Lagavulin "double matured" Pedro Ximinez finish

Your tastes and our tastes are discussed here, so make sure you share your pleasures with us.
New member
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 2:01 am

Lagavulin "double matured" Pedro Ximinez finish

Postby Jon » Tue Nov 19, 2002 10:22 am

Regarding the Lagavulin "double matured" Pedro Ximinez finish, I bought the 1984 version at the Oslo airport tax free shop in august (appr £30). I must say its probably the finest whisky I ever tasted - a whole lot of "standard" Lagavulin in there (16 YO is, IMHO, probably the finest "standard issue" whisky of any destillery), only more (the best way I can describe it here at my office without a glass at hand). Recently I bought the 1986 version at the same airport (again appr £30), and I look forward to comparing the the two (still a wee dram or two left in the 1984 bottle). I haven't seen any tasting notes for any of these "vintages", but Michael Jackson tasted the 1979 version in his book and awarded it no less than 95 points (the only one in the book matching the Lagavulin 16 YO, as far as I can see). Can anyone point me to notes for the 1984 and 1986 - or, even better, has anyone experienced these and other versions of the Lagavulin "double matured" Pedro Ximinez finish??


Rudolph Hucker
Silver Member
Posts: 258
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2002 1:01 am

Postby Rudolph Hucker » Tue Nov 19, 2002 10:46 am

there are tasting notes for the 1979 in the tasting room on this website



Nic Rhodes
Bronze Member
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2002 1:01 am

Postby Nic Rhodes » Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:04 am

Thought I saw the 1988 the other day, we are rushing through these vintages, not 16 years anymore Image will have to check this one

Silver Member
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 2:01 am

Postby Ize » Fri Jan 03, 2003 7:20 am

Hello Jon, I opened 1986 PX Lagavulin on Christmas and I would say that it is good (or even very good) but I feel that one or two year earlier bottling of normal Lagavulin was slightly better. 1986 PX had even rounder taste (sweeter perhaps) and it was even bit watery when compared to "older" Lagavulins. To me it it did not offer value for the money, but I'm sure some would like this better than normal bottling.


Deactivated Member

Postby Deactivated Member » Fri Jan 03, 2003 12:31 pm


I still have to try my Lagavulin DE 1984, I know the 1979, wich was quite good, just wonder about the 1984, but havn't opend yet. Let you know later on...


Bronze Member
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:01 am

Postby Rudy » Sun Apr 13, 2003 3:56 pm

Hello Jon,

your experience with the double matured Lagavulin is quite the same as mine. They're both great, but the PX finish seems to add a dimension that very much suits my taste. I have the 1981, bottled 2000, haven't tasted others.


New member
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 2:01 am

Postby ceedeedoos » Mon Apr 14, 2003 3:16 pm

haven't tried these distiller's editions, but I feel partially sad about the fact that they make so many of them ... I think it might jeopardise the releases of the standard 16yo ...

Silver Member
Posts: 494
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 2:01 am

Postby WestVanDave » Wed Apr 16, 2003 4:38 am

I've thoroughly enjoyed the 1980 DE PX Lag. with the coding lgv. 4/464 special release limited edition ~ Master Distiller, M. Nicholson, White Horse, Glasgow I recall from the write-up included (now lost) that this was an 18 yr. old, but confirmation is absent from the bottle and the box.

The supply in Canada has been sporadic - and now the only release available is the distilled in 1986 - bottled in 2002 (16 years) with a lgv. 4/490 marking - master distiller unnamed. I haven't opened this one yet (and will likely stock up when I next have a chance) - but I'm curious if anyone would like to comment on the '86 version. Could they have shortened up the process to meet our impatient demand?

Cheers, Dave.

Triple Gold Member
Posts: 2724
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 2:01 am

Postby Admiral » Fri Nov 07, 2003 3:51 am

With the well documented shortage of Lagavulin 16yo acknowledged (it appears they did not anticipate Lagavulin 16yo being such a popular malt 16 years ago), we are now told that Lagavulin is no longer available for the blenders, and that all casks are for single malt bottlings only.

With Lagavulin being very precious with its casks, you would assume that there is less possibility for some of the finer casks to be set aside for the Distillers Edition bottlings.

Is it possible that the malt is spending less time in its second cask? Could it be that PX casks are harder to source now than when the Distillers Edition bottlings were first introduced?

After all, the Distillers Editions of the Classic Malts were launched fairly recently, weren't they? Would I be right to say they were launched in 1998? (Not sure - correct me if I'm wrong).

Whilst five years has elapsed since 1998, the vintages have gone from 1979 to 1986, which is seven years, so somewhere along the line some shortcuts have been introduced.

Any thoughts?

Matured cask
Posts: 5019
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 1:01 am

Postby Lawrence » Fri Nov 07, 2003 8:39 am

Well, you learn something new everyday, I have two bottles of the Lagavulin DM and I never realized they were different, one is the 1980 vintage lgv 4/464 and the other is the 1986, bottled 2002 lgv 4/490. I'll have to wait to determine the differences......

Jeroen Kloppenburg
Silver Member
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 1:01 am

Postby Jeroen Kloppenburg » Wed Nov 12, 2003 9:16 am

New member
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:17 pm

95 points

Postby jsf » Sat Dec 06, 2003 2:42 am


for what it's worth, springbank, some macallans, and perhaps others are scored at 95 points by jackson.


Silver Member
Posts: 494
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 2:01 am

Postby WestVanDave » Sat Dec 06, 2003 6:09 am

Jon & jsf - I think we'll all enjoy Jackson's next edition (deferred into the New Year, I've heard) - which should add tasting notes for some of the more recent versions of the Lag PX...and then some.

I believe Jon may have been using an older editon of the Jackson bible. For example, my 1984 printing scores the Lagavulin 16 at 95 - and the only other mention I can find in that book that comes close is Macallan 25 at a 95 score. The Springbank 1966 rated a 93 and the 30 yr old a 92...

Now leap ahead to the next edition (1999) and the Springbank 25 achieves a 95 as do a host of Macallans (5+).


Return to “Whisky Tastings”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests