• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

Drew Estate Undercrown and NC cigars (in general)

tsmckenney

tsmckenney

Mick
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
2,954
Watch the guys from Friends of Habano review the Drew Estate Undercrown.  If you don't know these guys, they do fantastic reviews.  This is an interesting take on a NC cigar from guys who almost exclusively smoke Cubans, and parts of it are hilarious.  It got me thinking of so many NC cigars I smoke that I could review in just one word.  Peppery.  Or two word reviews: smooth pepper or harsh pepper.  Especially Nicaraguan cigars, and I would consider many of them good cigars, but the complexity is just non-existent.  With that considered, I grow even fonder of Padron, Fuente, and the other cigar blenders who can create cigars outside of Cuba that can awaken the palate and generate some conversation.  I was excited to try the Davidoff Nicaraguan release and had the opportunity last week.  I was so disappointed.  Dry, bland, mildly spicey, and never changed through the thirds. 
 
So, how far do you think NC cigars have come over the years in terms of developing complexity? 
 
"It's a crap cigar." 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec7R0rsJhUk
 
I have smoked a single Undercrown (corona doble) and did not find it compelling whatsoever. LP #9 Robusto on the other hand is one of the best cigars I've ever had.
 
Mick, I'll have to take a look at the video later, as my work doesn't allow streaming and such through YouTube.
 
Having said that, I take a lot of stock in what FOH has to say and I can say my experience with them has verified it.  So now I'm interested to see the vid.
 
As far as Nicaraguan cigars go, it's funny you brought this up.  I had a guy in my office yesterday and I was going on and on about certain brands, only to realize as I said it, most of them are Nicaraguan blends.  Which obviously tells me where my preferences are.  He said the same thing you're saying.....if he had to use one word to describe them all, he would say "spicy".  I have to disagree though.  Honestly, I'm not partial to spice.  I don't mind the first quarter with some kick, but in my mind spice gets in the way.  This is why I have strayed from the DPG Black Label.  I think they are overloaded with spice and I just can't take it anymore.  Having said that, I don't find spice to be the overwhelming character to Nicaraguan tobacco.
 
Just my two cents.  But I think if I listed my top 10 cigars, 5 would be Nicaraguan.  Oh, and just to add, I had my first Undercrown this weekend, and I have to admit I was impressed.
 
FOH guys are CC snobs, plain and simple.  Not that there is anything wrong with that, but there's a pretty clear bias there.
 
I think it's a pretty big stretch to say that Nicaraguan cigars have 'non-existent' complexity.  Sure, some of them are heavy on pepper and spice, but certainly not all of them.  The original Tat 'Brown' label sticks were wonderful, and recently the 2011 / 2012 Tat TAA's (one of my favorite smokes) are amazing, wonderful cigars with tons of complexity.  There are lots of others, those are the first two that come to mind (the most recent I smoked, actually).  I will say the palate is completely different than a CC, but to say they have no complexity isn't accurate. If you like peppery, spicy, cigars with a palate that runs that gambit, you might be tempted to say CC's are 'bland'.....which of course isn't accurate, either.
 
The flip side is that I've had some real dogs come off the island.  Ever had a plugged Nicaraguan smoke..??  Neither have I.  I've thrown away a lot of CC's because they were completely plugged, and no amount of dry boxing / drilling them out would fix it.  I realize recent production from the island is markedly better, but it was an expensive learning experience for a few years, and not that long ago.
 
At the end of the day, it's still "smoke what you like, like what you smoke".  I happen to like Liga #9's, Undercrowns, heck even the Nica Rustica quite a bit.  But I don't just smoke Nicaraguans, I smoke CC's and every other kind of stick I can get my hands on to try.  Variety is part of the enjoyment of cigars.  It's fine to say "they're not for me" but to put Nicaraguan sticks down in general, to say all Nicaraguan cigars are one dimensional....that's a pretty broad brush, IMHO.
 
As they say, one man's opinion....B.B.S.
 
I've never watched one of their reviews, but I enjoyed this one.  They seem to be a couple guys that would be fun to sit around, drink and enjoy a cigar.  I'll have to find a few of these and see how their review lines up with mine.
 
BlindedByScience said:
....snip......FOH guys are CC snobs, plain and simple.......snip
 
 
....snip......The flip side is that I've had some real dogs come off the island.  Ever had a plugged Nicaraguan smoke..??  Neither have I.  I've thrown away a lot of CC's because they were completely plugged, and no amount of dry boxing / drilling them out would fix it.  I realize recent production from the island is markedly better, but it was an expensive learning experience for a few years, and not that long ago....snip....
 
