Do you prefer Fonseca to Taylor

Post by **Roy Hersh** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 1:37 am

Although I would prefer to discuss this with you over a fantastic bottle of 1970, don't let that vintage get in the way of your answer.

I am asking about which house makes the better Port for your tastes and why?

I will also mention that this is not specifically aimed at just Vintage Port, but overall house style, so you can refer to any style you'd like.

Thanks!

Frederick Blais · Post by **Frederick Blais** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 1:43 pm

I have not had too much experiences with old taylor and fonseca. One thing I'm sure is that in their youth I do prefer Fonseca that has always been more open, fleshy and opulent than the rather closed Taylor. With age getting into account, it is much different. I probably like them both even for different reasons.

Ted D · Post by **Ted D** » Mon Jul 30, 2007 5:11 pm

Taylor, just because I do! Not in all vintages of course, but my peak Taylor experiences eclipse my top Fonseca experiences.

Axel Probst · Post by **Axel Probst** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:49 am

Roy,

to me as a very enthusiastic german car freak you could ask as well: do you prefer Mercedes, Porsche, BMW or Audi.

I like the aged tawnies of Taylors more than I like the ones of Fonseca, but Vintage-Port-wise I would never make such a statement.

Isn't the difference of style and taste what wine is all about??? Fonseca and Taylor are both Top-producers with all the aspects VP needs to have and I have pretty much the same amount of good memories of VPs from both producers.

Since we are prohibited in choosing more than one alternative in other fun-aspects of life, I think we should be very happy that it is allowed when having port, especially at this level.

By the way, Im going for a bottle of Noval this evening...

All the best

Axel

Scott Anaya · Post by **Scott Anaya** » Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:14 pm

Man....tough choice. I've been all about Fonseca lately the last few years or so as I have loved drinking and comparing across the vintages from the 50's thru 2000.

But my highlight reel and fond memories are of Taylor. The '92 Taylor was my first epiphanal VP experience and a '55 Taylor was one of my first aged VP's that showed me just why the hell one tries to wait as long as they can for the big boys to mature.

So they both have a place atop my list and are perhaps tied for number one at this point. That is until I get more thoroughly after another producer perhaps

Post by **Roy Hersh** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:15 am

Interesting points so far. I hope others will venture to add their opinions as well. This would have made for an interesting poll, but I really wanted to hear the reasons for the likes and dislikes. Thanks to those above who have added their commentary.

Steve Culhane · Post by **Steve Culhane** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 5:42 pm

Definitely Taylor for me. I like big wines and I always thought there was a bit "more" in Taylor than Fonseca vintages. Second reason would be that I think the aged tawnies are a lot better than Fonseca.

Post by **Andy Velebil** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 6:29 pm

Wow, a tough question that I've had to think about for several days now. I could talk about this one for a long time, so here is the Reader's Digest version.

I would give a nod to the Fonseca as my favorite of the two.

First, Taylors are so disjointed when young that drinking them is painful. I know, I should wait years when they mature, but I like trying things periodically to see how they are coming round. Where as Fonseca's are more approachable to me when young.

Second, As Taylors age they integrate better and the secondary nuances come out. Yet they don't seem to ever shed that shear brawny muscularness from their youth. Don't get wrong, as this isn't a problem as I love big VP's, but they lack some of the elegance that Fonseca's seem to aquire as they mature. Fonseca's seem to get this beautiful floralness on the palate, in addition to being very muscular at the same time.

I would not turn away either one, trust me on that one

But I have a slight preference for Fonseca.

Todd Pettinger · Post by **Todd Pettinger** » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:58 pm

Sadly, I have never tried a VP from either producer, so I can not weigh in on this. The price of an aged bottle of either in my market limits my ability to try either of these.

Weirdly enough, younger versions of these same producers have the price so ridiculously jacked up it is almost incomprehensible ($135-155/bottle of Fonseca 2003??? C'mon... you gotta be kidding me!)

I have ONE bottle of '77 Taylor VP in the cellar which I bought for the occasion of my wife's 30th birthday this year, but a couple of developments have forced me to reconsider keeping it until a 40th b-day celebration perhaps!

I also have a Vargellas '91, but as far as VP from Taylor, that is what I have been able to afford (and find in my area as far as aged VP goes.

Fonseca, I have no aged in my cellar, but stumbled across a good deal on 11 bottles of Fonseca 2001, so I will surely be enjoying those around, say, my 65 or 70th birthday! :)

I'd LOVE to try more by either. I have a feeling I'm in for an epiphany when I do, but budgetary limitations being what they are, I shall have to wait and dream for now!

But I do still enjoy reading why others like either/or and why!

