Herfin Bigdog
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2005
- Messages
- 582
Now that you all have been stewing on what the cigars were...
Cigar Number 1 was:
The ASH Experience, 6 x 54 Torpedo, Mexican Puros with Havano wrapper; manufactured by Tabacalera JEM. - http://www.tabacalerajem.com/index.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
AVB’s Reviews (Cigar Pass member)
Cigar #1
A 6x50 torpedo with a somewhat rough veiny wrapper and a nice well packed feel.
Prelight aroma was earthy with a manure scent very much like some ISOMs I've had.
I toasted the foot and took a few puffs, good draw and nice amount of smoke but it seemed on the mild/medium side and was fairly bland until the half way point when more leather/earthy flavors came out. This, however, did not last long when the cigar started to taste like an old catbox smells, VERY ammonia, and bitter. I smoked about a quarter inch more and nothing changed so I tossed it.
Needless to say I wasn't looking forward to the second one but a few days later I decided to give it a try. Nothing was different compared to the first one. Sort normal and OK for the first half and then really nasty. I don't know if a few years would help or not.
Black Plague Reviews (Cigar Weekly member)
Mystery Cigar #1
Approximately 6 1/8 x 52 Pyramid
Appearance: A colorado wrapper over a pyramid body that was apparently (without breaking out a ruler) the classic Cuban pyramid size. The wrapper leaf was a bit veiny and leafy-looking, but soft and velvety to the touch. The pyramid tip was a bit lop-sided and a little haphazardly applied.
Prelight: Cut nicely and evenly. Prelight draw seemed ample and with some very strong pre-burn flavors. Very woody with an alcoholic, almost whiskey-like edge to it.
Flavor: Began with a very peppery, woody, and creamy flavor, with some hints of semi-sweet jalapeños. The spice wasn't very subdued and slight. Possessed a chocolatey finish that developed a distinctly herbaceous character to it, an almost root beer-like ambiance. Notes of oak and earth and I could tease out hints of cinnamon. The aroma was nice-tingling and the taste sometimes had a very slight metallic tinge to it. At one-third down, the flavor changed over to one of slow-roasted, herb-encrusted red peppers. I could also detect the flavor of dry-roasted nuts on the finish. Halfway down, this flavor developed a distinctly more earthy tone with even more roasted flavors. Aroma became more peppery to the nose. Two-thirds down, the bittersweet flavor of cocoa returned and the herbal characteristics made resurgence. Nearly the end, it left a bit of an unpleasant after-taste. Medium-full in body and strength.
Construction: A pale to medium gray ash that was solid and held nicely. The burn was a bit wavy, but behaved itself admirably and never required a touch-up. The cigar did become spongy in the last third or so.
Misc: Accompanied by a glass of San Pellegrino mineral water.
Summary: Despite a few negatives, this cigar offered a very nice degree of complexity I haven't seen in a non-Cuban for a while. I was actually very surprised by it and this is a cigar I believe I would keep around for friends and casual consumption. Worlds above the Dominican Davidoff I smoked last week. Maybe some more age is needed to smooth out some of the less desirably elements, though I suspect this cigar might already have a year or two on it. If I had to guess this cigar's pedigree, I'd guess it to be a blend of Dominican and Nicaraguan tobacco. I'm very curious to find out what this cigar is.
Brew Meister Reviews (Cigar Pass & Cigar Weekly member)
Smoke # 1:
Size: 6 x 50 Belicoso
Appearance:
Wrapper - Brown perhaps an EMS, a few edges and veins, a solid firm stick.
Pre-light:
Aroma - hay or grass
Draw - very well.
Light: Easy light.
The experience:
First smoke (2/27/06) was enjoyed with a cold War Steiner beer. Plenty of smoke, aromas was the same as the pre-light with a grassy taste. Mild to medium body. A bit harsh at first mellowed out a bit at the half way point. Still fairly single dimension with a grassy hay flavor. Had a bit of a canoeing problem and had to be touched up several times. Ash was a bit flakey and crumbled easily, and was aggravated by the burn problems. After the halfway point the harshness reappeared with vengeance. Finish was terrible.
Second smoke (3/14/06) was with a cup of coffee. It was a bit better than the first, a bit less harsh, and very mild bodied. It also had a very harsh and bitter finish.
