Cigar: Rocky Patel Vintage 1992
Size/Shape: Churchill
Time In My Humidor: 2 weeks +
Smoking Time: 1:30
Overall Rating: 9.1
This is a cigar that has a lot of admirers around here, and I can see why. For starters, it's great looking. For seconders, it draws perfectly. Unlit, it tastes of dried fruit -- kind of a blend of raisins, dates, and figs, without really tasting like any of them individually. It also has just a hint of chocolate.
Once lit, it produced lots of smoke (again, always important to me) with good body and a flavor I find I cannot describe. It wasn't the dried fruit flavor anymore. More of a fermented fruit flavor, maybe? Not sweet, but not spicy either, yet very flavorful. And there was definitely an earthiness to it. Like I said, I dunno how to describe it. But there was lots of it, and it was good.
The cigar lit and burned well. It took a couple of minor corrections, but by and large corrected itself. I smoked it until it singed the hairs on my knuckles, and although it's a medium-full cigar, I think even a new smoker could smoke it safely. All in all, quite an accomplished cigar.
Question...the white ash, is that something that shows quality in a cigar? I have heard this before but I'm not sure of the reason that you want white ash.
along whit what others have said... its not so much the color of the ash but how strong it is. all the color can tell you (if you know) is the different amounts of compounds in the soil that the tobacco grew in. (or so im told)
It was very smooth, indeed, kuzi. Creamy might be what I was tasting, but it was a more complex and savory flavor than comes to my mind, at least, when I think of "creamy." I find I keep coming back to "fermented." Actually, it reminds me of a very fine pipe tobacco by McClelland's called "Christmas Cheer." They make a limited run of it for Xmas every year. It's a blend of stoved Virginia tobaccos, pressed into cakes and fermented, then sliced. Very savory, like the RP 92.
I haven't tried the 90, yet. Looking forward to it, though. Three of each came in the RP sampler I got.
I've seen different colors on good cigars. I'm not seasoned enough to know what regions some flavors may come from, although I have realized that I prefer smokes from Nicaragua then Honduras.
Now, the RP 92...that 'creamy' discription eluded me for months. This is the cigar that sold me on smoking cigars. Being new then I had no idea that a cigar could have that kind of flavor and it wasn't a hint of flavor either. It was a rich creamyness like a damn good cheesecake or 30 y.o. tawny port. Damn, I can't wait to get home.
Cigar: Don Pepin Garcia Legend
Size/Shape: Robustoro (5.7x54)
Time In My Humidor: 1 week
Smoking Time: 1:30
Overall Rating: 8.75
This was a good cigar that fell just short of being a very good cigar. If it'd had just a bit more flavor, it would've been a 9.
As it is, I would describe this as a classic cigar. That is, it doesn't taste like anything as much as it tastes like a cigar. The first half is peppery, and the last third or so has a sweet, herbal undertone. It produces lots of smoke, and has lots of body. More body than flavor, actually, if that makes any sense. It struck me as milder than DPG cigars generally are reputed to be. (I've only had one DPG, myself -- a 601 -- and it was stronger than this, IIRC.) It's still a medium-strength cigar, I'd say, but not a bruiser.
I smoked this more slowly than I normally smoke, not because of any trait of the cigar, but because I was more focused on what I was reading. I almost always read while I smoke. My attention is usually 50/50; this time it was more like 70/30. Anyway, I assume the slowness must have affected my experience with this cigar in some way, though I won't try to guess how. Just thought it was worth mentioning.
The cigar lit and drew well, and burned evenly despite spending a lot of time by itself. I like that. It speaks of really good construction, I think. It even went completely out, once, and retained its good flavor and body even after being relit. Another good sign.
All in all, this is a good smoke. If it and the Graycliff are typical of the Legends line, this is a happy time to be a cigar smoker.
I have realized that I prefer smokes from Nicaragua then Honduras.
me too. i just find that honduran tobacco has the most roundness to it. it seems to have alot of dimention to it.
try the punch gran puro, Carlos Torano Virtuoso, gurkha Regent, Camacho Havanna, Bolivar, sancho panza extra fuerte, and the camacho 1962.
that should be a good list of inexpenisve hondurans to try.
I've had a couple Toranos, I really like them, and I've had a Camacho but i don't remember being that impressed by it. The others I haven't had yet. The main one I want to try when I get home is a 5 Vegas, y'all talk about them so much I have to try them. As far as Nic over Honduras, I think I like the simplicity of the Nic smokes, it's like Honduras Light.
The cigar lit and drew well, and burned evenly despite spending a lot of time by itself. I like that. It speaks of really good construction, I think. It even went completely out, once, and retained its good flavor and body even after being relit. Another good sign.
Mine go out often becuase I'm usually talking too much but I have found that the better ones relight well and ratain there flavor. I haven't had a relight ruin a cigar yet unless it was just not a well made cigar. Where is the DPG from?