Todd

SEAN C. · Post by **SEAN C.** » Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:39 pm

Call me crazy (or something else) but I've never yet had a bottle of Taylor's that I have gone nuts about. I've had the 1945, 1970, 1977, 1983, and 1985. The 1945 was by far the best. I've really never liked the 1970 Taylor that much, and I've had the bottle many times.
The 1970 and 1977 Fonseca's are infinitely better than the Taylors in their respective years. The Fonseca's that I've tried were the 1948, 1966, 1970, 1976 (Guimaraens), 1977, 1983, and 1985. The 1948 was the best, with the 1970 in second place. I can see from typing this that I need to drink more Taylor's and Fonseca's especially the 1963's and 1955's!
I own a bottle from almost every year of Taylor production since 1900..(need to drink more of them)
My Fonseca collection begins in 1912 and the only major years I need to obtain are the 1900, 1927,1934,1935 and 1945. Vertical anyone?
Overall I would take Fonseca over Taylor any day!

Eric Ifune · Post by **Eric Ifune** » Sat Aug 04, 2007 8:25 pm

I'll go with Taylor. Maybe I'm a masochist, but I love that Taylor backbone and grip.

simon Lisle · Post by **simon Lisle** » Sun Aug 05, 2007 5:08 am

In general Taylors for ports over 70 years Fonseca for less sweeping statement though.I find Fonseca are subtle and refined which does not make a great Tawny after they are passed their best.

Moses Botbol · Post by **Moses Botbol** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 7:49 am

SEAN C. wrote:Call me crazy (or something else) but I've never yet had a bottle of Taylor's that I have gone nuts about.

Overall I would take Fonseca over Taylor any day!

What about the '66 Taylor last night?

SEAN C. · Post by **SEAN C.** » Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:07 pm

Moses Botbol wrote:
SEAN C. wrote:Call me crazy (or something else) but I've never yet had a bottle of Taylor's that I have gone nuts about.

Overall I would take Fonseca over Taylor any day!
What about the '66 Taylor last night?

It's safe to say that I'm becoming a believer ..I do think the '66 Taylor I had the other night was slightly better than the '66 Fonseca!

Post by **Roy Hersh** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:17 am

REALLY?

Sean,

I am very much looking forward to meet you and think that you and Andy are going to get along quite well.

Moses Botbol · Post by **Moses Botbol** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 9:04 am

The 66 Taylor had a lot more life in it than the 66 Dow. The smokey-pepper taste I associate with Taylor was still alive, yet had depth and age... The Dow was soft tasting (yet still good).

Waiting for Sean to post our tasting notes for the 66 Taylor and 66 Sandeman.

SEAN C. · Post by **SEAN C.** » Tue Aug 07, 2007 12:10 pm

Moses Botbol wrote:The 66 Taylor had a lot more life in it than the 66 Dow. The smokey-pepper taste I associate with Taylor was still alive, yet had depth and age... The Dow was soft tasting (yet still good).

Waiting for Sean to post our tasting notes for the 66 Taylor and 66 Sandeman.

YOU MEAN FONSECA MOSES

Paulo Barbosa · Post by **Paulo Barbosa** » Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:26 pm

Taylor all the way.

Recently I did a side by side Taylor/Fonseca 1970 tasting and all at the table went with Taylor.

Al B. · Post by **Al B.** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:26 am

My preference varies from one day to the next. Sometimes I will be looking for the robustness of the Taylor wine, especially if I am drinking a VP with a meal. Sometimes I will be looking for the elegance of a Fonseca.

On the rare occasions when I have tasted the two wines against each other, I have generally scored the two wines within one or two points of each other with no particular preference of one over the other.

I love them both!

Alex

Michael C. · Post by **Michael C.** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 12:38 pm

This has been a fun thread to read ... I have developed some pretty firm opinions on my preferences between these two houses (at least from an aged tawny perspective) and it seems that my impressions are the complete opposite of the majority of people here. Clearly, this means I need to pull a bottle of 20-year tawny from each house out of the cellar and do a true side-by-side comparison in order to refresh my memory... :)

Based on my experiences, the Taylor aged tawnies are refined and elegant. They are smooth, consistent, and well-integrated. The Fonseca aged tawnies, on the other hand, strike me as being significantly more interesting; though just as well-integrated as the Taylor, the Fonseca has a "big" tawny feel, with a long finish, and much more complexity than the Taylor. Since folks here seem to focus more on VPs (I'm partial to my tawnies, but maybe that's because I've never been exposed to a properly aged, classic VP), I'm wondering if the styles are somewhat different between the VPs and aged tawnies.

Just to make sure we're comparing apples-to-apples, I'd be interested in hearing from people who have tried *both* VPs and aged tawnies from these houses. Are the "styles" the same within each house (e.g., are Taylor ports, in general, more or less robust than Fonseca) or do the comparisons differ across styles of port (e.g., a robust VP doesn't necessarily mean the same house makes a robust tawny)?

Make sense? Thoughts?

For The Love Of Port

Do you prefer Fonseca to Taylor

Do you prefer Fonseca to Taylor

Each wine has its time...