914-939-7511

Chateau Lascombes Margaux 2016 750ml
SKU: 25250

Chateau Lascombes Margaux 2016

  • wa94+
  • jd94
  • we93
  • ws92
  • v88

750ml
$149.99
Save $35.03 (23%)
$114.96

Available for:
Pickup
Delivery
Shipping
Share
Wine Advocate
  • wa94+

Deep garnet-purple colored, the 2016 Lascombes features beautiful candied violets, Black Forest cake, cassis and menthol with hints of underbrush, cloves, pencil lead and tar. Medium-bodied with good intensity and firm, grainy tannins, it finishes long and perfumed.

November 30, 2018
Jeb Dunnuck
  • jd94

The 2016 Château Lascombes is another brilliant Margaux, and I was blown away by this wine on two separate occasions. Sporting a deep purple color as well as a thrilling bouquet of cassis, smoked earth, charcoal, and tobacco, it hits the palate with medium to full-bodied richness, has obvious minerality, a big palate presence, and a terrific sense of elegance and purity. It's a beautiful wine, and while I'd happily enjoy bottles today, it's going to keep for 25-30 years.

February 28, 2019
Wine Enthusiast
  • we93

While there are serious layers of wood in this young wine, it scores with its rich black-currant fruits and fine ripe tannins. It has structure and concentration, a wine that has great potential. Drink from 2025.

May 1, 2019
Wine Spectator
  • ws92

This is dark and lush in feel, with alluring steeped plum and blackberry fruit carried by velvety tannins, picking up lilac, incense, black tea and alder notes along the way. Fresh acidity runs throughout, keeping everything detailed and focused. Best from 2022 through 2035. 31,667 cases made.

March 31, 2019
Vinous
  • v88

The 2016 Lascombes was tasted from two bottles, as the first felt very subdued. The bouquet on the second is high-toned with black cherries, cassis, dried blood and crushed stone aromas. The palate is medium-bodied with toasty oak, and grippy in the mouth, but here the wood tannins rather dominate the finish. So-so. Tasted blind at the Southwold tasting.

August 2020

Are you 21 years old, or older?

No