For The Love Of Port

Greetings from Wake Forest, North Carolina, Port lovers!

I am considering the Colheitas below and hope that you good folks can help me to select a winner; I esteem highly extensive knowledge, experience, and colllective wisdom here at FTLOP and welcome your insights.

Here are the ones I'm considering:

1) 1950 Burmester (Bottled 2010)
2) 1964 Kopke (Bottled 2017)
3) 1966 Kopke (Bottled 2017)
4) 1966 Taylor Fladgate (Bottled 2015)
5) 1967 Kopke (Bottled 2017)
6) 1967 Taylor Fladgate (Bottled 2016)
7) 1968 Taylor Fladgate (Bottled 2017)

Cheers!

Jonathan

P.S. -- Not to complicate matters, but, in terms of overall flavor profile alone, would any of you go for a 40-year Noval (one of my all-time favorites) instead of any of these above?

Personally I'd probably go for the 1966 Kopke. They've only made a handful of better Colheitas, and they're all legendary.

I don't think I've tasted the 1950 Burmester, but it could also be superb if it's anything like their early '40s Colheitas.

You can't really go wrong with any of those, though. Even the 1964 Kopke is excellent, but it pales next to the 1966. (I'm a 1964 Vintage myself.)

Like Glenn, I like the Kopke, but I've heard good things about the 1968 Taylor's. I haven't seen the 1968 Noval in the States, otherwise I'd pick that.

Any of the 2017 bottlings for a start

Thanks very much, Glenn and Eric. Two votes for the 1966 Kopke so far!

Moses Botbol wrote:Any of the 2017 bottlings for a start

Thanks, Moses. Although the Burmester was bottled in 2010 and is well past the optimal freshness window, I thought that some might have some experience with it and say to go with it despite that drawback.

I have not tried the Burmester 1950 but I'm a big fan of their old Colheita. 55 and 63 comes to my mind as almost perfect wines.

Frederick Blais wrote:I have not tried the Burmester 1950 but I'm a big fan of their old Colheita. 55 and 63 comes to my mind as almost perfect wines.

Thanks for your insight, Frederick.

You are the second person who has mentioned that the old Burmesters tend to be quite special. To what extent would the 2010 bottling date give you pause?

Not a bad one in the bunch, so you wouldn't go wrong with any. The 1966-67 Taylor's are fantastic, so is the '64 Kopke. Not had the 1950 but others from around that time have been very good.

And Noval 40 is killer.

Like I said, you really won't go wrong with any of them.

Andy Velebil wrote:Not a bad one in the bunch, so you wouldn't go wrong with any. The 1966-67 Taylor's are fantastic, so is the '64 Kopke. Not had the 1950 but others from around that time have been very good.

And Noval 40 is killer.

Like I said, you really won't go wrong with any of them.

Thanks, Andy! It's good to "read" ya.

I'm really kind of torn... The wild card is that 1950 Burmester, for I find it quite alluring due to its date. As a history buff, I find it really cool that it was bottled when Harry S. Truman was president and at a time when World War 2 was still a recent memory. My father was 3 years old, my mother was but 1... However, I don't want to get caught up in nostalgia and take a chance on a unproven commodity (insofar as I have not been able to find any reviews on it, neither here on FTLOP or elsewhere on the Internet.) Although the appeal of the 1950 Burmester undoubtedly is strong, I am leaning towards the proven commodity of the 1966 Kopke (plenteous excellent reviews), and I love the Kopke house style. Complicating matters is that most of the official reviews for the 1966-1968 Taylor Fladgate releases are stellar - I have seen 98's from official publications for the 1967 and 1968 releases, in fact.

Of course, I could nearly get two Noval 40's (one of my two favorite bottles I have ever owned - the other being a Kopke 40) for the price of the 1950 Burmester and assuredly love every drop.

Eric Ifune wrote:Like Glenn, I like the Kopke, but I've heard good things about the 1968 Taylor's. I haven't seen the 1968 Noval in the States, otherwise I'd pick that.

Pretty sure it was available during one of our buying opps many years ago. I have one, and can't think of any other reason that I'd have it. (Sadly it's not available to share, as it was a birthday gift for my brother-in-law this year who couldn't take it home with him so I'm storing it for him.)

173 g/l residual sugar in that 1968, according to reports. That better have some massive acidity to go with it! I want to put it head-to-head with the 1968 Krohns that we got from Premier Cru some time, just for fun. I've heard that the Taylor is a different blend, possibly including some actual Taylor stocks.

I do like the Taylor (née Krohn) Colheitas, especially '66-'67, but I think they're overhyped due to the (new) name and a lot of marketing dollars. They're not 98-point wines. 94-95, sure. 96? Maybe for the right bottle. But 98 is in an entirely different league and my experience with them simply hasn't been worthy of that kind of a score.

+1 on all the Noval 40 comments. I'd have to say it's my favorite "readily available" 40 since the Romaneira isn't made any more and the S. Leonardo can be hard to find. It used to be less expensive than the other big-name 40s as well, but I don't know whether or not that's still the case.

I was hoping for the 2017 bottling. Much better than the buying opportunity version IMHO.

Jonathan S wrote:

Frederick Blais wrote:I have not tried the Burmester 1950 but I'm a big fan of their old Colheita. 55 and 63 comes to my mind as almost perfect wines.

Thanks for your insight, Frederick.

You are the second person who has mentioned that the old Burmesters tend to be quite special. To what extent would the 2010 bottling date give you pause?

For me I don't mind too much about the bottling date. I like bottle age :)

I've enjoyed the 1968 Krohn and 1968 Noval, but believe the 1966 Kopke is probably better. I've had it too, but not side-by-side with these. I think the Taylors are likely overrated and overpriced, but admit I haven't tasted the new blends, if they are in fact newly blended.

Thanks for all of your input, gentlemen!

I ended up ordering a 1966 Kopke, and I can’t wait for it to arrive tomorrow. :)




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Execellent choice. I've had it once, the Kopke 66, and it is wonderful.

I found a review for you of the 1950 Burmester, just for the record. Perhaps you will try it another time




Curtsey of http://www.vintageport.se/Colheitas.php#TastingNotes

Thomas V wrote:Execellent choice. I've had it once, the Kopke 66, and it is wonderful.

I found a review for you of the 1950 Burmester, just for the record. Perhaps you will try it another time




Curtsey of http://www.vintageport.se/Colheitas.php#TastingNotes

Thanks, Thomas! That is the first one I’ve seen for the 1950 Burmester, and I searched high and low. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Update: I actually left work early yesterday in order to pick up the 1966 Kopke Colheita that was being held for me at the FedEx distribution center. Let's just say that it was a lovely afternoon! I poured a glass of the 1966 Kopke and consumed it alongside a 1976 Porto Rocha (birth year Port) over the course of a couple of hours.

I was rather surprised to see how dark the 1966 was. It was about as dark as most 20-year Tawnies that I've had! It is aging quite slowly, so much so that it still has a hint of purple hue. For 51 years in cask, I was blown away by the freshness and by how much fruit is present, and the balance between the acidity and the sweetness is quite impressive. The balance might be the best I have encountered in a Colheita, in fact. It possesses an addictive entry, and the finish, although long, isn't on par with the length of say a Noval 40-year old.

At this point, I would assign a score of 94+, however, if the bit of slightly distracting heat dissipates over the next few days, I would bump it up to 95. (For comparative purposes, the 1976 Porto Rocha would be a 90+. Further, I would rate a Kopke 40-year 95+ points and a Noval 40-year 96+ points.)

Cheers!