Review Pass--Reviews

[ashauler]

Well...I knew when I lit cigar #2 it had to be an Opus. Nothing else has that flavor. The only other cigar that is close are the Litto Gomez Small Batch.

Cigar #14...I had no clue as to what it was. It was not a bad cigar. It just lacked much complexity.

I figured you'd nail it when you posted your takes, being the experienced "old" guy and all.

[bigwhiteash]

Ok, here goes my review, (or attempt at a review), of cigars #4 and #9

Cigar #9 (smoked them in this order)

5 X 50 Robusto, maduro wrapper, Very bumpy/toothy, slight yield to finger pressure, but not soft. Cut nicely with the dbl. Guillotine, draw was perfect to my liking, had a strong wood / hay taste. Lit this with a Colibri torch, no problems here.

I really don’t have much to say about this thing. I selected it because it appeared to be a Rocky Patel Edge, which I have enjoyed a few of. I gave it a chance, but it never really delivered in the flavor department. Started out with a burning hay taste, and just stayed there. I let go of it with about 1.5” remaining. UGH!

I’ll be surprised if this thing cost over $3.00



Cigar #4

I chose this one for it’s intriguing shape, 6 X 48 Toro maduro, with a slight bulge in the middle to about 50rg. Kinda looks like a snake that recently ate a rat. Not overly pronounced, just a slight curve. Very oily looking, darker than #9. with a nice triple cap. Looking at the foot, there seems to be a lot of ligero present. Prelight aroma is very sweet, almost overpowering chocolate. Same cut and light as above, although the draw was a little loose for my preference.

This is really not to my liking, the overwhelming sweetness from the prelight stayed on for 2/3 of this smoke, then got a bit harsh. I really prefer spicier cigars. The ash on this was fairly loose, and fairly dark gray for a maduro. Overall, not a BAD cigar, just not in my ballpark. I expected a stronger cigar based on appearance. I did get a slight nic-buzz, but that may be because I smoked these both in a 4 hour period.

I’m going to say this was also in the lower end price range… Maybe $4.00

[ashauler]

Ok, here goes my review, (or attempt at a review), of cigars #4 and #9

Cigar #9 (smoked them in this order)

5 X 50 Robusto, maduro wrapper, Very bumpy/toothy, slight yield to finger pressure, but not soft. Cut nicely with the dbl. Guillotine, draw was perfect to my liking, had a strong wood / hay taste. Lit this with a Colibri torch, no problems here.

I really don’t have much to say about this thing. I selected it because it appeared to be a Rocky Patel Edge, which I have enjoyed a few of. I gave it a chance, but it never really delivered in the flavor department. Started out with a burning hay taste, and just stayed there. I let go of it with about 1.5” remaining. UGH!

I’ll be surprised if this thing cost over $3.00



Cigar #4

I chose this one for it’s intriguing shape, 6 X 48 Toro maduro, with a slight bulge in the middle to about 50rg. Kinda looks like a snake that recently ate a rat. Not overly pronounced, just a slight curve. Very oily looking, darker than #9. with a nice triple cap. Looking at the foot, there seems to be a lot of ligero present. Prelight aroma is very sweet, almost overpowering chocolate. Same cut and light as above, although the draw was a little loose for my preference.

This is really not to my liking, the overwhelming sweetness from the prelight stayed on for 2/3 of this smoke, then got a bit harsh. I really prefer spicier cigars. The ash on this was fairly loose, and fairly dark gray for a maduro. Overall, not a BAD cigar, just not in my ballpark. I expected a stronger cigar based on appearance. I did get a slight nic-buzz, but that may be because I smoked these both in a 4 hour period.

I’m going to say this was also in the lower end price range… Maybe $4.00

Well......here is what you smoked:
#9 Los Blancos maduro ($3-4)
#4 Camacho triple maduro ($10+)

I'm sorry, and surprised, that you had such bad experiences with both smokes.

[bigwhiteash]

well... dang!

didn't really have a bad expierience with #4, just not my preference.

I am surprised at the loosness of draw on the camacho, and the flaky ash. I really expected more based on it's appearance.

anyway... I'm batting 500

[cigarsarge]

I think the Camacho Triple Maduro cigars are a bit over rated. They would fit more into the $5 ranmge.

[Mizicke5273]

I had a triple maduro before, the only thing to me is that there seemed to be a distinct lack of flavor. It was a great cigar going by construction, burn, abundance of smoke, but it was just bland to me. Im gona pick up a 5er soon and let them set a while to see if I have a different experience with them as I quite enjoyed it, except for the no flavor part.

[ReV]

Ok, I've smoked these things; here goes...

#20 (Pairing: Hoegaarden)
Pre-Light: Dark uniform color, small even veins, rich aroma. Firm feel, tightly rolled. The pre-light draw was easy but not loose.
During Smoke: Initial flavor is surprisingly light in contrast to the rich color and aroma of the wrapper pre-light. Burn seems to be fairly even with one minor run. Picks up strength about an inch in, but maintains somewhat mild woodsy flavor. Draw is tighter than what i initially anticipated but remains fairly easy. Flavor has become smoother with medium body and some coffee undertones and some leathery notes. The flavor remains, for the most part, consistent and not all together complex. Developed some slight building spice a few inches in. Ash hung on for three inches. Finish wasn't spectacular, got a little harsh with two inches left even after a purge; but overall was a good cigar with a consistent flavor. I thought it may be a Gurkha at one point in the smoke, but my initial thought was a Torano Exodus Gold. I'll stick with my inital guess that it was a Exodus Gold, so higher end price wise. I gave it a 6/10. Also, i'd like to note that Hoegaarden pairs very well with whatever this stick was. What are these, maybe $6?

#5 (Pairing: Blue Moon)
Pre-Light: Beautiful coloration; rich brown with a few discolorations. Very firm; tightly rolled. Somewhat mild aroma. Evenly spaces small veins with a couple large veins. Overall construction looks good but the wrapper looks a little rough.
Durring Smoke: Initial taste is rich with medium spice. Full flavor with chocolaty notes. Burn is mostly even but a little lopsided. The spice builds somewhat, but the flavor remains consistent and rich throughout. Ash held on for an inch and a half. I gave this cigar a 9/10, and while i enjoyed it alot, my instinct is that it may be a Don Kiki Brown Label, so i'm going to guess it is in the lower price range. Around $3 or $4.


thanks for setting this up, i enjoyed it.