Bump - Finally got to the second cigar.
Printable View
Bump - Finally got to the second cigar.
Cigar #1
A beautifull toro the color of dark chocolate. The cap looked a bit rough. The smell was ok but not spectacular. Construction looked qute good.
The cut was almost effortless and the wrapper stayed perfectly intact. Pre light draw was a bit tight but no signs of the cigar being plugged.
It took nicelly to the light and a pleasant aroma hit my nostrils. Started out with very smooth and creamy smoke full of chocolaty notes and some leathery undertones. This continued for about half of the stick and the rest was just as pleasant with a little spice showing up every once in a while. All throughout not even a note of harshness :smiley20:
Burn was also perfect with tight greyish white ash. The flavor started to disappear with about an inch or so left and I decided to let this one go out before my enjoyment would pass.
Overall a very nice experience and I think this was a 5 Vegas Serie A. At least I had a very similar experience with the last serie A that I had.
Review on # 2 to follow shortly ( hopefully sometime tom )
Good review Dan, I 'll let you know what it was after the second review.
Here is what you smoked: Stick 1 is a Padron 1964 and Stick 2 is a RP1992.Quote:
Originally Posted by WOXOF
Cigars # 2
Also a toro sized cigar. This one had a beautifull brown wrapper ( perhaps corojo ) that was oily with almost indistinguishable veins. The aroma was exceptionally pleasant and i knew I would enjoy this one.
Cut it and lit it up quite easilly. The draw was perfect and I got hit with a taste of spices. The spice was not overwhelming like some cigars have but rather just enough and smoth as well. So every puff begged for another. Burn was perfect with tight ash.
There were also some cedary notes and someting else I can't quite put my finger on.
Overall an awesome experience
I loved both cigars and would love to have both in my regular rotation if the price is right.
If IU had topickbetween the 2 as far as price I would say that #2 is more expensive.
Well can't wait to find out what they are !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
O.K., Now I officially feel stupid. Maybe the chilly(shitty) weather had something to do with it. Is it possible the Brazilias and Antanos have fried my taste buds? At least I picked which one was more expensive. That was my first Padron '64. I have another '64 and a R.P. Vintage '92 in the humi. I will have to have a do-over under more suitable conditions.Quote:
Originally Posted by drew_goring
Sorry Paul, thanks for the wonderful smokes though.
Cigar #1 was a Gurkha Master Select Maduro. I paid $10 each for a couple of these at a local B&M a while back. They can be had for much less online.Quote:
Originally Posted by CgarDan
Quote:
Originally Posted by CgarDan
Cigar #2 was a Cubita SMS. I got a bundle of 20 of these from cbid for $30. A helluva deal imho.
Unlike my latest attempt, those were great reviews Dan. I would definately agree with you.
Ok now I feel really stupid :smiley29: :smiley9:
At least now I can pick up a Cubita SMS and make it my daily go to smoke for $30 a bundle :smiley36:
Hey St JOhn did you get a chance to smoke the sticks I sent you
don't worry about it - I got 'em backwards too. It still blows me away that slsraiders nailed his - not one, but both, not only which was more expensive, but named the fucking sticks! sheesh.Quote:
Originally Posted by CgarDan
Pure luck. This was my third go round. On the first review pass, I managed to identify one of the cigars and which was more expensive. Round two, no recognition of the smokes and I think I got the more expensive part wrong as well. I amazed even myself with that last one. Maybe it was just those two cigars. I have smoked several of each and the hunch came so easily as I was smoking them. Bizarre, nonetheless. I say this because I could smoke the same type of cigar from the same box just at different times or with different surroundings and they can taste quite a bit different???Quote:
Originally Posted by basil
I think I will not do this pass going forward. I want to retire on top of my game...
Dan, hell of a busy at the moment, but this is at the top of my todo list. If the weather is reasonable tomorrow I plan on going for a long walk with the dogs and smokin one of the monsters that you sent. Review soon.
Cheers
Stjohn
Quote:
Originally Posted by CgarDan
Finally got a chance to spark up one of these and I decided to start with stick #2.
Curchill like in size (7") but hard to determine the true ring guage do to a triangular cross section. Lovelly colarado wrapper with a matt finish and fairly evident veins.
Popped the cap with a double guilotine and the pre light draw was good, not to free, not to tough. Slightly dusty under the cap, but that was easily solved with moistening from the lips.
Took my time to get a nice healthy and even burn and then set off on a walk with the dogs.