Rating - 1.75 stars
Tim’s Rating: FYI my evaluation criteria is broken into 5 levels, designated by stars, I know it’s not the most elaborate rating system, however, it works for me.
***** (5). Order more now, and keep on hand.
**** (4). Order some, when I want a little variety in the humidor.
*** (3). I'd smoke it if it were handed to me.
** (2). Keep giving to moochers
* (1). Dog Rocket - Stay away from these.
Elk Twins Reviews (Cigar Weekly member)
HBD Mystery Cigar #1
6x50
Filler – Unk, Binder – Unk, Wrapper – Unk
A classic pyramid, with a long, tapered head that canted slightly to one side, this cigar came wrapped in a dry, moderately rough wrapper that was a lovely medium brown in color. Some small soft spots indicated questionable construction, but the pre light draw was fairly resistant with good airflow. Pre-light flavor was sweet and mild but had a tiny chemical tint.
A fairly large soft spot at the foot caused an uneven light, which extended into a rather lengthy runner up one side. The first draws were aggressively harsh and had a flat, monotone cardboard character. The tunnel up the side became distracting and I had to wet the wrapper and touch the other side up with the lighter. There was a soft sputtering crackle during each draw, which seemed interesting. The smoke had a bite and offered a tingling sensation in my tongue, but the flavor was not complex. Some woodiness and a varnish overtone predominated.
Despite pairing this cigar with a glass of ice water I still suffered a bit of burn. Even the finish was harsh – acerbic and sour – and left a bite on the sides of my tongue. This seemed strange to me as it was on the lighter side of medium in strength. The ash was light grey and suffered a bit of flaking from the loose roll. Halfway down the burn improved slightly but never evened out; it was always faster on one side. The best part of this cigar was the aroma; it was sweet and cedar with a pleasant room note.
The final two inches of this cigar were the best. The smoke lost its bite and settled into a medium if unrefined flavor and the finish mellowed a bit. I might recommend this cigar if it had performed this way from the beginning.
Appearance: 8/10
Construction: 7/10
Flavor: 16/20
Finish: 6/10
Smoking experience: 15/20
Aroma: 10/10
Overall impression: 15/20
Total: 77/100
Sevenmag Reviews (Cigar Weekly member)
Cigar # 1
My two samples for cigar #1 were 6x50ish torps that had nice looking, medium brown wrappers. Tissue thin and oily. It’s one of my favorite types of wrapper. The big detractor for both cigars was the taper. One was very bad. I can’t really describe it other than it was just plan malformed. The other was lopsided. One side was straight all the way to the tip and the other tapered over to the straight side. They both were just a touch on the soft side, but had no voids or bad spots. Probably more wet than soft. No real problems here at all.
I’ll give them a 2 out of 5 here because of the tapers.
The pre light aroma was strong and loaded with straightforward tobacco. Nothing subtle about it at all, completely in your face, but that’s not a bad thing to me. The pre light draw came with the same stiff dose of raw tobacco and both cigars did well in the resistance department.
4 out of 5 on the draw.
Once I lit them I was disappointed, the initial flavors were acrid and harsh. I couldn’t pick out much else for the first inch or so. Then they settled down somewhat and herbal sweetness started to make it’s way to the front. By the time I had smoked the first third or so, they were showing some potential but to be honest, they needed to start showing it sooner. At the half waypoint, they had actually become a fairly nice medium bodied cigar. Herbal and nutty, but that initial acridness never completely faded away. The second half of both cigars stayed this way all the way to end. If the first half had been as pleasant as the second, it would have been a much better experience overall.
I’ll give the flavor a 3 out of 5.
Both samples burned straight, needed no touch ups, and otherwise smoked like a dream. Nice solid dark grey ash that held on well and hid a nice red cone. It was here where these cigars excelled.
5 of 5.
Both cigars had a very nice straightforward tobacco aroma. Nothing particularly subtle or complex about it. I don’t think you’d get any complaints about it in a crowd, and you might just get a compliment or two.
4 out of 5.
3.5 overall. If the first half of these had just been a little less acrid and acidic the score would have better. I get the impression that these were just plain young and could benefit from a short nap. I don’t think they’re candidates for any serious aging, but a few months might smooth them a good bit.
