[jledou]

Rubusto D review

Review Format

0.0 - 2.0 = poor/inferior quality

2.1 - 2.9 = fair

3.0 - 3.5 = good

3.5 - 4.5 = excellent

4.6 - 5.0 = superior

1) Aesthetics:

These cigars looked beautiful. They had a dark smooth wrapper with a little bit of the bumps from the binder showing through probably do too the thinness of the wrapper.

Score for aesthetics: 4.0

2) Pre-light Construction:

All four samples that I smoked were solid, dense cigars without any softspots. I felt like I could have knocked someone out with these cigars given how solid they were.

The first time I have ever related chewing tobacco with a cigar, but on the prelight draws I got the same sweet tobacco taste as Redman chewing tobacco.

Score for Pre-light construction: 4.5

3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked:

Since draw is noted in the Post-Light construction, this is where these samples fell down for me. The first sample had a very tight draw, smokable but very tight and got tighter as the cigar went from the 2/3 point to the 3/3 point. The second sample had a tight draw but not nearly as bad as the first one. It did swell and get to be undrawable in the last inch but performed OK until then. The third sample actually had a normal draw throughout and burned like a normal cigar all the way through. The fourth sample unfortunately went right in line with the first sample. After clipping it I found the draw once again to be very tight and it stayed tight to maybe getting a little bit tighter all of the way through the cigar.

The burn seemed hot for most of the time although these would go out if not regularly puffed on. The ash was one of the most solid ashes I have ever seen. I literally had to knock it off rather than just let it fall off or tap off.

Score for post-light construction: 2.5

4a) Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3:

The flavors to me were very muted but in saying that we still didn’t get along. I mainly got harsh mixed earthy and woody flavors. I seemed like maybe the strength to this cigar which I would move to the full category would get in the way of letting the flavors come out. The harshness seemed like a little bit of under fermented tobacco or maybe just a little too much ligero.

4b) Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3:

The second third really brought on more of the first. As we were moving out of the second third a little bit of the harness started to go away but still the muted wood and earthness was the best I was able to pull out of this cigar.

4c) Flavor and strength – Last 1/3:

The final third was probably the least harsh to me, but still didn’t bring out anything I would write home about.

Score for flavor and strength: 2.8

5) Aftertaste/Finish:

The aftertaste is something I would describe as harsh and heavy and just was not pleasant for me.

Score for aftertaste: 2.6

6) Aroma:

I would say I liked the aroma better than liked the flavor on the cigar. Maybe a woodsy/tobacco aroma that was a little stronger than the other cigars but not too heavy.

Score for aroma: 3.0

7) General Comments:

Needless to say from above but this cigar and I did not hit it off between the construction issues and the harshness present to me in the flavors. I would describe this cigar as unbalanced in flavor and would not be something I go out to find.

Overall score for the cigar. 2.8

8) Recommendation:

I would not recommend this cigar. From the tight draws on the construction and the unbalanced strength to flavor on this cigars I think you can get a lot more out of other cigars.