Review These - Reviews

**WOXOF** · 12-30-2007, 11:07 PM

Great reviews and exactly my opinion of both cigars.

Cigar #1: Angel 100, MSRP is around $2 but I paid less on Cbid.

Cigar #2: Montecristo EL 2003, MSRP around $10 if I recall. Got a couple more resting still.

**slcraiders** · 12-31-2007, 10:06 AM

Thanks Chris. I have a couple of those Angel 100's (made by Oliva I think) sitting in the tupperdore with loose singles.

That Monte EL was an absolute treat down to the final ash!

**WOXOF** · 01-01-2008, 12:22 AM

Originally Posted by slcraiders

Thanks Chris. I have a couple of those Angel 100's (made by Oliva I think) sitting in the tupperdore with loose singles.

That Monte EL was an absolute treat down to the final ash!

I tried to stump you with the wrappers. The Angel 100 construction is great and the Monte is pretty dark for an ISOM. It's good to see your palate was up to the task. You had me worried when you said you had a cold.

The Angel 100 is actually made by NATSA in honor of Angel Oliva with 100% Oliva Tobacco. The one you smoked was the 1961. 1961 was the year that the Oliva family established a tobacco farm in Honduras in anticipation of the U.S. Embargo against Cuba.

Linky courtesy of ashauler.

**ashauler** · 01-10-2008, 03:15 PM

Smoked #1 today on my lunch hour.
This stick is a robusto size, approx 5" x 50 or so. Wrapper is a fairly dark natural, darker than cigar #2, but not a maduro. Construction is good, the stick feels firm with only a slight yield to pressure between the fingers. It appears to have at least a double cap, perhaps a third but I can't quite tell. The cut was uneventful and the pre-light draw was just about right for me, somewhat firm, but not an eye-popper.

It took to the bic pretty well and was easily lit. Initial draws produced some peppery spice and a pronounce leathery flavor. The aroma from the stick was very pleasant. The pepper seemed to dominate the flavor for the first third of the smoke, then the leather seemed to be taking the lead. At about the 1/2 way mark the pepper moved way to the background and the leather flavor with some added earthiness seemed to take over. It remained this way until th end. Very interesting smoke with this change up.

The ash held well and was nice and firm for the entire smoke. It broke off cleanly each time I ashed, and the ember showed only a slight cone, perhaps due to my smoking speed. I would place this in the med-full strength and body categories. I did not notice a significant nic hit.

I'm not even going to begin to guess the manufacturer of this stick, though the profile seemed familiar. It was an enjoyable smoking experience and I would certainly pick up a 5er of this stick for further exploration.

I'm gonna try to smoke #2 on tomorrow's lunch break.

**ashauler** · 01-17-2008, 02:17 PM

First off my apologies to the board for the delay in completing this.

I smoked #2 today on my lunch hour, accompanied by a nice cup of black coffee. This stick was lighter in shade than #1 and was approximately the same size (maybe a bit bigger ring but not alot). On inspecting the cigar, I noticed that the foot was "uneven" with the filler in the middle extending farther out of the end of the cigar than the edges, kind of wedge shaped. The wrap of the wrapper leaf was very evident and the feel of the stick was somewhat "bumpy". It was less firm than #1, but not extremely squishy.

After I cut it, there was a depression in the middle of the cut end....almost as if the bunch was uneven in length...extending longer in the middle at the foot, but short at the head. The light was easy and the burn was even throughout the smoke. The ash was not flaky, however it did not snap off the cigar and crumbled in the ashtray pretty easily. The ash also appeared to be very much whiter in the middle of the ash vs the edges and developed somewhat of a cone.

The flavor was straight up tobacco with some leather overtones. When exhaled through the nose it burned like a

. The flavor didn't change much for me over the course of the stick. The draw as a little loose for my preference, and consequently I had to keep slowing down on my draws to keep it cool. This was a decent smoke, but not as eventful and interesting imho as #1.....therefore, based on that and the construction differences I will guess #1 as the more expensive cigar.

Thank you slcraiders for these two smokes, I enjoyed them both.