Review These - Reviews

[ashauler]

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.

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.

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...........

[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.

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.

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...........

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.

[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.

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.

[Desert Rat]

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.

[sprangalang]

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

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.