Here are the cigars you smoked:
A- Padilla 1932 robusto 9.62
B- Cusano LXI robusto 4.57

I'm surprised at the performance of the Padilla, but glad you enjoyed the Cusano. Thanks for playing.

Quote Originally Posted by derivation View Post
Here we go.

Both of the cigars I smoked were manduro robustos. About there is where their similarities ended. I smoked them both on my patio on two consecutive nights. It was a little chilly, but not much wind on either night.

Cigar A
The only interesting characteristic of this cigar from the eye was being a bit veiney. The prelight draw was a little sweet.

After lighting the cigar up the sweetness continued, but there really wasn't any flavor to the cigar at all. The smoke had no density to it, and the cigar as a whole really lacked strength or depth. It also tunneled a few times and required relights. To say I was unimpressed with this cigar would be an understatement.

Cigar B
This cigar was a little oily. Prelight I noticed spice and honey.

After lighting the cigar the spice and honey continued. The smoke was a great and I felt like I was really smoking a cigar again. The cigar burned nice and slow with no problems. I found that the flavor of the cigar didn't change much over time, but that didn't both me at all. This was a medium strength cigar. This cigar was a great smoke, and I would definitely smoke more of them.

Obviously, I think that Cigar B was the more expensive cigar. I should note, however, that Cigar B got an extra day in my humidor so perhaps some of the burn issues between cigar A and B could be related to that.