Illusione MK Ultra 2011 ICCPR

Illusione MK Ultra

Photobucket Pictures, Images and Photos

Preflight:

5 1/8x42, cold draw of Sweet tobacco, earth, hints of chocolate and dark fruit. Wrapper smooth and dark with a slick sheen. Well balanced and nicely packed.

First Half:

Pow, right in the kisser, pepper, leather,  chocolate, smooth and full flavor.  A good heavy chewy smoke. Medium-full bodied but very well balanced and smooth.

Second Half:

 The finish brings in characteristics of oak similar to the finish of a good merlot with a bit of powdered coco like Hersey's. Strength comes up a bit and finish remains dry. Flavors remain except the leather characteristics.

Final thoughts:

This is not as powerful as the original MK Ultras but a bit more refined. Do not hesitate if you like Illusione. Dion smashed it out of the park.

Comments

  • docbp87docbp87 Posts: 3,521
    Interesting. These are actually meant to be more powerful than the regular MK. When the MK was originally put into production some years ago, it was too strong to stand alongside the rest of the Original Document line, so Dion set them aside, and toned the blend down. He then sold the limited quantity of overly powerful MKs as the MKULTRA (if you aren't familiar with the dubious activities of the CIA's Office of Scientific Intelligence in the 50's and 60's, read THIS. The ULTRAs got a fantastic response (and since have become a hot, rare item) so Dion took that blend, and released it this year as its own line. I know the wrapper is darker than the regular MK (though the MK's seem to have the darkest wrappers in the OD line), but it actually isn't a maduro I don't think. Thanks for your review. They sound awesome.
  • AJGARLETTAJGARLETT Posts: 648
    looks like docbp87 is correct according to Dion

    http://www.stogiereview.com/2011/07/21/ipcpr-2011-illusione/
  • BlueRingsBlueRings Posts: 367
    They are more flavorful due to the strength has been tempered. The original MK Ultra were too strong from what I read and the post you reference. Doc everything Im reading states maduro as do most of the articles on this cigar. Thanks for the references and history Gents.
  • docbp87docbp87 Posts: 3,521
    Just asked Dion if this was a maduro, since I too have seen it called a maduro in a few places as well now, and he says it is NOT a maduro. Straight from the horse's mouth.

    Vudu9: @BurtonOblivion it's not maduro.
  • The_KidThe_Kid Posts: 7,871 ✭✭✭
    docbp87:
    Just asked Dion if this was a maduro, since I too have seen it called a maduro in a few places as well now, and he says it is NOT a maduro. Straight from the horse's mouth.

    Vudu9: @BurtonOblivion it's not maduro.
    I found the wikipedia link very interesting, Made me want to try it even more..lol, Thanks for posting
  • t_evan50t_evan50 Posts: 1,725
    Gotta love it when modern tech is that useful.
  • BlueRingsBlueRings Posts: 367
    Well guess it's not Maduro then. What does he call it? Is it natural? I think that's why the misconception and why so many of us are calling it Maduro, even most websites.
  • BlueRingsBlueRings Posts: 367
    BTW, it taste like a maduro. I would venture to say it has a San Andreas wrapper on it. Maybe it isnt cooked as long as a maduro would classify as such and that is why he is not calling it a maduro. BTW I removed all the references to such. In any classification I would still call it a maduro since maduro means ready to consume, ripe, at peak perfection. Times maduro was used in this reply (6).
  • jsnakejsnake Kansas CityPosts: 5,773 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Got some of these and the hl maduro. Haven't tried either yet. Nice review and pics!
  • BlueRingsBlueRings Posts: 367
    Smoking another one now and this one is strong. It's my first cigar of the morning and pairing well with a Costa Rica Terrazzu my tongue is taking a beating and it likes it.
Sign In or Register to comment.