Initially this cigar was a bit of a beast, dry and harsh. This lasted for the first inch or so, however as the stick warmed up a more pleasant body started showing through.
The first third mainly tobacco with an overtaste of liquorice, reminiscent of the Sancho Panza Double Maduro.
The second third added a nice mollasses flavor to the mix and the smoke became a lot more juicy.
The last third of this cigar settled into a nice leather and pepper combo.
For the most part an even burn, though about half way it started tunnelling but quickly recovered. Right at the end developed a major pair of antlers, but nothing bad enough to spoil the smoke.
Not a bad smoke for an hour and a half.
All in all, OK but I wouldnt travel far or pay much to smoke one.
These sticks arrived sometime last week while I was in Cuba, and my daughter opened the "package from the UK" per my instructions and laid it to rest in my coolidor. Last night things slowed down so I got a chance to smoke both, back to back with some time in between.
CIGAR # 1:
This was a very nicely constructed ciger, Petite Corona size (~ 4" X 40) with a medium brown wrapper that was very smooth & oily feeling with no prominent veins. The cap looked almost perfect and snipped off easily and cleanly with my Xikar revealing a very nice roll pattern. The pre-light draw was almost perfect with flavours reminding me of many of the cigars I smoked in Cuba last week.
It lit easily and initial impressions were a little harsh, but that's possibly because I wasn't expecting (or ready for) either the amount of smoke or the power in this little beast. . It settled down to a nice, strong, flavourful smoke after the first 1/2 inch or so.
The burn was a little wonky on this, but easily self-corrected. The ash was on the light side of med-gray with a little flaking but held it's shape very well.
1/2 way found the flavours of Cubans (cedar & leather) very prominent, but the strength seemed a little milder with still a wonderful amount of smoke for a cigar of this size.
Getting to the end, the strength picked up a bit again, but still a very smooth smoke. It started burning my lips so I let it go out. This smoke lasted 25 minutes.
Cigar # 2:
Another Petite Corona size, ~ 4-1/4" X 42 with a wrapper slightly darker then #1, and a little rougher with some veins showing. It also had one tiny white spot about 3/4" from the foot. This one also had a near perfect cap that snipped cleanly to once again reveal a nice roll pattern. The prelight draw on this one was tighter, but not to the point of being uncomfortable and also showed some "Cuban" flavour characteristics.
Lit easily, and with the tighter draw, I found it milder with less smoke. It showed a much cleaner burn than the other with no hint of even needing a correction. The ash was slightly darker, but smoother and firmer than #1.
At 1/2 way, it seemed like it was going to plug, but after a few more puffs, the draw settled out again. The flavours became more pronounced at this point and started to become a little stronger with more smoke. It strengthened close to being harsh by the end of the smoke. This stick lasted 35 minutes.
OVERALL:
Here's a picture of the nubs side by side with corresponding caps. #1 is on the left and this picture doesn't really give the slight colour difference justice.
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i1...ewThese002.jpg
Dare I say that I think both these cigers were Cuban in origin?? I thoroughly enjoyed both, but I have to say I enjoyed #1 more, mainly because I liked the draw better. Both had their good points, but I would have to give #1 a slightly higher mark. I don't know if I was sent two ISOMs to play with my skull or not, and maybe neither is Cuban, but I would buy either as a short smoke (depending on price, of course). In spite of my preference, I may have to say #2 may be the higher priced smoke.
So, what are they??
I can't wait!
Newf:Quote:
Originally Posted by Newfie
All cuban, but not intentional to screw with you mind.
#1 Cohiba Siglo1 (apr $9)
#2 Partagas Short (apr $5.50)
To be honest I think that the cohiba is overpriced, but it still is a nice cigar. The cohiba might have been a bit young.
Great reviews, Jim.:smiley20:
Thanks James.Quote:
Originally Posted by slcraiders
Cool, I'm not losing it!!! I figured at first the #1 was a Monte Cristo, but I've never had a small MC with a nice draw. I find 'em too tight. I didn't think of the Party Short for #2 because of the "milder" start.
Well Jim has put me to shame, both with the quality and promptness of his review, not sure if this is going to help my case much either.
Crappy weather has kept me from smoking this stick (#1) for a while, but finally the clouds clear and I am able to clip the cap from this churchill (7⅛" 46(?) RG), again a lovelly colarado maduro wrapper with an easy pre-light draw.
First draw on this after lighting gave me an almost sweet (burnt sugar) flavour and plenty of body, but this did not last long. For the most of the cigar I got leather and pepper and a lot of well bodied smoke. The stick burnt incredibly well and easily dealt with a sip on the smoke every three to five minutes, such an even burn circle.
