Daniel

Mostly I enjoyed this. Heard the first two movements previously, so I won't comment, but in seeing all three, I think the first movement is the strongest.
Perhaps it is the development in style, as you took so long to finish the piece, but the third movement is certainly different in style to the first.
There are some things about the third movement which I find just somewhat unconvincing. Overall the movement is rather enjoyable, and good -very cleverly worked out, but there are places here and there where the effect is weakened by something.
I can't really explain this any better, but I will point out a couple of things which I think detract from the movement as a whole.

Weak cadences, or cadences which seem contradictory with the phrase structure. Hard to point out any specific examples, but noticeably in the first 20 or so bars.
Along the same lines, I find the transition from bar 4 to 5 rather weak.

Voice leading also seems to weaken the music in some places. Again, just an example:
bar 61 - look at just the violin and the piano left hand (i.e., soprano and bass). Why did you use a Db in the violin? It causes a succession of two tritones between soprano and bass. Then there is a direct fifth between the last note of b.61 and the first note of the next one. These pass along almost unnoticed, due to the speed of the notes, but they are awkward to my ears, and definitely have a deleterious effect on the music.

In any case, the spirit of the music is good - it's thematically very clever, and effective; the problems lie in having too many weak/contradictory cadences, and too much displacement of accents (which is in some places superbly done, but in other cases doesn't work so well).
Most of this could be explained by the fact that your style has progressed since the first movement, and I am perhaps using it as a yardstick, but some things just aren't quite as convincing as they could be.

By the way, there's great economy of part writing here - impressive writing for the instruments.