Steve Hawk Reviews (Cigar Pass member)
Cigar #1
This was a cocoa colored, belicoso-shaped cigar. I did not measure it, but would estimate it to be 6” x 54-ring gauge. It had a medium textured wrapper that showed minor veining. The cap was average, but the feel of the cigar was firm and somewhat lumpy. The pre-light aroma of the first cigar I tested smelled heavily of manure. (The aroma was surprisingly absent on the second one I smoked about two weeks later.) I clipped the cap and tested the draw, which was perfect.
I lightly toasted the foot and then lit it completely. The initial taste was grassy and herbal and stayed that way throughout the entire cigar. The flavor was modest, as was the richness of the smoke. This cigar was mild-medium and left a slight burn on the throat and tongue.
The burn was very uneven on the first cigar tested. It had a run for just about the entire cigar, despite several attempts to correct it with my torch. The second cigar tested was not as bad, but still burned unevenly. The coal on each was cone-shaped; the ash was medium- to dark-gray and flaky in structure.
I’d rate this cigar as fair good. It was a bit mild for my tastes, as I prefer stronger, fuller smokes, but the taste was agreeable. I would not buy any of these, but would smoke another if it were handed to me. The only noticeable differences between the two cigars tested were the pre-light aromas and the run problem with #1.
Wilkey’s Cigar Reviews (Cigar Pass member)
Cigar #1
First Sample:
A belicoso measuring 6" long and about 50 rg.
Wrapper was a moderately veiny colorado, reasonably well rolled. Prelight nose was faint but with no hints of ammonia. Upon lighting, initial impressions were of pepper and dry wood. Smoke volume pulling through the easy draw was nice and full. The overall impression is one of medium tobacco flavor with faint hints of a coconutty sweetness. The first inch burned well but was otherwise unremarkable.
The draw firmed up after about 1.25-1.5" and I started to detect hints of sweet spice over the medium strength tobacco. The cigar remained fairly one-dimensional without developing in any significant way. Smoke blown through the nose was a little harsh. In the second half, the pepperyness started to mellow and fade.
Overall impression: This was a decent looking, well-constructed belicoso. Primary profile was medium tobacco and black pepper with hints of sweetness. It was inoffensive but also fairly monotonous. Not a bad smoke if in the $3-4 range. In my opinion, this cigar is not likely
To improve with age.
The Second belicoso #1.
I accompanied the cigar with plain water. I'd have to say that my
reactions were pretty much identical to the first specimen.
Cigar Number 1 was:
The ASH Experience, 6 x 54 Torpedo, Mexican Puros with Havano wrapper; manufactured by Tabacalera JEM. - http://www.tabacalerajem.com/index.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
AVB’s Reviews (Cigar Pass member)
Cigar #1
A 6x50 torpedo with a somewhat rough veiny wrapper and a nice well packed feel.
Prelight aroma was earthy with a manure scent very much like some ISOMs I've had.
I toasted the foot and took a few puffs, good draw and nice amount of smoke but it seemed on the mild/medium side and was fairly bland until the half way point when more leather/earthy flavors came out. This, however, did not last long when the cigar started to taste like an old catbox smells, VERY ammonia, and bitter. I smoked about a quarter inch more and nothing changed so I tossed it.
Needless to say I wasn't looking forward to the second one but a few days later I decided to give it a try. Nothing was different compared to the first one. Sort normal and OK for the first half and then really nasty. I don't know if a few years would help or not.
Black Plague Reviews (Cigar Weekly member)
Mystery Cigar #1
Approximately 6 1/8 x 52 Pyramid
Appearance: A colorado wrapper over a pyramid body that was apparently (without breaking out a ruler) the classic Cuban pyramid size. The wrapper leaf was a bit veiny and leafy-looking, but soft and velvety to the touch. The pyramid tip was a bit lop-sided and a little haphazardly applied.
Prelight: Cut nicely and evenly. Prelight draw seemed ample and with some very strong pre-burn flavors. Very woody with an alcoholic, almost whiskey-like edge to it.
Flavor: Began with a very peppery, woody, and creamy flavor, with some hints of semi-sweet jalapeños. The spice wasn't very subdued and slight. Possessed a chocolatey finish that developed a distinctly herbaceous character to it, an almost root beer-like ambiance. Notes of oak and earth and I could tease out hints of cinnamon. The aroma was nice-tingling and the taste sometimes had a very slight metallic tinge to it. At one-third down, the flavor changed over to one of slow-roasted, herb-encrusted red peppers. I could also detect the flavor of dry-roasted nuts on the finish. Halfway down, this flavor developed a distinctly more earthy tone with even more roasted flavors. Aroma became more peppery to the nose. Two-thirds down, the bittersweet flavor of cocoa returned and the herbal characteristics made resurgence. Nearly the end, it left a bit of an unpleasant after-taste. Medium-full in body and strength.
