Review These - Reviews

[drew_goring]

Well, after much delay, here are my reviews:

#1: Dark Maduro Wrapper, fairly long (~6") 50ish RG. Nice draw. Slightly tighter than average, but that's how I like 'em. Lit it up and intantly got (What I think ) is that Padron taste. Very nice. Medium-full bodied...not experienced enough to pick out the individual flavors, but I am sure that it is a padron. I am guessing the x000 series, whatever is the torpedo.

#2: Darker Maduro Wrapper. Kind of a unique shaped tip for a torp. Cut it and damn...the draw was not unlike a drinking straw. It was fairly mild which suprised me. I just couldn't get into it due to the loose draw. I have no idea what this one is, but I am going to guess that it is a Thompsons bundled smoke.

Thank Dan for letting me do this

[CgarDan]

Well Andrew #1 was the more expensive of the 2 so you got that right, although I have to say boht are great smokes

#1 AVO - 80th
#2 La Gloria Cubana Reserve Figurado

[slcraiders]

StJohnRoe,

Smoked the gars yesterday and here is my take. Thanks again for sending these and keeping the thread alive after someone slacked:

Both smokes were approx in the robusto size range-

#1 was the shorter and lighter of the two with a natural wrapper and decent construction. Nice and firm cigar with a tight draw that loosened nicely as it went on. Hints of cedar, but nothing else stood out other than plain good tobacco. Consistant, but lacking complexity. Beautiful white ash and even burn with a pleasant burning aroma. Reminded me of a Arturo Fuente Chateau Fuente Natural. Mild to Med strength. Good cigar all in all, but not the best, imho.

#2 was about a 1/4 of an inch longer with a medium brown wrapper. Noticeable small veigns. This was also a tightly packed firm cigar, but the draw was terrific. The ash was an ugly dark grey, and the cigar released clouds of thick white smoke. Initial hints of leather with a hint of spicieness. The spice picked up as the smoke progressed. Some initial burning issues that quickly corrected. On the Med side of Full. Great cigar that I would definately smoke again. Due to the flavor profile, I would guess this was a RASS.

I am probably wrong, but I would venture to say that #2 was the more expensive of the set???

[stjohnroe]

James,

Spot on for both cigars:
1: Fuente Chat Nat
2: RASS
I bow to your superior senses and taste.

Stjohn

[slcraiders]

Dayam! Very Cool!

[CgarDan]

Wow James that is amazing

[heftysmokes]

Holy shit!
Well done, SLC!

[Newfie]

snip....
I am probably wrong, but I would venture to say that #2 was the more expensive of the set???

You sell yourself short for no reason James. Nice job identifying these 2 smokes.

[WOXOF]

un-fucking-believable!

[SmokinDVM]

We're not worthy, we're not worthy.

[mauied1101]

Well, let's assume that SLC didn't do the last reviews so I don't have a bar to bench against. That being said, smoked the first 'gar today:

Cigar #1:

Light wrapper/Connecticut-shade looking. Smelled great, felt great. Once lit, had a wonderful, full white, almost opaque smoke. Tasted a little nutty, nice mild flavor, got a bit spicy toward the 2/3 mark. Great construction - ash held out for a couple of inches before I felt the need to flick it. Looked and tasted very, very close to a Montecristo White Toro.

Cigar #2:

Alrighty now... cigar had a dark wrapper - wasn't oily, solid construction, slightly veiny. Smelled good, if a bit light. Lit it with my creme brulee torch (lighter of choice) - even burn (very nice), full smoke, not quite as full as cigar #1. Tasted light, as if there was a hint of flavor, but no actual taste. This was pretty consistent through about 1/2 the stick. The smoke smelled fuller (better), but the taste wasn't quite there. Very mild stick. Couldn't tell you what it was.

Gonna guess that stick #1 was the more expensive one. Would love to know what they were.

Cheers