Click to expand...
 
Very true on both statements.  I actually stayed away from purchasing much CC for about 3 years after a plugged box of MAG 46 and plugged box of RASS, followed by some plugged singles.  It seemed as though CC's were plugged 75% of the time and I was done with it.
 
However, I got back on the horse and can speak very well of the current HDM Epi #2 and JL #2 batches at the moment.  I feel like I'm having much better luck.
 
But your statement remains valid....I can't recall ever having a plugged Nicaraguan.....ever.
 
I've had 1 plugged nic, it was an el centurion torpedo OR, I had 3 robusto that were just fine. I've had a couple of "extra firm" drawing CC's but not a plugged one yet, hope it never happens.
 
When the one fellow said the Undercrown lacked a punch or had a missing note in its profile, it rang a major bell for me. Obviously that is an individual experience, but it is one I happen to agree with.
 
I don't think it's fair to say they are biased, just because they usually only smoke Cubans.  You also have to consider they have legal access to the Cuban market, and many of the cigars they can select from are Cuban.  
 
It will always boil down to 'Smoke what you like...', but that doesn't make for much of a conversation. 
 
Some NC that I've found age tremendously well, and really blossom with complexity:  Most Padrons (including the thousands), Opus X, Don Carlos, God of Fires...  Remember those cheapy Fuentes everybody used to age (some still do I'm sure), some age used to change those significantly as well. 
 
A little more background on why this is of interest to me.  A couple months ago, I smoked a well aged Opus Love Story.  That cigar was a work of wonder.  Cinnamon, nutmeg, black pepper, cedar.  The flavors changed with every few draws.  I've had cigars like this before and almost all of them were well aged.  So, I decided to get a good collection going of cigars that I could age with real potential.  So far, any NC I can think of that is worth aging is Fuente.  Maybe some Padrons, but there has to more potential with NCs that I just am not experienced with.  That's also where one of the catches between Cubans vs. NC lays.  When people discuss Cuban cigars, the type of cigar and its age go hand in hand.  Rarely do you hear that with NC cigars.  What are you smoking?  Tatuaje.  What are you smoking?  Partagas D4 from 2008. 
 
If these cigars were worth aging, wouldn't we be on to that by now?  With Opus, you hear it.  Sometimes with Anejos, but little else.  Ever. 
 
tsmckenney said:
....snip.... When people discuss Cuban cigars, the type of cigar and its age go hand in hand.  Rarely do you hear that with NC cigars.  What are you smoking?  Tatuaje.  What are you smoking?  Partagas D4 from 2008. 
 
If these cigars were worth aging, wouldn't we be on to that by now?  With Opus, you hear it.  Sometimes with Anejos, but little else.  Ever....snip
Click to expand...
 
So I've been sitting here for about 15 minutes trying to figure out how to answer this.....and I've gotten nowhere.  Which tells me it's a fabulous question.  I will admit, that they only NCs I have in my humidor with ages noted on them are Opus X and Anejo's.  Yet, just about every CC I have has a year annotated on it, be it with a band I've added or simply through the box stamp.  Whatever the method, I am saying that the only cigars which I pay attention to the year on are CC's, Opus, and Anejo's....and 1 box of Padron 2000 maddies from '06...damn they're good.
 
So why is this?  Shit, I'm not sure.  Maybe it's because typically I buy my CC's by the box and 75% of my NCs in packages of 10 or less.  Maybe it's because I've simply been trained by the cigar community to pay more attention to the dates of CCs rather than NCs.
 
Or maybe it's because for some dumb reason I'm holding my CC's to a higher standard, and therefore noting every little subtle difference in each.  For example...when I drink Yellow Tail Merlot, I don't give a damn what year it is, just pour it in the glass.  But when I order Duckhorn Merlot, I'd like to know if the 2007 is available, and please give it a chance to breathe.
 
Yes, it does sound ignorant now that I think about it....but it's true.
 
I don't know Mick, but it's a good question.
 
I wonder what the answer from cigar manufacturers would be, if you asked about long term storage for their cigars.  Are they producing cigars, to be smoked now?  I guess in my mind, I just assume the Fuentes know people are aging their cigars and are more meticulous about their production? From the beginning, they are already using aged tobacco, so it makes sense to assume people are hanging on to these for years knowing they'll only get better.  
 