Construction: A pale to medium gray ash that was solid and held nicely. The burn was a bit wavy, but behaved itself admirably and never required a touch-up. The cigar did become spongy in the last third or so.
Misc: Accompanied by a glass of San Pellegrino mineral water.
Summary: Despite a few negatives, this cigar offered a very nice degree of complexity I haven't seen in a non-Cuban for a while. I was actually very surprised by it and this is a cigar I believe I would keep around for friends and casual consumption. Worlds above the Dominican Davidoff I smoked last week. Maybe some more age is needed to smooth out some of the less desirably elements, though I suspect this cigar might already have a year or two on it. If I had to guess this cigar's pedigree, I'd guess it to be a blend of Dominican and Nicaraguan tobacco. I'm very curious to find out what this cigar is.
Brew Meister Reviews (Cigar Pass & Cigar Weekly member)
Smoke # 1:
Size: 6 x 50 Belicoso
Appearance:
Wrapper - Brown perhaps an EMS, a few edges and veins, a solid firm stick.
Pre-light:
Aroma - hay or grass
Draw - very well.
Light: Easy light.
The experience:
First smoke (2/27/06) was enjoyed with a cold War Steiner beer. Plenty of smoke, aromas was the same as the pre-light with a grassy taste. Mild to medium body. A bit harsh at first mellowed out a bit at the half way point. Still fairly single dimension with a grassy hay flavor. Had a bit of a canoeing problem and had to be touched up several times. Ash was a bit flakey and crumbled easily, and was aggravated by the burn problems. After the halfway point the harshness reappeared with vengeance. Finish was terrible.
Second smoke (3/14/06) was with a cup of coffee. It was a bit better than the first, a bit less harsh, and very mild bodied. It also had a very harsh and bitter finish.
Rating - 1.75 stars
Tim’s Rating: FYI my evaluation criteria is broken into 5 levels, designated by stars, I know it’s not the most elaborate rating system, however, it works for me.
***** (5). Order more now, and keep on hand.
**** (4). Order some, when I want a little variety in the humidor.
*** (3). I'd smoke it if it were handed to me.
** (2). Keep giving to moochers
* (1). Dog Rocket - Stay away from these.
Elk Twins Reviews (Cigar Weekly member)
HBD Mystery Cigar #1
6x50
Filler – Unk, Binder – Unk, Wrapper – Unk
A classic pyramid, with a long, tapered head that canted slightly to one side, this cigar came wrapped in a dry, moderately rough wrapper that was a lovely medium brown in color. Some small soft spots indicated questionable construction, but the pre light draw was fairly resistant with good airflow. Pre-light flavor was sweet and mild but had a tiny chemical tint.
A fairly large soft spot at the foot caused an uneven light, which extended into a rather lengthy runner up one side. The first draws were aggressively harsh and had a flat, monotone cardboard character. The tunnel up the side became distracting and I had to wet the wrapper and touch the other side up with the lighter. There was a soft sputtering crackle during each draw, which seemed interesting. The smoke had a bite and offered a tingling sensation in my tongue, but the flavor was not complex. Some woodiness and a varnish overtone predominated.
Despite pairing this cigar with a glass of ice water I still suffered a bit of burn. Even the finish was harsh – acerbic and sour – and left a bite on the sides of my tongue. This seemed strange to me as it was on the lighter side of medium in strength. The ash was light grey and suffered a bit of flaking from the loose roll. Halfway down the burn improved slightly but never evened out; it was always faster on one side. The best part of this cigar was the aroma; it was sweet and cedar with a pleasant room note.
The final two inches of this cigar were the best. The smoke lost its bite and settled into a medium if unrefined flavor and the finish mellowed a bit. I might recommend this cigar if it had performed this way from the beginning.