As I came into the last two inches the smoke became a bit sour and acrid, and I stubbed with an 3/4 inch left.
All in all a very nice smoke, definately in the medium to full range as it left me feeling kind of full.
On the comparison between the two cigars, I would have to say that i prefer #1 as it just seems to fit my taste range better, and given a better day with my pallate I think that I could have really got a lot out of it. Given the distinctive shape of #2 I guessing that it was a Trilogy and the cheaper cigar, but if it was what my research led me to believe, then it is damn good value for money.
Thanks for the opportunity Dan and I look foward to learning what these sticks were.
Great revews man :smiley20:
You are right on the money with #2 -- Trilogy Corojo ( although not the best cigar out there, still a very good deal for the money IMO )
#1 was in fact the more expensive one AVO maduro. I also agree that it is a very pleasant smoke and I am glad you enjoyed it
:smiley20:
Review These From Newfie
Ok well I started the review these today I started with #1 it was a short cigar about 5" with a small ring gauge it snipped really well it lit kinda hard at first the draw was tight and the burn was a little uneven for me at the start the taste was not real good at first then about the second half it really started to develop and burn evenly but really it was over to quick for me as far as what kind of cigar it was I would have to guess some kind of Cohiba I am not a real big fan of short small cigars as far as rating this I would have to say on a scale of 1-10 I would have to give it a 4 I will post #2 as soon as get a chance to review it
DUDE!! What's up. Still waiting for the second review!!!:smiley17:
Man its been to cold here I promise I will do it as soon as I can
Say what??:smiley3:Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNakedGun
You're in fuckin' Florida Dude!!! Come up here and puff one with Drew or me, or Bill or Tyler in the frozen North East, or .........
:smiley17: :smiley42: :smiley8:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNakedGun
lmao!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Newfie
Well when your used to 80s and 90s and 50s in the winter 30 and lower is a little too cold but I will do my best to finish the review this weekend
Sorry this second one took so long guys
#2 Review These From Newfie
Ok this cigar was was about 51/2" long this one snipped really well the draw was great from the beging the burn was fine it started with a spicey flavor and stayed that way through the entire smoke I would also say this is some ISOM but its hard for me to tell without a band I really liked this cigar and would say it was the more expensive of the 2 this is one I would deffinately have again
# 1 Review These From Newfie
Ok well I started the review these today I started with #1 it was a short cigar about 5" with a small ring gauge it snipped really well it lit kinda hard at first the draw was tight and the burn was a little uneven for me at the start the taste was not real good at first then about the second half it really started to develop and burn evenly but really it was over to quick for me as far as what kind of cigar it was I would have to guess some kind of Cohiba I am not a real big fan of short small cigars as far as rating this I would have to say on a scale of 1-10 I would have to give it a 4 I will post #2 as soon as get a chance to review it
Thanks for the reviews Pal, but you were a little off on the more expensive one.
Cigar #1:
Romeo y Julieta Coronitas en Cedros (ISOM)
Cigar #1:
Romeo y Julieta Cedros Delux #2 (Dominican)
Cigar # 1 From TheNakedGun
Dark brown wrapper about 48RG 5". Nothing special about constuction average looking slightly vieny. Prelight draw offered almost no restriction at all. My initial though was this is going to burn fast and hot. Wrapper tasted sweet almost as if flavored. Lit up fine. 1st few draws all I could taste was something very sweet off the wrapper and nothing defining from the draw. surprising ash was tight and firm. 1/2 way thru I started getting hint of some definition nothing special and still over whelmed by wrapper sweetness. Last 1 1/2 or so it was an okay tasting stick probably from the nicotine build up.
Cigar # 2 From TheNakedGun
Light brown wrapper nicely constructed firm but not to tight. Clipped cleanly, didnt give away anything on prelight draw. Lit nicely and right of the bat I knew (at least I think I knew) this was the better stick. Creamy taste hints of nut and leather as best as I can determine. A much more complex stick. Burned perfectly. Taste became more defined but still cool creamy draw. Smoked nicely right down to the hub.
Conclusions:
Cigar # 1 ---- Cheapy
Cigar # 2 ---- The more expensive stick
that is funnyQuote:
Originally Posted by Newfie
to you sprangalang......usps first class DC# 9101010521297784633083. Enjoy them, and I look forward to your review.