From a CC standpoint, we're trained to notice the box codes and we hold on to them knowing they'll only get better as they age. Why....not really sure.  I've had very few CC cigars that perform young (PSD4s stand out in my mind).
 
I wonder if any of us would really be able to tell, without being told, if we smoke 2 of the same cigars with different ages.  Would we be able to pick out the aged one, or is it a psychological thing where if we know it has age, we automatically know it's better then a young cigar.
 
I don't know. 
 
bfreebern said:
I've never watched one of their reviews, but I enjoyed this one.  They seem to be a couple guys that would be fun to sit around, drink and enjoy a cigar.  I'll have to find a few of these and see how their review lines up with mine.
Click to expand...
 
I watch a lot of their reviews and those guys are funny as shit and spot on with CC's. I agree with BBS on them being bias though but they have to be. The guy sells CC's.
 
Most of my non CC's are Fuente, Padron and Tatuejes. I think that Fuentes age well but don't feel the same about Padron's and Tatuejes. These are ready to go for me and for the most part usually never have a flat one. I also have never had a plugged one either.  :thumbs:
 
The rest are CC's and some age very well such as Esplendidos, Sir Winnies and PLPC just to name a few. However the latest 2012 and 2013 production have been phenomenal ROTT.
 
In the past like many here I  have had a bunch of plugged ones that were just tossed out. Lately it has been way better. The party shorts are the worst though for being plugged in my experience.
 
Sometime should send these guys a couple of Padron 2000s with 5 or so years on them. I would find that review fascinating.
 
Brickhouse said:
I will admit, that they only NCs I have in my humidor with ages noted on them are Opus X and Anejo's.  Yet, just about every CC I have has a year annotated on it, be it with a band I've added or simply through the box stamp.  Whatever the method, I am saying that the only cigars which I pay attention to the year on are CC's, Opus, and Anejo's....and 1 box of Padron 2000 maddies from '06...damn they're good.
 
So why is this?  Shit, I'm not sure.  Maybe it's because typically I buy my CC's by the box and 75% of my NCs in packages of 10 or less.  Maybe it's because I've simply been trained by the cigar community to pay more attention to the dates of CCs rather than NCs.
 
 
Click to expand...
 
Right.  There are the aged Fuentes that provide the wow-experience.  Occasionally, I'll hear that of a Padron.  The 80th, the 44th, or the Millenium.  All cigars that you pay a large premium for, and they are all aged.  Perhaps it's just the market.  Other manufacturers are making cigars that are good to smoke now with no thought or concern over the development.  Perhaps it's inexperience.  Perhaps... it's the tobacco.  I don't know. 

Juanote said:
Sometime should send these guys a couple of Padron 2000s with 5 or so years on them. I would find that review fascinating.
Click to expand...
 
Agreed!  That would be spectacular. Wyatt, do you have their addy!  :)
 
It would be a bit uncanny to hear a couple of CC snobs judge a relatively inexpensive NC to be a world class smoke.
 
True brutha, true.  That is one thing with CCs though, many of them aren't all that expensive.  Cohibas and Trinis really, the rest are reasonable (by MN standards).
 
tsmckenney said:
Agreed!  That would be spectacular. Wyatt, do you have their addy!  :)
 
Click to expand...
 
I'm sure I could make contact...I'm a "participating" member ;)
 
Let me see how many of those 2000 Maddies I have left and see if I'm willing to part.  I'm thinking I have 6 or less.  If they seem interested, maybe I can make this happen.
 
tsmckenney said:
True brutha, true.  That is one thing with CCs though, many of them aren't all that expensive.  Cohibas and Trinis really, the rest are reasonable (by MN standards).
Click to expand...
 
I agree Mick, I've honestly moved to a lot of CC purchases due to the prices being more reasonable.
 
Yeah, make sure they would actually review them.  I've been on there for quite a while, but strictly for info.  I think I posted an intro and then stuck to lurking.  The reviews are what I really like.  I was crushed when Smitty took leave.  Haha. 
 
Excellent point. There again that may go to the heart of this thing. It is much cheaper to pluck something out of the ground, age it a few months, roll it up and send it out the door than it is to carefully age select tobacco years ahead of time prior to rolling then aging again before release. I suppose that is the advantage of superior raw material. The disadvantage though is being made complacent by this same advantage, which is why NC makers are responsible for virtually all innovation in the industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top