1970 or 1977 fonseca

dave leach · Post by **dave leach** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:54 pm

i have a chance to get either a case of 1970 or a case of 1977 fonseca for a very, very good price, in the same price range for either. they are both in owc, excellent provenance, etc.

in the london port tasting thread this week, several of you indicated you were disappointed in the 77 fonseca, that it was thin, and lacking in some respect. i had one 5 years ago and thought it was delicious, but haven't tried it since. i was going to grab the case of 77 as i already own 7 bottles of 70, but after reading this thread, i'm rethinking my decision.

can't afford one case of each. which vintage would you go for? i appreciate your input.

dave

Shawn Denkler · Post by **Shawn Denkler** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:41 pm

I have always liked the 1970 Fonseca over 1977, in spite of Suckling's 100 point rating for the 1977.

The 1977 Fonseca was noted in Alex's note as being a little hollow in the mouth - which has been my experience. The Fonseca is very tasty, but not a 100 point port! The 1977 is just a little thinner in fruit than the 1977.

The 1970 has lots of fruit still, in spite of being seven years older. Seven years is quite a bit of time. The 1963 Fonseca has very little fruit and is quite mature compared to the 1970.

1970 has better structure than the 1977. At this point in time I think the 1970 will far outlast the 1977.

One disadvantage of the 1970 is that it was mostly English bottled and I have tasted variation from different bottlings. The top bottlers have done a good job as normal.

Part of the decision of which vintage to buy depends on how long you want to keep it. I feel the 1970 will outlive the 1977 and that the 1977 is softer now.

Another decision is investment. The 1977 has a higher rating and may sell for money in the future.

Axel Probst · Post by **Axel Probst** » Sun Jul 22, 2007 2:20 am

In my experience the Fonseca 70 is still by far in advance over the 77. Despite I never had a bad bottle of the 70, but several of the 77, Im very much convinced, that the 70 has more structure and is more complex than the 77, even when both bottles are well, when comparing my tasting notes.

But nevertheless: Take into consideration what Shawn wrote. If you want to resell it, the 77 might bring you more profit, but for drinking it yourself, take the 70.

After all both are Fonseca Vintage Ports and are a lot of fun drinking. To find out which suits you more, you have to have 2 good bottles and compare them directely.

Axel

dave leach · Post by **dave leach** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 1:18 pm

is it possible that the 1977 fonseca is just not ready? maybe still has some growing up to do?

dave

Richard Henderson · Post by **Richard Henderson** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 7:06 pm

I am sure ROy will weigh in here soon but I think he will agree with me that the 70 is ahead of the 77.

Post by **Roy Hersh** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 1:24 am

It is a really tough call and I would understand folks who prefer either.

I have found incredibly large variations of the 1977 Fonseca's I have had in the past couple of years. Some have been brilliant, still dark and profoundly young. Two or three bottles were much lighter ruby and seemed WAY advanced (from 2 different cellars in NY and SF). When they show as the former bottles have, it is still a gorgeous wine. The latter version is more reminiscent of 1955 Fonseca today. It should not be that way.

I am a HUGE fan of the 1970 and outside of the Nacional, it is the best of the vintage. You all have read enough times how much I like the '70 vintage overall, so for my money and given the bottle variations (I blame it on poorly stored '77 Fonseca shipped off to auction of course

) it is a pretty easy decision. Not only that, but the 1970 Fonseca is a stunning VP right at this very moment and it has not hit its apex as of yet.

Moses Botbol · Post by **Moses Botbol** » Tue Jul 24, 2007 5:25 am

I had a 77 Fonseca a few weeks ago that was the best 77 I have ever had. Decanted one day and had a flavor to die for.

If they are the same price, and similarly great- go for the older one!

dave leach · Post by **dave leach** » Wed Jul 25, 2007 4:35 am

so it appears that most folks prefer the 1970, and i agree, its a stunning wine. so why then is the 1977 about $20-40 more expensive online or at auction? were there far fewer cases made in 1977? why does it seem to be a more prized vintage? unless there was a dramatic variance in the amount of port produced between the two vintages, i would think there would be less 70 available due to a 7 year head start and more of it having been consumed.

roy, is there a way to truly ascertain provenance of a case in owc? why would there be so much bottle variation in the 77s being shipped off to auction, but not the 70s? they were also shipped off to auction, no?

dave

Post by **Roy Hersh** » Thu Jul 26, 2007 12:28 am

David,

In reverse order. Don't forget that the 1970 vintage was the last one allowed to be done outside of Portugal. Lots of the 1970 bottlings I own are from the various UK agents. I have no doubt that they were doing at least as good a job back then (very likely better) than the ex-cellars bottling that took place on old, tired bottling lines in that era. I do not know if this accounts for the difference in bottle variation, as there could be many actual causes for this.

so why then is the 1977 about $20-40 more expensive online or at auction?

Very simply because James Suckling annointed the 1977 Fonseca with 100 points back in 1989, that appeared in his book in 1990/1991 at the earlest stage of the Port "Renaissance" in the USA. I have never found the '77 Fonseca to be a perfect wine and I would love to see what Mr. Suckling would rate the 1977 today!

Roy

For The Love Of Port