|
|
![]() |
#1 |
Haberdasher
![]() |
![]()
Next I hit baggie "C". I'm keeping the last two until after the big reveal.
Disclaimer from cigar "A" and "B" review - I preface by saying I smoke CCs 90% of the time. Smoked tons of NCs for the past 6 or 7 years, but within the past year or more, CCs have the flavor profile I enjoy most, plus I am afforded more skinny to smaller RG smokes that fit my time allotments. A lot of NCs are heavier and spicier than I enjoy as relaxation smokes. I'll post both reviews and will average my scores and give a final summary. Pictures include for each event. Cigar C #1 - After supper, strawberry daiquiri as drink, 1 and 1/2 hours, watching "Next Friday". Punched cut. 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: the look of the cigar - oily, coarse, smooth, dry, light, dark, pretty, ugly, etc... Minimal veins, dark, smooth, semi-oily, maduro-toned stick. Nice triple cap and well-crafted. I like it. Score for aesthetics: 4.4 2) Pre-light Construction: Roll cigar between fingers - soft spots? loose? tight? dense? lightweight? Well rolled? how does it smell? Nice tobacco, barnyard smell. Maybe a little cocoa. Score for Pre-light construction: 4.3 3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked: Does it draw well, does smoke pull through on its own, do soft spots appear after lighting, burnes evenly? smokes hot or cool? What is ash like? color of ash? flaky or solid? Punched well, good draw, tight and dense. Lit well. Score for post-light construction: 4.5 4a) Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3: What does it taste like? Full-bodied, med. or mild? Does it taste earthy, spicy, fruity, vegetal, sweet, rich, harsh, direct, floral, robust, woody, green (haylike), acidic, salty? Is it pleasant or unpleasant? Does it build in flavor and/or complexity as you smoke it? Is it bland, flavorful, complex? Did it get bitter? Initially was warm cocoa. No spice as I could detect. Very smooth. A little wood coming through. Awesome burn with no touchups. I like the maduro-like chocolate profile. Medium body. - 4.5 4b) Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3: Still no spice. Flavors didn't change much from the first third. They do get a little bolder, which is fine. I really like the flavor profile of this stick. While you could call it somewhat one-dimensional, at least it has the cocoa, light woody, and little leather flavors, plus the smoke is creamy in feel. A great NC. Still medium. - 4.6 4c) Flavor and strength – Last 1/3: Still more of the great cocoa maduro flavors. The entire stick smoked well with no runs or touch-ups needed. This time I was digging the monotony. I also like the little to no pepper. I nubbed it and was sad to see it end.- 4.6 Score for flavor and strength: 4.6 5) Aftertaste/Finish: aftertaste is the sensation &/or flavor on you palate after each puff, not the taste left after you finish the cigar. Is it heavy - light? Spicy, cedary, fruity, bitter, hot, grassy? Mild - strong? Pleasant or not? Harsh? A nice pleasant aftertaste. It didn't have too long of a finish. The nice warm cocoa flavors dominated the tongue. Never hot and never bitter. Score for aftertaste: 4.5 6) Aroma: What does it smell like? Good - bad? light or heavy? pervasive - mild? floral, perfumed, grassy, harsh, woodsy, overpowering, unpleasant, magnificent? Aroma was standard. A great evening stick to enjoy with friends. Score for aroma: 4.3 7) General Comments: Are samples consistent? Did you particlarily enjoy of with a certain food or beverage? Did they appeal more at certain time of day? Did it remind you of something? Would you buy them? Sum it up as you would to a friends ("That cigar was awesome!") and give it an overall score. See summary Overall score for the cigar. 26.6/30 (or 89/100 for those that like the base 10 scale) 8) Recommendation: Would you recommend the cigar? Pick one of the following and explain: Not Recommended; Possibly Recommended; Recommended; Highly Recommended See summary ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
__________________
Somebody has to go back and get a chitload of dimes |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Haberdasher
![]() |
![]()
Second smoke of baggie "C". I'm keeping the last two until after the big reveal.