Quint You are absolutely right
#1 Flor De Olivia Natural
#2 Montecristo RothChilde
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quint
Review stick #1 from Quint
Torpedo shaped, approx. 6 X 50. Light brown wrapper, small veins. The cigar was very firm and I couldn't feel any soft spots. The cut was easy, and the pre-light draw was fine. The light was easy and the burn started off well, however, within the first 1/4" the wrapper split from the foot directly towards the cap end about 1" in length. The flavor was good, and was medium in strength to me. The splitting problem with the wrapper continued throughout the smoke, and really made it un-smokable with about 1/2 of the stick left. The ash was pretty flaky. This cigar got softer and softer as I smoked it, and appeared to be swelling and bulging somewhat. Seems like I was so engrossed with the wrapper problems and correcting the burn issues it created that I didn't really notice anything special with the flavor of the stick.:smiley13:
Review stick #2 from Quint
Same shape and size as #1, but the wrapper was a darker shade of brown. Some veins, with a couple that ran almost the entire length of the smoke. The cigar was not as firm pre-light as #1 but the construction looks good. Cut was easy with a good draw that was a little looser than I usually like, but not too loose. Light was easy, and the burn was fantastic throughout the smoke. This may be the most even-burning stick that I have had to date. The flavor was fuller than #1, more robust and I think stronger than #1. The ash was salt and pepper and very firm; I finally ashed it about 1 1/2" in, but it would have held longer. I enjoyed this smoke.:smiley1:
My guess:
#1 Lower $
#2 Higher $
The burn and wrapper problems with #1 are what led me to my guess. I suppose that I could have just gotten an unlucky example of a good stick, since based on the initial appearance, firmness of construction, etc.....I was guessing that #1 was more expensive.....then I smoked them.
I'm ready for my public humiliation...........:smiley23:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashauler
Sorry to hear about your problems with #1 I wonder if it was change in climate that effected the stick.
#1 was a Monty # 2
#2 was a Cusano Cuban (supposed to be a Cohiba knock-off)
I suspect your correct in that the wrapper problems influenced your guess. You might want to let the others sit on your humi for a while and let them stablize before smoking. Sorry about the Monty.
No need to apologize, you are probably right that the climate change had something to do with it. I suspected that #1 was the more expensive since it initially appeared to have superior construction and was much firmer than #2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quint
I am disappointed in myself for not recognizing the CC. I have smoked a couple of these and enjoy them, I even have a couple of robusto's in the humi right now. I've never had a Cohiba, so I can't offer any comparison between the two, but the CC, imho, is a good solid value priced smoke.
Thanks Sprangalang for the excellent review cigars and the extra riders!
Sampling these two cigars is what makes this thread so much fun. I have had neither one of these, and the contrast between the two was amazing. Both were Torps, one with a claro wrapper and the other maduro.
#1 Slightly box pressed torp with a toothy claro wrapper. Burned fine with a fluffy greyish ash that was crumbly. Tons of smoke!
Spicy from the get go, the cigar was a bundle of spice, with a little bitter woodiness. Kinda light and airy body, short on finish. I'm gonna guess a Sumatra wrapper for the spice, but I didn't taste the saltyness I usually get from sumatra. Had to be a little Honduran in the cigar for the bitterness. (Bitter as in a taste, not a bad tarry flavor).
Pretty consistant from start to finish, this one is a real change of pace for me. I'd smoke one of these once in awhile, not by the box.
#2 Huge black torp with a shiny slightly oily sheen to the wrapper. Burned fine with a beautiful off-white ash, tight as a drum. The ash fell off like breaking a roll of quarters. Draw was a little firmer than I like, but very smokeable.
I'll go out on a limb and call this a Nicaraguan puro. Very slight sweetish taste in the maduro, and a rich tobacco flavor. Medium-full body, short finish.
The cigar grew in intensity as it burned which I liked, and then got a little tarry towards the end. I think I might have heated the cigar a little due to the firm draw. Overall, this cigar was better than a Padron #000, but nowhere near a PAM.
Both cigars were a taste treat. Like I said, I would buy a fiver of #1 and throw it in my humi for a spice break. To be fair to #2, I would like to try a smaller vitola, crank the Rh down a shade, and try it again.
Excellent reviews, man!
From your review of #2, it seems you thought #2 was the higher priced cigar? In which case you would be correct!
I was trying to get a closer looking and smoking pair. So I guess they were drastically different. Oh well. Sorry about the Rh on the the #2. My B&M tends to run a little wet. I should have mentioned you may want to dry box for a day or two.
