How much to age which cigars?

[Nightwingvyse]

As a rule of thumb for puros, anything less that one year from the box date

That's a real popular opinion i've picked up on. Which is why the P2's, D4's and Bb's are sitting right at the bottom of my humidor.

[TJCoro]

Go to the source!

Not too............confuzzed.............. tbh. It makes sense and is real food for thought. It's really one of those subjects which require intimate knowledge of the chemical reactions that occur within a cigar between the growing and the smoking, so it's hard to compare cigars of different origins.

Don't over think it, muchacho. As a rule of thumb for puros, anything less that one year from the box date needs more humi time, IMO. The longer the better! There are some exceptions to this rule that have been documented on this fine forum other so-called aficionados, but the one-year rule works for the Coro Clan.

Now, if you want to learn more about the chemistry involved with the cigar-making process, there are plenty of good sources available, from the Complete Idiot's Guide to Cigars to Min Ron Nee's book An Illustrated Encyclopaedia of Post-Revolution Havana Cigars.*




And for the record, I've never smoked a NC that required additional aging.


Names TJ, TJCoro, and I'm at your service.


*Click the books for more information.

[Nightwingvyse]

Now I'm no expert when it comes to the chemistry of aging tobacco used in cigars, but it is my understanding the most of the benefits from aging occur BEFORE the cigar is rolled, both NCs and Cs, not after. Tobacco used in NC sticks is generally aged far longer that that used in puros*, however, which is the reason (so I've read) that puros continue to age more noticeably after being rolled then do their brothers from another mother.

From my personal experience, this makes sense. I have noticed that NCs are ready to go the day you buy them because of the longer aging period and therefore, benefit very little from addition aging after being rolled, IMO. Puros, on the other hand, continue to age AFTER rolling because of the shorter period the leaf is subject to aging before it is made into a cigar.
Therefore, puros benefit greatly from additional time in the humidor. NCs, not so much.

Anyway, that's what I think.

Not too............confuzzed.............. tbh. It makes sense and is real food for thought. It's really one of those subjects which require intimate knowledge of the chemical reactions that occur within a cigar between the growing and the smoking, so it's hard to compare cigars of different origins.

For the last few days i've been using the info in this thread to prioritize which cigars require what i call "hard time" before lighting. My ratio has shifted to about 70:30 in favour of CC's (not including loads of cigarillos i've ended up with after bundle deals and duty free), so in theory, 70% of my cigars need ageing, which has lead me to carefully plan what i can choose from and what i'll be buying in the not-too-distant future.

gaza-city-destroyed-buildings.jpg

[TJCoro]

Older is Better!

I thought i'd revive this thread for another question?

It seems to be the idea, from this thread, that the demand for CC's is so high that they are rarely aged, so the buyer usually ages them themselves to get a more pleasant and balanced taste, whereas NCC's are often aged before they are rolled. I have tried a few aged Cubans and found them to be consistently more pleasant than both un-aged Cubans as well as aged NCC's.,..

Now I'm no expert when it comes to the chemistry of aging tobacco used in cigars, but it is my understanding the most of the benefits from aging occur BEFORE the cigar is rolled, both NCs and Cs, not after. Tobacco used in NC sticks is generally aged far longer that that used in puros*, however, which is the reason (so I've read) that puros continue to age more noticeably after being rolled then do their brothers from another mother.

From my personal experience, this makes sense. I have noticed that NCs are ready to go the day you buy them because of the longer aging period and therefore, benefit very little from addition aging after being rolled, IMO. Puros, on the other hand, continue to age AFTER rolling because of the shorter period the leaf is subject to aging before it is made into a cigar.
Therefore, puros benefit greatly from additional time in the humidor. NCs, not so much.

Anyway, that's what I think.


TJ, TJCoro

Hey TJ! I'M SO CONFUSSED!


* Knewbee Tip: Don TJ often uses the term "puro" which means "pure" en espanol, when referring to Habanos/Cuban cigars.

[Nightwingvyse]

I thought i'd revive this thread for another question?

It seems to be the idea, from this thread, that the demand for CC's is so high that they are rarely aged, so the buyer usually ages them themselves to get a more pleasant and balanced taste, whereas NCC's are often aged before they are rolled. I have tried a few aged Cubans and found them to be consistently more pleasant than both un-aged Cubans as well as aged NCC's.

I was always under the impression that the main idea of ageing is that the oils between the filler, binder and wrapper diffuse or whatever it is. So doesn't that mean that the time NC tobacco spends ageing is best spent after it is rolled, rather than before? my personal experience with cigars would suggest this.

Discuss......

[TJCoro]

A Different View!

Jorge Padron told me that his cigars do not benefit from ageing at all as far as he is concerned.

Hmmmm? Maybe it's we who age and not the puro/cigar. Think about it...



Hello! My name is BJ, BJ Coro, and I've been away for a long, long time.


Hey BJ! Welcome back! Wanna' play with me blu-balls!

[monkey66]

Jorge Padron told me that his cigars do not benefit from ageing at all as far as he is concerned.