Cigar C #2 - After supper, Apple Pie Moonshine as drink, 1 and 1/2 hours, watching "History of the World, Part I". Punched cut. 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: the look of the cigar - oily, coarse, smooth, dry, light, dark, pretty, ugly, etc... Hardly any surface veins. Beautiful dark and smooth, maduro stick. Nicely applied triple cap and crafted with care. Good-looking stick Score for aesthetics: 4.5 2) Pre-light Construction: Roll cigar between fingers - soft spots? loose? tight? dense? lightweight? Well rolled? how does it smell? Nice tobacco, earthy, light manure smell. You know it was going to be good. Score for Pre-light construction: 4.3 3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked: Does it draw well, does smoke pull through on its own, do soft spots appear after lighting, burnes evenly? smokes hot or cool? What is ash like? color of ash? flaky or solid? Punched well, better draw than the first from the bag, tight and dense. Lit well. Score for post-light construction: 4.5 4a) Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3: What does it taste like? Full-bodied, med. or mild? Does it taste earthy, spicy, fruity, vegetal, sweet, rich, harsh, direct, floral, robust, woody, green (haylike), acidic, salty? Is it pleasant or unpleasant? Does it build in flavor and/or complexity as you smoke it? Is it bland, flavorful, complex? Did it get bitter? Same as the first "C". Nice cocoa flavors with hints of wood (oak), leather, and a little toast. No pepper again, just a creamy, tasty smoke - 4.6 4b) Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3: I'm liking the "C" smokes. It just has that delicious maduro chocolate flavor. It doesn't change much and there are no surprises, but that's fine. The flavor is great and enjoyable. Still medium-bodied. - 4.7 4c) Flavor and strength – Last 1/3: Again, I took this one to the nub. No tar residue, no bitter flavors, never hot and squishy. Just a solid smoke. I do believe this one was better than the first. - 4.7 Score for flavor and strength: 4.7 5) Aftertaste/Finish: aftertaste is the sensation &/or flavor on you palate after each puff, not the taste left after you finish the cigar. Is it heavy - light? Spicy, cedary, fruity, bitter, hot, grassy? Mild - strong? Pleasant or not? Harsh? Great aftertastes! The cocoa profile stays with you. It pairs well with a sweet drink. No nicotine buzz, not curve balls, no surprises. For monotonous, very pleasant. Score for aftertaste: 4.6 6) Aroma: What does it smell like? Good - bad? light or heavy? pervasive - mild? floral, perfumed, grassy, harsh, woodsy, overpowering, unpleasant, magnificent? Nothing to complain about. Lots of smoke to fill the area and the smells were good. Score for aroma: 4.3 7) General Comments: Are samples consistent? Did you particlarily enjoy of with a certain food or beverage? Did they appeal more at certain time of day? Did it remind you of something? Would you buy them? Sum it up as you would to a friends ("That cigar was awesome!") and give it an overall score. See summary Overall score for the cigar. 26.9/30 (or 90/100 for those that like the base 10 scale) 8) Recommendation: Would you recommend the cigar? Pick one of the following and explain: Not Recommended; Possibly Recommended; Recommended; Highly Recommended See summary ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
__________________
Somebody has to go back and get a chitload of dimes |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Haberdasher
![]() |
![]()
Cigar C Summary:
Overall average score for the cigar. 26.8/30 (or 89/100 for those that like the base 10 scale) 7) General Comments: Are samples consistent? Did you particularly enjoy of with a certain food or beverage? Did they appeal more at certain time of day? Did it remind you of something? Would you buy them? Sum it up as you would to a friends ("That cigar was awesome!") and give it an overall score. Right up my alley! This is the NC profile I really like. Maduro, cocoa, woody, leathery, creamy smoke with no pepper - just a nice, relaxing ride. I can't wait to enjoy the two that are left over. This is my favorite so far and the last one better bring out the guns to top "C". 8) Recommendation: Would you recommend the cigar? Pick one of the following and explain: Not Recommended; Possibly Recommended; Recommended; Highly Recommended. I would recommend to anyone that likes this profile. If they do, they won't be disappointed. I'd purchase them for sure.
__________________
Somebody has to go back and get a chitload of dimes |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Have My Own Room
![]() |
![]()
Rubusto C 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: This cigar has a nice wrapper in my opinion, fairly dark, not too many flaws but maybe not a “perfect” appearance either. The wrapper did not seem overly oily on the first few samples which were smoked on cloudy days. The last one had a nice shine to it when the sun hit it. Score for aesthetics: 3.8 2) Pre-light Construction: All of these samples have a solid construction without softspots in all 4 of my samples. I would call these dense but not overly heavy. Score for Pre-light construction: 4.0 3) Post-light Construction/How it smoked: The very first cigar I had out of the four had a tight draw, not completely plugged but a lot tighter than the rest. All of the samples burned very well without the need for a touch up. The ash varied a little form light grey to off white and in all cases looked flakey but didn’t leave a mess of ash flying all over the place. Score for post-light construction: 3.8 (4.0 without the first sample) 4a) Flavor and strength – 1st 1/3: I will start off by saying the first sample had a very tight draw and exhibited a metallic aftertaste that was very prominent throughout the cigar. This taste was not present in the other three cigars. The cigar started off on a mild-medium note with a very smooth oak flavor. This flavor lasted for about the first half inch before it started to transition for me in the last three samples. 4b) Flavor and strength – 2nd 1/3: From the lighter oak/woody flavor I would slowly go into a deeper flavor and fully moved towards the medium side. I would start to get the slight metallic flavor as I got closer to the final third in cigars 2-4. 4c) Flavor and strength – Last 1/3: I all cases the final third for the cigars turned more metallic, burned hotter and became harsh enough that I put down the cigars with about 1 inch or a little less left in all cases. In the end I would set this one down at med-full range. Score for flavor and strength: 3.6 5) Aftertaste/Finish: I would say that the final aftertaste was a little harsh but overall I would tend to put the overall impression as medium wood to earth notes on the finish. Score for aftertaste: 3.5 6) Aroma: Still my hardest category to pick up. I would overal give this a pleasant aroma that was not overpowering. Score for aroma: 3.5 7) General Comments: I would say this is a well constructed cigar from prelight through burn to finish. It tells you when it’s done and that is OK. I think the first cigar was off due to the tight roll, but overall I would say the cigar was consistent. Overall score for the cigar. 3.75 8) Recommendation: I would Recommended this cigar to most people. While not one of my favorites, this cigar still have a lot of good qualities and was enjoyable for me up until the final third. |
![]() |
![]() |