Chateau Latour 1992

robert_parker89

Reviewed by: Robert M. Parker, Jr.

The 1992 is a more expansive, broader, sweeter Latour than the 1991, with a deep ruby color, a charming bouquet of red and black fruits, minerals, and vanillin, excellent ripeness, medium-bodied flavors, soft tannin, and low acidity. It is a very good 1992 that should drink well for 10-15 years.

robert_parker90

Reviewed by: Neal Martin

Tasted alongside Chateau Lafite 1992, a more classic Pauillac nose: cedar, pencil-lead and dusty black fruits. Develops more aromas in the glass, with a touch of green pepper and a slight tinny note. The palate is well-balanced, a little more concentrated than Lafite with firmer tannins and structure. Austere and conservative but with good grip and persistency. Not a wine that would show well on its own, but a perfect accompaniment to food. Drink now. Having said that, I think I would choose the Latour 1991 over the 1992, the former a little riper and vigorous. Tasted July 2004.

robert_parker88

Reviewed by: Robert M. Parker, Jr.

Only 50% of the 1992 harvest went into the "grand vin." The result is a sweet, expansive, rich, medium-bodied, surprisingly supple Latour with the tell-tale English walnut, blackcurrant, and mineral-scented nose, very good to excellent flavor concentration, low acidity and moderate tannin in the finish. This is an extremely well-made, approachable style of Latour that should age well for 10-15 years. It may develop even further, thus justifying an even higher score.