Hi everyone,

I have recently obtained some Padron 1926 and 1964 cigars, not eevn one fo each but close to it and after a few days I have come to some conclusions of my own taste of course but wanted to talk about it here and gather some addition input as well.

I will start this off simple with a very broad opinion.

Firstly while smoking the Padron 1926 I myself have been won over completely by the Natural versions of this cigar verses the Maduro's. The Maduro's for the 26 seem to me to be almost too strong or maybe a better word is spicey. While the Natural comes off almost as a creamy and smooth smoke.

On the 1964 though I have found myself in exact polar opposites at this time. The Natural 64 with a bit of an almost bitter taste to it, not bitter in a bad way, but in a strong, not aged well enough sense. The maduro however has the boldness as a maduro should yet pulls off a chocolate and creamy smoke.

I now open this for your comments and input. I very much would like to hear what your experiences with these cigars has been. I have not smoked them enough or have enough of them to go into a great detail. Just the broad opinions as stated above. I can say though with certainty they are the best yet I have smoked with enjoyment on the NC side of the house to date.

Larzz

The difference between 1964 and 1926 is 38.

Did I win?

LOL, good one Doc.

I have some '26 maduro's. I wouldn't say spicy at all. Just a perfect combination of everything. JMO, they definately have a spot in my humi.

Haven't smoke enough 26's to comment but personally I love the PAM 64. Have never smoked the natural. The 26's(maduro)I have smoked I havent found to be too strong at all. I'll try more and report back.

P.S. both are excellent cigars, either one is a winner

got plenty of both and like em both!

I actually like the 26 M better than the natural. They have consistently been slightly more complex, and I have not noticed much spicy-ness to them at all. In fact, I would call them "creamy and smooth." Fantastic body to the smoke itself, and most certainly a cigar that you want to savor for as long as possible.

As for the 64, they certainly have completely separate tendencies. I have found that they tend to be slightly less complex (probably due to their age) yet absolutely flavorful.

Bear

PS- Doc, that's 38.276 years to you! heehee

I prefer the naturals on all of Padron's lines.

I'm completely opposite. I go maduro only when it comes to Padron. I have tried the PAN but I do not enjoy them nearly as much as the PAM. And the regular line Churchill maduro is a classic for the price. So tasty especially if aged for about six months.