Tweet
Montecristo Montecristo D LE 2005
Size: 170 x 43 ? Dalias
Smoke time: 1hour 25mins (Stopped)
Box date: 2005 Source: SmokeyDave.
This cigar was generously gifted by SmokeyDave this year when I was gathering in as many Lonsdales as possible for the reviews. From what I?ve read about this LE, seemingly it come in two wrapper shades, this one which is the dark and a lighter, and there is a lot of BOTL division over which is the better.
Appearance: Slightly sinister. The D looked almost like a Maduro, sporting a very dark brown wrapper with a marbled look about it. The wrapper was very oily to the touch, and the veins despite being numerous were fine with little or no relief. The wrapper spital was neat and the Cuban cap prominent and well applied. Standard band ?B? with EL 2005 band beneath. IMHO the dark wrapper and the brown and gold and black from the bands together give the cigar a slightly forbidding look.
Construction: Feeling along the barrel the cigar was a lot more yielding than I had expected and felt distinctly spongy around the bands area. The pre-draw was good and the smoking draw smooth and accessible throughout the smoke. The burn was straight and from beginning to end and the dark grey ash firm and well compacted. One re-light, no corrections.
Flavour: The pre-light aroma was strong earthy tobacco and barnyard. The cigar started with a heavy blast of earth and salt. After a puff or two the smoke became leathery/woody and I began to pick up some underlying citrus but for the most part this taste was being kept quite by the dryer, stronger tones with only the occasional break through to bring some sharpness and sweetness into the mix. For one short passage in the first third I could pick out some fruitlike tastes, but again these were being killed by the duller dryer, woody base. Generally the smoke though smooth and reasonably voluminous was dry and offered nothing by way of refreshment. Towards the end of the third I caught a little note of toffee warmth that died and never returned. The second third and beginning of the final third carried on in the same dry and equally un-inspiring manner as the first. The singular highlight coming at around half way when the cigar went out and I had to relight it. To be honest I would have given up then, but I carried on hoping the cigar might perk-up. It didn?t, the last picture is where I?d bored of it, my throat had become dry and the monotony was actually making me feel nauseous, so in the best Zino Davidoff tradition I set it to expire.
Overall: Bland. Why Habanos bothered with this LE I?ve no idea, a regular production Montecristo No.1 can stamp on it, piss on it and kick it into the gutter by comparison. The blend I think is feeble and anything good inside is totally slaughtered by the wrapper. Will more age help? I don?t know, I hope so for any BOTL holding onto a box, but this cigar was 7 years old as it was so I have serious doubts. On the plus side the cigar looked reasonably well and at around half way was showing signs of having some power. Will I try another? On this smoking no. I?m sure they look wonderful in their varnished 10 boxes and that in 20 years time collectors will be paying each other shed-loads to have them in their collections ... and that, as far as I?m concerned is the best place for them. I had high hopes for this cigar and would like to make the point that this poor review of the D should in no way be regarded as any criticism or relection on David who?s BOTL generosity was totally well intended and very much appreciated.
Marks. On this smoking, I?m giving the Montecristo D a ?dunces? 6. No competition to the Partagas 898?s lead whatsoever.
Getting to the closing stages now, next up .... Bolivar Gold Medal.
Size: 170 x 43 ? Dalias
Smoke time: 1hour 25mins (Stopped)
Box date: 2005 Source: SmokeyDave.
This cigar was generously gifted by SmokeyDave this year when I was gathering in as many Lonsdales as possible for the reviews. From what I?ve read about this LE, seemingly it come in two wrapper shades, this one which is the dark and a lighter, and there is a lot of BOTL division over which is the better.
Appearance: Slightly sinister. The D looked almost like a Maduro, sporting a very dark brown wrapper with a marbled look about it. The wrapper was very oily to the touch, and the veins despite being numerous were fine with little or no relief. The wrapper spital was neat and the Cuban cap prominent and well applied. Standard band ?B? with EL 2005 band beneath. IMHO the dark wrapper and the brown and gold and black from the bands together give the cigar a slightly forbidding look.
Construction: Feeling along the barrel the cigar was a lot more yielding than I had expected and felt distinctly spongy around the bands area. The pre-draw was good and the smoking draw smooth and accessible throughout the smoke. The burn was straight and from beginning to end and the dark grey ash firm and well compacted. One re-light, no corrections.
Flavour: The pre-light aroma was strong earthy tobacco and barnyard. The cigar started with a heavy blast of earth and salt. After a puff or two the smoke became leathery/woody and I began to pick up some underlying citrus but for the most part this taste was being kept quite by the dryer, stronger tones with only the occasional break through to bring some sharpness and sweetness into the mix. For one short passage in the first third I could pick out some fruitlike tastes, but again these were being killed by the duller dryer, woody base. Generally the smoke though smooth and reasonably voluminous was dry and offered nothing by way of refreshment. Towards the end of the third I caught a little note of toffee warmth that died and never returned. The second third and beginning of the final third carried on in the same dry and equally un-inspiring manner as the first. The singular highlight coming at around half way when the cigar went out and I had to relight it. To be honest I would have given up then, but I carried on hoping the cigar might perk-up. It didn?t, the last picture is where I?d bored of it, my throat had become dry and the monotony was actually making me feel nauseous, so in the best Zino Davidoff tradition I set it to expire.
Overall: Bland. Why Habanos bothered with this LE I?ve no idea, a regular production Montecristo No.1 can stamp on it, piss on it and kick it into the gutter by comparison. The blend I think is feeble and anything good inside is totally slaughtered by the wrapper. Will more age help? I don?t know, I hope so for any BOTL holding onto a box, but this cigar was 7 years old as it was so I have serious doubts. On the plus side the cigar looked reasonably well and at around half way was showing signs of having some power. Will I try another? On this smoking no. I?m sure they look wonderful in their varnished 10 boxes and that in 20 years time collectors will be paying each other shed-loads to have them in their collections ... and that, as far as I?m concerned is the best place for them. I had high hopes for this cigar and would like to make the point that this poor review of the D should in no way be regarded as any criticism or relection on David who?s BOTL generosity was totally well intended and very much appreciated.
Marks. On this smoking, I?m giving the Montecristo D a ?dunces? 6. No competition to the Partagas 898?s lead whatsoever.
Getting to the closing stages now, next up .... Bolivar Gold Medal.
Comment