what can I expect from the 1985 vintage?

[xxxMonique Heinemans]

I've been reading several times on other forums about VA concidering many vintage ports from 1985. I do have some Fonseca, Graham and Taylor of that year in my cellar. What can I expect?
Could anybody please explain to me what it is coused by, and is it possible to prevent it?

[Frederick Blais]

Volatile acidity is mainly caused during the process of fermentation in the lagares or in barrel elevage. It is often caused by the development of unwanted bacteria.

For the 1985 vintage, the reason why there is VA is that during the fermatation days, the temperature was very high in the Douro so the producers could not control the fermentation temperature in the lagares. Normally you want to keep the fermentation temperature below 30 celcius, else your yeast can die and develop bad substance like Volatil Acidity.

The same thing happened in 2004, very high temperature were encountered during the fermentation, but today most quinta are well equiped with cooling system, so fewer producers should be affected with this problem.

But again no one knows yet if 2004 could have the same problem because with the 1985 every critics predicted a high quality vintage. Still you can find some critics stating that 1985 is a 95+ vintage. No one was able to smell or taste that volatil acidity because of the explosion of fruit in their youth.

I've only taste Taylor in the port you have and I had a great time with it still you can wait another 10 years to get more complexity. Fonseca and Graham are 2 stars of the vintage.

Taste sunday, Offley which was showing great concentration and full harmony 3 years ago had fallen appart and showed too much burning alcool on the nose, mouth was not that bad. With the Warre's 1985 it was the inverse, showing VA but with nice aroma but the mouth was really burning too much. This is another flaw with some 1985 too much alcool is showing as they age.

[Roy Hersh]

Monique,

I am in the camp that really enjoys the 1985 vintage today. I have had them early in their lives and as even a few this year. The Fonseca is fantastic and is the top wine of the vintage in my view. Graham's is probably second. Gould Campbell and Smith Woodhouse are very very good too. IMO, Taylor missed the 1980s in terms of making decent wines. The 1980, 1983 and 1985 are all average at best.

The VA issue is WAY overblown, especially by people who have not tasted a vast array of the wines from the vintage. Quinta do Noval is just an average wine while the Nacional falls below the Fonseca and Graham's. Dow is a beauty and will rise even higher as time goes on. So, I don't get the VA thing and will continue to enjoy my '85s in another decade when they are showing more maturity. Your Fonseca is a fabulous wine and I urge you to try one during the cooler weather in the autumn of 2005. Save the rest from there!

[Steven Kooij]

Monique, I have not tasted the Graham's, but the Fonseca is a beauty! I also find the Taylor to be dissapointing. Kopke is quite nice to drink now, and it is affordable in The Netherlands. Romariz and Noval are, IMHO, both a bit to light.

'85s I'd skip due to the VA-problem (and I DO think it is a problem): Niepoort, Warre, Sandeman, Romaneira and Burmester. Perhaps I should add that I'm rather sensitive to VA - absolutely can't stand it, not in Port or any other wine.

[David Spriggs]

I think the 1985's are still a bargain for the top wines. 1985 Fonseca and Grahams are fantastic. I remember early on that the 1985 Fonseca seemed so closed and backward that I wasn't sure that it would ever be fun to drink. Well... it's great now! Prices are still reasonable so I would snap this up if you can find good bottles at a reasonable price. IMHO, the Fonseca needs at least another 10 years to really become drinkable and will last many, many years - I would say at leat 40 or 50... probably more. The Grahams has always been pleasurable and is wonderful right now. It also has many years ahead of it. The styles are quite different between these two ports.

-Dave-

[Roy Hersh]

Steviecage,

I happen to enjoy the '85 Burmster although I have not had it recently. If I may inquire, have you been drinking Port for a long time? No disrespect meant, whatsoever!



David,

Do you really mean it when you say that the 1985 Fonseca:

the Fonseca needs at least another 10 years to really become drinkable

?

I have had a number of great bottles of this wine and although I agree it will be a great wine when mature, it is a fabulous wine that drinks impeccably well today. I should note that this is for my palate.

[Steven Kooij]

No problem, Roy. I've started drinking Port when I was studying in Vila Real in '97 / '98, and have been seriously collecting since 2000, and probably taste some 200 Ports per year (but that includes pours at fairs, etc.).

I agree with you on the Fonseca '85 - while it will improve, it is already soooo delicious that it is hard not to open one already!

[David Spriggs]

David,
Do you really mean it when you say that the 1985 Fonseca:

the Fonseca needs at least another 10 years to really become drinkable

I do mean it. Mine are still realtively closed. They are best after being open for 3 days. IMHO, this port is just emerging from it's closed phase. It's really a fantastic port that people should be searching for. It may be the best port made between (but not including) the great years of 1977 and 1992.

-Dave-

[Derek T.]

I read this thread last week with interest as I had only just purchased 7 bottles of Graham's 1985 and have never (to my knowledge) experienced VA.

Last Sunday I opened a bottle of the Graham's 85 to try it out - half hoping that VA would be present so that I would know what you were all talking about. The cork came out in one piece, which is always a good start. I decanted the bottle through a Screwpull stainless steel mesh funnel (which I would highly recommend) and was surprised at how little crust there was. I poured all the way to the end and there was only a thin (1 to 2mm) layer of sediment caught by the mesh and almost nothing left inside the bottle.