Anyway, great, job!
#1: Nic 3000 Torp
#2: CAO MX2
:smiley4: :smiley20:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert Rat
Ashauler, those were some fine smokes. I enjoyed both very much. As for determining which was the more expensive, I will have to take a shot in the dark.
These both sat in my humi for a while, about a week, at a nice 62 to 65%.
#1
Natural wrapper robusto, 5x50. Very firm and well consructed. Some veins, not shiny.
The cut, separated the ring a little, but it re-adhered with a little moisture no problem. Pre light draw - a bit on the tight side, but still good. Alert - spice detected pre light. :smiley15:
I lit it with the toast and blow method, completely glowing foot before the first draw. Spicy! :smiley1: Toasty spice from the git-go. Wow, a bit of burn on the nose. Oil around the ember. A great ligero kick, the aroma was just fantastic. Spicy white pepper, toasty flavors, maybe caramel. Occasionally a slighly sweet flavor, but very subtle. Clean finish in the first half. Wrapper split slightly, but not a catastrophe. Burn was a little uneven, but never got out of control. Not favoring one side, just had kind of a jagged edge. Ash was a darker shade of grey, with a white center. Last half, strong ligero scent, peppery notes abound, with coffee flavors.
Some people would consider this cigar as harsh, but I really enjoyed it. The spicy taste and aroma was just kick ass. It had some nose burn and when I inadvertantly inhaled a wisp, it about knocked me out. I nubbed the hell out of it.
#2
5 1/4 x 50 robusto. Darker wrapper, but not a maduro, I don't think. Some light spots,veins, but well constructed. Nice and firm. Smells good, hint of chocolate. Toothy wrapper, some goose-bumps.
The cut, ring separated a bit, but stuck back on with moisture. Pre light draw, nice and easy.
Lit with the same method as on #1. First puff, I was rewarded with a ton of smooth white smoke. Lots of flavor, rich earthy toasty flavors. Mottled grey ash. The burn was uneven throughout the smoke, the cone was off-center, but it never got silly with a canoe or anything, and no tunneling. Huge smoke volume, this baby filled my garage with smoke. Every draw resulted in lots of smoke. The smoke was very creamy, big fat smoke rings, and what a great flavor. Rich, nutty, smooth. Easy on the nose, no choke on the slight inhale. Leathery notes at the end, delicious, I did not want it to end. Nubbed the hell out of it.
This was a very well balanced smoke. Great full taste.
I would buy both of these, I enjoyed them both immensely.
As for guessing the price that is difficult. Both cigars had great attributes. I guess #2 is the higher priced one.
Thanks again Jamie, I enjoyed them both. :smiley20:
Jeff
First off, let me apologize to all for missing these great reviews for this long !!:smiley6: I don't know how I did that, but sorry.
I'm glad you enjoyed the smokes Jeff , I like both of them as well. the smokes were:
Smoke #1 La Aurora Preferidos Robusto $9.95 at the b/m
Smoke #2 Excalibur 1066 merlin $3.50 at the b/m
jamie
Oh man, I knew it. :smiley12: I had a feeling it was #1. That kind of oomph comes at a price. :smiley20:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashauler
Sorry for the delay but the New Years was pretty busy here.
I will do these reviews in real time.
Stick # 1:
Looks like a solidly constructed stick with a triple cap. (Cuban ? ) Smelling the foot produced a nice aroma. Wrapper is connecticutr shade color. Looks like it is packed heailly so could be a bit tight on the draw.
Cut was effortless. Pre light draw was very easy I guess no tightness in the draw on this one. Even the prelight draw hit me with spice.
Light it up.
Right away I got hit with peppery spice. After a few puffs I am starting to have doubts that this is a Cuban. Another thing that makes me lean in that directin is the ring size a little too big for a regular Cuban. Also I tend to notice more notes reminiscent of Conn shade wrappers. So far it seems a little one dimensional just peppery taste, although I do have to say no harshness on this one. The ash is grayish white and flaky.
One 1/3 through now. This cigar is a little too light for me. I doubt it has any NIC tobacco in it as well. Perhaps a DOM puro.
2/3 the pepper is gone now its more leathery and plain tobacco that is actually a bit sweet now.
into the last 1/3 now. Taste is earthy and sweet with some pepper creeping back.
Overall impression it's a nice cigar for those who like milder - medium body. It turned out to have enough comlexity to keep one interested. Still doubt its a Cuban but probably not a bad Dom perhaps an Ashton
Review # 2 to follow tom