Paul S
Posts: 3023
Joined: 1/15/2008 From: Singapore Status: offline
|
I have quite a few vintages of the Dead Arm, and I think it consistently gives really great value. The 2001 is a stand-out year, the 2002 should be skipped, I skipped the 2003 as well. Loved the 2004, and have had quite a few bottles of 2005. I find it hard to choose between the later. But if your prefer more sturture and acid, than you will love the 2005. Have a bottle of Peter Lehmann Stonewell 2002 stashed away somewhere. However, people in the know (i.e. Aussies who love their un-jammy Shirazes) have told me that it is usually a wine built for the long-haul and should not be touched until at least 2012. I find the Dead Arm far earlier drinking, especially for soft vintages like 2002 and perhaps 2004. I think the 2005 may benefit from a wee bit more time in the bottle, although I think you will have no complaines opening one now.
|