[TJCoro]

Lazy Sticks!

I've got so many fookin' stogies that they can't help but age since I just can't get around to smoking them all (tried smoking five at a time, but it just made me turn green).

IMNSHO, NC's age just fine TYVM.

Not all, mind you, but most. If you read the literature (of which there is a great deal of which), the general consensus is that virtually ANY cigar will benefit from aging, not only CC's.

Migh too sense.

YMMV

Like you, senor rocketinhispocket, I have a vast number of ancient N/Cs - 10 years and older - that I've collected over time and now are taking up valuable real estate in don TJ's massive unit. But unlike you, my sticks show little improvement from the day the were purchased (with the exception of a box of Indian Tabac Tepees, which improved noticeable over time) - the good ones are still pretty good and the not-so good ones are, well....No doubt that N/C's, like all cigars, benefit from aging over time, but from my experience, it's just not nearly as noticeable as with Cubans.


Names Perro, el Perro, and most NCs are ready to go on the day you purchase them.


Hey el Perro! I think your N/C sticks could learn a thing or two from that Rocket guy's sticks.

[rokkitsci]

I've got so many fookin' stogies that they can't help but age since I just can't get around to smoking them all (tried smoking five at a time, but it just made me turn green).

IMNSHO, NC's age just fine TYVM.

Not all, mind you, but most. If you read the literature (of which there is a great deal of which), the general consensus is that virtually ANY cigar will benefit from aging, not only CC's.

Migh too sense.

YMMV


ISent from my iPhone by iGeorge

[TJCoro]

Cream of the Crop!

This is certainly one valid explanation; one other is the fact that cuban tobacco from the Vuelta Abajo has a much richer, complex chemical structure compared with other tobaccos?

...That Too!

[Pleevy]

My God, Man! Those of some of the fastest aging puros I've ever heard about. You must have some kind of hi-tech, space age humidor!

Actually, what you experienced sounds like the benefits one would expect from sticks acclimating to their new home after sitting in the mail (post) for a few days/weeks - they do improve after a few days as they adjust to the temperature and humidity level in your unit.

As far as aging cigars, there is a vast amount of information on this topic which no doubt will be discussed on this thread. As a general rule, cigars under a year old (from the roll/box date) should be aged for a year or more to loose the ammonia taste/smell that results from the rolling process (when the leaves are dampened) which triggers another fermentation. Another thing I've noticed over the years is that Cuban cigars age far better than N/Cs. I wonder why that is? Could it have something to do the the way the leaf is prepared before it's made into a cigar?


BB

As good as a space age Humi sounds, they were actually from 2 different forum members as it goes. I am not sure on the date of either but Styler said that the ones he sent me could do with a little bit of time in the Humi, me being impatient and inquisitive, I decided to dig in anyway.

[Smallclub]

Actually, as senor Daveyboy pointed out, it's probably because the tobacco used in N/Cs has been aged far longer than that used in Cubans.

This is certainly one valid explanation; one other is the fact that cuban tobacco from the Vuelta Abajo has a much richer, complex chemical structure compared with other tobaccos…

[El Catador]

Love it...

wait for my first review... "like chewing on a christmas tree while sniffing a bottle of fresh horse sweat it was...".

I'm sure I've had one of those... now, what was it..?
Anything 'horsey' has GOT to be Cuban!

Hmmn. 'Christmassy'.. you say?
Partagas... Por Larranaga..?
Am I close?
Is there a prize?

[TJCoro]

Time Will Tell!

By that do you mean that ageing a Cuban does more good than ageing a N/C? Would this mean that ideally, N/C's should be given more time?

Actually, as senor Daveyboy pointed out, it's probably because the tobacco used in N/Cs has been aged far longer than that used in Cubans. Consequently, there is more to be gained from aging Cubans than N/Cs, since the leaf used in the latter has been thoroughly aged before they are made into cigars. Therefore, based on my experience, aging N/Cs, no matter how long, adds little or no benefits to the smoking pleasure.

Well, that's what I think anyway.


Perro, el Perro

[Zigatoh]

I don't want to be an elitist or a snob or whatever, but WHY do you have to mention the tannins if you don't know what they are exactly?
Tanins and phenols are present in tobacco leaves, no doubt, but one need to have very deep knowledge to be able to tell how they affect the taste of a cigar, how they will affect the aging process, etc.
On french cigar forums, where many posters have a solid background in wine tasting, you hardly see tanins mentioned…

just my 2 cents…

I think it's very clear in my posts that these are just my opinions of flavours, and I even point out that there is commonly confusion between references to tannins and ammonia and so on, from me as much as anyone. I honestly haven't read many french cigar forums (read as ANY) so wouldn't know what they talk about but I have read a number of english/american cigar forums and it is a term that crops up a lot so again IMO is worth mentioning if only for discussion.

I also requested further information at the end of my post, if you have some great, if you do in fact want to be an 'elitist or snob or whatever' in opposition of the start of your post then please, carry on...