped on it. If it is his comment then I reckon he's towing the corporate line, as expected of course.

I'm yet to try the 2004 but associates who have say it's very good without getting excited about it, so doubt it's got potential to overtake the 1996, the 1998 never did have that potential.