Appearance: 8/10
Construction: 7/10
Flavor: 16/20
Finish: 6/10
Smoking experience: 15/20
Aroma: 10/10
Overall impression: 15/20
Total: 77/100
Sevenmag Reviews (Cigar Weekly member)
Cigar # 1
My two samples for cigar #1 were 6x50ish torps that had nice looking, medium brown wrappers. Tissue thin and oily. It’s one of my favorite types of wrapper. The big detractor for both cigars was the taper. One was very bad. I can’t really describe it other than it was just plan malformed. The other was lopsided. One side was straight all the way to the tip and the other tapered over to the straight side. They both were just a touch on the soft side, but had no voids or bad spots. Probably more wet than soft. No real problems here at all.
I’ll give them a 2 out of 5 here because of the tapers.
The pre light aroma was strong and loaded with straightforward tobacco. Nothing subtle about it at all, completely in your face, but that’s not a bad thing to me. The pre light draw came with the same stiff dose of raw tobacco and both cigars did well in the resistance department.
4 out of 5 on the draw.
Once I lit them I was disappointed, the initial flavors were acrid and harsh. I couldn’t pick out much else for the first inch or so. Then they settled down somewhat and herbal sweetness started to make it’s way to the front. By the time I had smoked the first third or so, they were showing some potential but to be honest, they needed to start showing it sooner. At the half waypoint, they had actually become a fairly nice medium bodied cigar. Herbal and nutty, but that initial acridness never completely faded away. The second half of both cigars stayed this way all the way to end. If the first half had been as pleasant as the second, it would have been a much better experience overall.
I’ll give the flavor a 3 out of 5.
Both samples burned straight, needed no touch ups, and otherwise smoked like a dream. Nice solid dark grey ash that held on well and hid a nice red cone. It was here where these cigars excelled.
5 of 5.
Both cigars had a very nice straightforward tobacco aroma. Nothing particularly subtle or complex about it. I don’t think you’d get any complaints about it in a crowd, and you might just get a compliment or two.
4 out of 5.
3.5 overall. If the first half of these had just been a little less acrid and acidic the score would have better. I get the impression that these were just plain young and could benefit from a short nap. I don’t think they’re candidates for any serious aging, but a few months might smooth them a good bit.
Steve Hawk Reviews (Cigar Pass member)
Cigar #1
This was a cocoa colored, belicoso-shaped cigar. I did not measure it, but would estimate it to be 6” x 54-ring gauge. It had a medium textured wrapper that showed minor veining. The cap was average, but the feel of the cigar was firm and somewhat lumpy. The pre-light aroma of the first cigar I tested smelled heavily of manure. (The aroma was surprisingly absent on the second one I smoked about two weeks later.) I clipped the cap and tested the draw, which was perfect.
I lightly toasted the foot and then lit it completely. The initial taste was grassy and herbal and stayed that way throughout the entire cigar. The flavor was modest, as was the richness of the smoke. This cigar was mild-medium and left a slight burn on the throat and tongue.
The burn was very uneven on the first cigar tested. It had a run for just about the entire cigar, despite several attempts to correct it with my torch. The second cigar tested was not as bad, but still burned unevenly. The coal on each was cone-shaped; the ash was medium- to dark-gray and flaky in structure.
I’d rate this cigar as fair good. It was a bit mild for my tastes, as I prefer stronger, fuller smokes, but the taste was agreeable. I would not buy any of these, but would smoke another if it were handed to me. The only noticeable differences between the two cigars tested were the pre-light aromas and the run problem with #1.
Wilkey’s Cigar Reviews (Cigar Pass member)
Cigar #1
First Sample:
A belicoso measuring 6" long and about 50 rg.
Wrapper was a moderately veiny colorado, reasonably well rolled. Prelight nose was faint but with no hints of ammonia. Upon lighting, initial impressions were of pepper and dry wood. Smoke volume pulling through the easy draw was nice and full. The overall impression is one of medium tobacco flavor with faint hints of a coconutty sweetness. The first inch burned well but was otherwise unremarkable.
The draw firmed up after about 1.25-1.5" and I started to detect hints of sweet spice over the medium strength tobacco. The cigar remained fairly one-dimensional without developing in any significant way. Smoke blown through the nose was a little harsh. In the second half, the pepperyness started to mellow and fade.
Overall impression: This was a decent looking, well-constructed belicoso. Primary profile was medium tobacco and black pepper with hints of sweetness. It was inoffensive but also fairly monotonous. Not a bad smoke if in the $3-4 range. In my opinion, this cigar is not likely
To improve with age.
The Second belicoso #1.
I accompanied the cigar with plain water. I'd have to say that my
reactions were pretty much identical to the first specimen.
