Drinking window of SQVP

[Clement R]

There is a lot of info here about drinking window and expected peak of top VPs, but what about the SQVP? Specifically those released in non-vintage years by top producers, such as Bomfim, Vargellas, Malvedos, Fonseca Guimaraens (even if not technically SQVP)...
I see the Symmington brands tend to release theirs around the 8-10 years mark, is it by design to avoid the closed off period and sell them close to their peak?

[Frederick Blais]

There is a lot of info here about drinking window and expected peak of top VPs, but what about the SQVP? Specifically those released in non-vintage years by top producers, such as Bomfim, Vargellas, Malvedos, Fonseca Guimaraens (even if not technically SQVP)...
I see the Symmington brands tend to release theirs around the 8-10 years mark, is it by design to avoid the closed off period and sell them close to their peak?

Bonjour Clément. Yes I would agree, the idea is to offer a glimpse of what a classic Vintage could be with a great price tag and approchability. The best ones will definitively improve for 20-30 more years. I had Vargellas 2001 and 2005 recently and they are starting their drinking window for my palate.

It is also a nice way for a wine lover to taste the individual character of a vineyard and what it can bring in the final blend.

[Eric Menchen]

We have some general ideas about VP drinking windows, but they vary from producer to producer and vintage to vintage. The one statement we can suggest is that in general SQVPs won't last as long as VPs, but there are plenty exceptions to that I'm sure. As for the variation, I'll hypothesize that it is greater for SQVPs, perhaps. I've had some 1990s Taylor Quinta de Vargellas that I think will last a long time, maybe not as long as 1994 Taylor, but as long as many other 1990s VPs. Maybe it was just a badly stored bottle, but I had a 1998 Fonseca Guimaraens that made me think it was time to drink those up at 15 years.

[Glenn E.]

I'll point out that there are 2 things that can be confusing... there are second label wines and single quinta wines.

"Malvedos" was a second label for Graham's Port until 1998. (I may be off by a year or two one way or the other.) It was not a single-quinta wine, which is why it is labeled as "Graham's Malvedos Vintage Port" and not as "Graham's Quinta dos Malvedos Vintage Port". Starting in 1998 or 1999 it became a single quinta vintage Port... but nothing changed. The Symington's acquired the neighboring properties that had always been included in Malvedos VPs and integrated them into Quinta dos Malvedos... so now it's a SQVP!

Fonseca Guimaraens is also a second label wine. Once in a great while you might find a Fonseca Quinta do Panascal, which is their single quinta wine.

So... why does it matter?

It seems to me that second label wines mature faster than fully declared wines, but that single quinta wines can often live almost as long as fully declared wines. After all, Quinta do Vesuvio is a single quinta wine. So is Quinta do Noval! (If you pay close attention, though, you'll notice that some of their LBVs in particular are simply labeled as "Noval"... and now you know why!)

My guess is that single quinta wines are normally made is smaller quantities, so the selection process is stricter and the resulting wine can be almost as good as a fully-declared VP. All one really lacks is the extra blending components that normally go into a fully-declared VP. The quality of the grapes used is top-notch, though.

I normally prefer to give a full VP or SQVP at least 30 years to mature, and then they might live 50-60 years. Or 80-100 years in rare cases!

A second label might only need 25 years to mature and then might only live for 50 years.

I do agree that SQVP tends to be more variable than fully declared VP. I suspect that's due to it being more dependent on what nature provided that year, whereas a fully declared VP can "blend away" minor flaws using grapes from other properties. At least for me, that's one of the things that makes Quinta do Vesuvio fun - they can be quite different from year to year!

[Andy Velebil]

The line has really blurred over the past couple of decades. SQVP’s and “second label” VP’s have really improved across the board. And that’s before factoring in producers who only make a “SQVP”.

Now days I’d say the vintage itself has far less influence than before. By saying that, I’m not minimizing growing year issues. But with modern wine making and viticulture, it’s hard to make a bad one except in really poor years. Many SQVP and Second Label VP’s can easily make it to older bones…30+ yrs old. Whereas that may not have been the case a quarter century or more ago.

[Eric Menchen]

Thank you for the exposition Glenn. I did know the differences, but was grouping them all together. It might be better to talk about them separately.

It seems to me that second label wines mature faster than fully declared wines, but that single quinta wines can often live almost as long as fully declared wines.

As for your above statement, I think some single quinta wines can live almost as long as fully declared wines (and my bets would be on Taylor as I mentioned), but I don't think all of them will. I think there are some weaker ones out there. I think more research is needed

[Mike J. W.]

As for your above statement, I think some single quinta wines can live almost as long as fully declared wines (and my bets would be on Taylor as I mentioned), but I don't think all of them will. I think there are some weaker ones out there. I think more research is needed

Further research is always an excellent idea.

[Moses Botbol]

Never been impressed with any vintage of Malvedos. Noval, Dow, Ferreira, seem to do the SQVP or 2nd line VP's better for me.

[Mike J. W.]

Never been impressed with any vintage of Malvedos. Noval, Dow, Ferreira, seem to do the SQVP or 2nd line VP's better for me.

Have you had the 1986 Malvedos? I think it's excellent.