The aroma of this wine was to die for - rich blackcurrent and absolutely no hint of alcohol. The colour was very dark. If I hand't seen the label I would have thought from the smell and the colour that this wine was less than 5 years old.

I couldn't resist an immediate taste - very fruity, rich and full bodied - I could have used a spoon! Again, like on the nose, there was no hint of alcohol. The finish seemed to go on forever.

I then locked the decanter in the kitchen for 2 hours. The nose had changed very little by this time but the wine appeared lighter to drink than when first opened. Still the same dark forrest fruit flavours but this time with a little alcohol showing.

I then locked myself in a cupboard to stop myself drinking the lot. Four hours after decanting this was as perfect a glass of port as I have tasted in my 2 to 3 years of collecting and drinking "real" VP. Beautiful.

I managed to leave about one third of the bottle for 24 hours. The same aroma was still present but not quite so intense. Some of the fruit taste had begun to fade and the finish was much drier than on the previous night. Still fabulous and still no real sign of heat or alcohol.

Thanks to all of you for the above debate that encouraged me to open this wonderful bottle. I'm looking forward to seeing my remaining 6 bottles evolve over the next few years. This wine surely has some way to go.

Derek

[Roy Hersh]

Regardless of the outcome, I love to read the passion for Port that you described Derek. I am very pleased for you that the bottle of Graham showed so well. Now imagine the Fonseca, which at least for my palate, is showing better today?

Although I own a bit of the '85 Fonseca, having tried a few bottles from my original case, I bought a six pack of them from a friend this week for $65 and another six pack yesterday (prior to posting the rest in Marketplace Forum) at $60.

Where else in the world can you buy the top wine of the vintage with 20 years of bottle age for even double that price, or triple or more for that matter? Port pricing can look incredibly cheap if you know what and where to buy.

[Roy Hersh]

I wanted to revisit this thread as I know that in the past four and a half years many who are now present at weren't at the time and it is worth bringing back some of these important topics nearly a half decade later to get a feel for how the vintage has been evolving and also to give some of the new folks a chance to participate ... but also, the people who have been here, I assume they've had lots more opportunities to test the waters with a vintage like this!

Discuss!?!!?

[Glenn E.]

I wasn't around for the first pass at this thread - I didn't join FTLOP until January of 2008. Hard to believe, I know!

There are a lot of 1985s that I really like. For me, though, the best for drinking now or over the next 10 years is the Graham. The Fonseca may out-live the Graham, but it's just not as fun for me to drink right now. The Dow, Smith Woodhouse, and Gould Campbell are also top-notch Ports.

The surprise of the vintage for me is the Churchill. It's not a 95+ point blockbuster like the Graham or Fonseca, but it's also reasonably easy to find in the $30 range (or at least was this past fall, I haven't checked recently). Fantastic QPR on an excellent bottle of Port.

I've been slowly collecting a 1985 horizontal, which now stands at about 20 different Ports. I think I'll probably top out between 24 and 28, which is still a nice large horizontal. The trick will be figuring out how to taste them all at one time!

[David Spriggs]

I also like the 1985 Churchill, but I think their 1991 is better. My favorite sleeper of the vintage is the 1985 Burmester. A very nice port and ready to drink if you can find one.

Arrg! I see that Eric just posted on the 1985 Burmester - http://www.fortheloveofport.com/ftlopfo ... =12&t=9106

[David Spriggs]

The VA issue is WAY overblown

I have to agree with you on this. I actually have yet to experience this and I've had a lot of 1985s.

[Glenn E.]

The VA issue is WAY overblown

I have to agree with you on this. I actually have yet to experience this and I've had a lot of 1985s.

Same for me - I've encountered more VA in 1977s than in 1985s. Off the top of my head (which probably isn't wise as I've been tasting tonight) I can't actually remember an incidence of VA in a 1985. Doesn't mean it hasn't happened, but it's certainly not often enough to be memorable.

[Roy Hersh]

Glenn,

In 2015, I'd be happy to co-host some 1985 horizontal and am sure I have at least one or two that you might not have yet. I'd just help with venue/restaurant permission to waive corkage etc. as it would be your event. Either split the tasting over a two day period or over two sessions in one long day into night would be my suggestion from previous experience. I prefer the former but there something about having them all at one time that also is very cool if you can train your palate to handle 20 VPs ... made easier at 30 years of age as hopefully they'll be settling down by then, not unlike many of the 1980s today.

[Moses Botbol]

Monique,

I am in the camp that really enjoys the 1985 vintage today.

The VA issue is WAY overblown, especially by people who have not tasted a vast array of the wines from the vintage.

Totally agree. Fonseca, Dow, and of course Graham are all excellent '85 vintages. I'd avoid Sandeman, Croft and Noval... even with those I'd still buy them depending on price.

[Glenn E.]

Roy, I was thinking 2015 as well to mark the 30th Anniverary of the Vintage. Let's pencil it in!

[oscarquevedo]

Roy, I was thinking 2015 as well to mark the 30th Anniverary of the Vintage. Let's pencil it in!

I hope I can join you! Would love!

From what I tasted and heard from some producers 85 is already over the hill. But I must admit I can be wrong, I've tasted few 85's.

[Eric Menchen]

I just had a 1985 Burmester. The first night we thought it seemed young for its age. The second night it was about right for a 1985, which is still good IMHO.