Chateau Latour 1986

robert_parker91

Reviewed by: Robert M. Parker, Jr.

The 1986 Latour has a deep ruby/purple color, and a moderately intense bouquet of mineral-scented, blackcurrant fruit intermixed with the classic walnut scents that seem to emerge from Latour's well-placed vineyard. Although undoubtedly excellent, with medium to full body, fine concentration, and impressive length, by Latour's standards, the wine is not as brawny, chewy, or as densely packed with fruit as I would have expected in a vintage when the Cabernet Sauvignon excelled. Nevertheless, this wine should easily last 20-25 years, but I do not see it taking its place as one of the many extraordinary wines that have been produced at this property. Anticipated maturity: 1996-2012. Last tasted, 5/93.

robert_parker90

Reviewed by: Robert M. Parker, Jr.

Tasted from my cellar, the 1986 has consistently been outstanding, falling short of being sublime. The spicy, peppery bouquet reveals aromas of dried herbs and red currant fruit. Medium-bodied, austere, but youthful, vigorous, and concentrated, this wine still requires 4-5 years of cellaring. It is surpassed in this vintage (which favored the northern Medoc and Cabernet Sauvignon) by its rivals, Lafite-Rothschild and Mouton-Rothschild. Anticipated maturity: 2005-2020.

robert_parker85

Reviewed by: Neal Martin

The perennial under-achiever, this maintains its distinctly vegetal nose that just lacks freshness and vigour. The palate is medium-bodied, tannic on the entry but hollow in the middle with a sharp, clipped finish. A cumbersome Latour, a wine perhaps startled by the vintage perhaps? Strip off the label: vin ordinaire. Drink now. Tasted November 2006.

robert_parker87

Reviewed by: Neal Martin

An unexpectedly lacklustre Latour tasted on several occasions, lastly at the Latour vertical in December 2004. Quite a youthful colour. A pinched, slightly weedy nose. Mocha and soft red berries with a touch of liquorice. Soft entry on the palate, but the problem is that the mid-palate is hollow and there is a green stalky edge. Moderate tannins. Lacks the harmony of the 1988 with an undesirable, herbaceous finish. A disappointment for the vintage. Drink now.

robert_parker90

Reviewed by: Robert M. Parker, Jr.

This wine has developed in a perplexing manner, although it still needs another 5-10 years of bottle age before it reaches that magical plateau of maturity. The color remains a dark murky garnet with some purple at the edges. The nose has developed Latour's classic aromas of black currants and walnuts, as well as scents of tar, earth, and a touch of peppery herbs. This medium to full-bodied wine possesses high tannin, and excellent to outstanding concentration. Given the top quality level achieved by many other northern Medoc 1986s, Latour will always, I suspect, be considered somewhat of a disappointment for the vintage. It is well behind its rivals - Chateau Margaux, Lafite-Rothschild, and Mouton-Rothschild. Anticipated maturity: 2000-2015. Last tasted 1/97

robert_parker86

Reviewed by: Neal Martin

Tasted at the Academie du Vin from double magnum, even despite the large format and perfect provenance, the 1986 Latour still falls somewhat short of what you would expect given that this was a great Left Bank vintage. Now at 30 years of age, the nose is rather lackluster with dusty, soft, red berry fruit, with mossy and damp autumn leaves. The palate is medium-bodied with ferrous red berry fruit, firm and obdurate tannin, masculine and foursquare but without the requisite fruit concentration, which renders this Latour a bit...dour. With its herbaceous finish, one can only take solace in the fact that this First Growth cleaned up its act, pulled up its socks and has produced far superior vintages since this. Tasted April 2016.

vinous87

Reviewed by: Neal Martin

The 1986 Latour is a vintage that has constantly left me disappointed in context of the growing season and the performance of its peers such as Mouton-Rothschild or Léoville Las Cases. This last bottle did nothing to change my opinion. It just feels enervated on the nose, as if it cannot be bothered to offer much more than dusty black fruit tinged with leather. The palate is foursquare, lighter than one would expect, the acidity nicely judged, but the fruit has always been lacking and there is no sense of density or ambition towards the finish. I sometimes wonder how this wine comes from the same vineyard that produced the 1982 or 1990! Tasted at a private dinner in London.