I hate to say this, but I’ve just enjoyed a Trinidad (D.R.) Robusto. First off, I wanted to hate this cigar, because I tend to hate the fact that it is a rip off of the Cuban marque, which I adore and enjoy to no end. I am not a fan of the NC market stealing Cuban brands, even if the blenders are the originals (not in this case). I hate it even more when NC makers use post revolution Cuban brand names, and even more when they rip off the Cuban band style! That said…
This cigar is the closet thing I’ve ever tasted to a Montecristo (Cuban) #3 or #4 from outside Cuba. First of all it’s smooth as all hell. No bite, no bitterness. It also maintains the subtle fruity / nutmeg/ anise notes that I love, averaging out to the slightly tangy nature that I find in my staple Montes. I don’t know what to think, perhaps I’m going crazy. But this cigar was very good if not excellent.
This cigar had about 5 mo. of time in my 70% humidor and that’s the RH I started it at. The draw was firm, but it did not hinder it at all. Medium throughout, the finish was short – I’d prefer it to be longer, but that aside, very good. The fruity notes increase through the smoke, with antique-cedar and a sweetness that I cannot identify on the finish during the last 1/3. Perfect burn.
I’ll have to try some more of course, but I’m impressed and surprised. Has anyone else tried these???
I can no longer say "nothing tastes like a Montecristo!" because this honestly did, very much, with perhaps more sweetness in the nose and less earth and body. Not at all "hearty and gutsy," as retailers are remarking (I just looked)...mine was smooth, refined, and delicious, to say the least.
Taken totally off-guard, I'm surprised by this otherwise unremarkable-seeming cigar! I hope it wasn't a fluke.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: aphexafx,
-aphexafx
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
I had a Trinidad Lonsdale a few weeks ago. It had about 10 months age at 65% RH. IMO it s_cked. The Honduran & Dominican part of the filler was very acrid to me. A taste I did not like at all. It also canoed on me to the point where I had to put it down at about the half-smoked point. I *very rarely* don't finish a smoke.
There are very few Dominican's that I like. Ashton and Arturo Fuente are probably the only two. I'm a Nicaraguan puro kinda guy.
Originally posted by Extensioncord: A good smoke? Sure. Resembles a Montecristo? Not in any way, shape or form that I can think of. Except perhaps that it is made of tobacco.
Mine did resemble a Montecristo, I can't stress that enough. And I average about a box of Monte's a month, #3's and #4's mostly.
Like I said, though, it could have been a fluke!
-aphexafx
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
Originally posted by SteveSur: I had a Trinidad Lonsdale a few weeks ago. It had about 10 months age at 65% RH. IMO it s_cked. The Honduran & Dominican part of the filler was very acrid to me. A taste I did not like at all. It also canoed on me to the point where I had to put it down at about the half-smoked point. I *very rarely* don't finish a smoke.
Hey Steve, that's what I was expecting. But no problems like that with this one. Not a hint of bitterness, and a dead-on perfect burn. I'm interested to see how the rest go - I have four left.
-aphexafx
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
Originally posted by aphexafx: Mine did resemble a Montecristo, I can't stress that enough. And I average about a box of Monte's a month, #3's and #4's mostly.
Like I said, though, it could have been a fluke!
I don't think it was a fluke, I just think that some people just focus in on different flavors than others. I tend to respond to a cigar's overall character first, then individual flavors second. I guess both cigars have a sort of earthiness. They also both have Colorado colored wrappers, and as a frequent Monte smoker, that's probably a wrapper tone you respond to.
Originally posted by aphexafx: Mine did resemble a Montecristo, I can't stress that enough. And I average about a box of Monte's a month, #3's and #4's mostly.
Like I said, though, it could have been a fluke!
I don't think it was a fluke, I just think that some people just focus in on different flavors than others. I tend to respond to a cigar's overall character first, then individual flavors second. I guess both cigars have a sort of earthiness. They also both have Colorado colored wrappers, and as a frequent Monte smoker, that's probably a wrapper tone you respond to.
Indeed, I suspect that is the case (except the wrapper part, lol). Mostly it was the tanginess in my nose at exhale. I imagine that, after I smoke a hadful of these things, they will no longer take me to Montecristo, and I'll shake my head: but that one cigar last night, sure gave me a surprise!
I do look forward to smoking more of them, and that is rare for a sub-super-premium, non-puro, NC, for me!
-aphexafx
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