Cigar: Gurkha Legend
Size/Shape: Churchill
Time In My Humidor: 2 weeks
Smoking Time: 1:30
Overall Rating: 7.0
According to ccom's description, "They spared no expense in the creation of this cigar. It is so densely filled that it requires quite a time devotion to smoke it the whole way through."
They should have spared a bit of expense and filled it less densely. Unlit, this cigar shows a lot of promise. It has a lovely maduro wrapper, which smells like those chocolate-covered raisins you buy at the movie theater. Unfortunately, as soon as I cut it and tested the draw, I knew I was in trouble. Tight. Very tight. Unevenly tight.
Sure enough, it started canoeing within a few puffs, and required constant corrective lighting. Worse, it was darn near impossible to get a good mouthful of smoke from it. It wasn't that it wasn't producing a lot of smoke. It was. I just couldn't get much of it to come home to papa. If you've ever tried to drink a milkshake through a swizzle stick, you get the idea. When I could get a useful amount of smoke, the flavor was very nice -- rich & complex: the only reason the overall rating didn't drop into the 6s. The problem was, I almost never could get that much smoke.
After having nursed it past the halfway point, the whole thing decided it didn't want to burn. So now the corrective lighting was more like just plain relighting every few minutes. What's more, the draw got even worse. With about 2.5 inches left, it went out again and I gave up.
I've had 4 Gurkha cigars, now, and 3 of the 4 have had moderate to serious problems. The Centurian didn't produce much flavor, while this one and the second Sherpa I smoked had construction problems. The only really good smoke I've had from this premium brand was the first Sherpa, which was fantastic. At $2 each, I can afford to have some misses with the Sherpas; these other 2, though, are $15 and $20. Gurkha has just flat gotta do better than this. Period.
(NB: It should be noted that the Gurkha Legend is not part of the Legends series, but one of Gurkha's own standard lines.)
Bummer deal. You'd really expect more from the brand that is called the Rolls Royce of cigars. Speaking of the Gurkha Legend, that Warlord I sent you is actually an extension of the Legend line, however, I did not run into any severe problems with it, a minor corrective light here and there. The flavor profile was much to my liking, so give that one a try before you give up on Gurkha.
Yeah, it really is frustrating, Joe. At this point, I'd have to say Gurkha's reputation is more hype than reality. I know kuzi is a big fan, which tells me there's gotta be some real quality to them; but he's obviously having much better luck with them than I have so far. Maybe somebody filled my COTM starter from the "rejects" bin.
I'll continue exploring the Gurkhas I have on hand -- from you and others here, or from the COTM starter -- but I won't be buying any unless those show me something MUCH better than what I've seen thus far.
Yeah, it really is frustrating, Joe. At this point, I'd have to say Gurkha's reputation is more hype than reality. I know kuzi is a big fan, which tells me there's gotta be some real quality to them; but he's obviously having much better luck with them than I have so far. Maybe somebody filled my COTM sampler from the "rejects" bin.
I'll continue exploring the Gurkha's I have on hand -- from you and others here, or from the COTM starter -- but I won't be buying any unless those show me something MUCH better than what I've seen thus far.
Hey urbino .. It looks like you've been hit with the curse of the Gurkha.. C.Com must send out a lot of Gurkhas being they start all COTM club members with
these pretty pricey sticks, or maybe they just don't sell that well at regular price and it moves the product.. They have all been good or better to me .. I hope you get back on a winning streak soon..And as far as that Rolls Royce
reputation goes, who was it that made that bold statement anyway ?
I see the Rolls Royce comparison on seemingly all of the Gurkha lines that ccom has to offer. Quite frankly, unless Rolls Royce sells for a high price but is inundated with malfunctions, I just don't see how this is an apt comparison. My Gurkha experience thus far has been about even... I was not thrilled with the Centurion, nor was I crazy about the Titan. I have liked the Warlord and the G3 triple ligero. So, i'm at 50% with Gurkha right now.... which is not really saying much for Gurkha at all. Maybe the Sherpa will win me over, I've got some of them coming my way.
As far as price Vs. quality goes, I'd take an Oliva any day over a Gurkha.
Rolls may have some issues but any car manufacturer that will fly the man who built your car to you to fix it has to be pretty commited to reliability. Rolls are built by one person not assembly line built. Thats the major difference between Roll and Bentley. Jags are just plain garbage, espicially since Ford bought them and now has sold them to a Indian firm called TaTa who's claim to fame is they build the world's cheapest car.
Gurkha is no where near the "Rolls Royce of cigars". They are a little more **** about production but there are other companies far more **** than they are, like for instance Davidoff who actually tests the soil where their tobacco is grown to make sure it is exactly what it needs to be.
id put gurkha as the OLD jag of cigars. they look great they have great stats and for the most part they do what is expected of them. However, the old jags had one problem: you needed two of them. one to drive and one for parts. gurkha has had some quality issues recently but i still think that they offer more taste and complexity than almost any other brand out there now. they are in the same legue as Rocky Patel, OpusX, and to an extent, davidoff. I feel that gurkhas slip in quality is due to biting off more than they can chew. they want a bigger share of the market. how do you do that? make a wider selection of cigars and make more of them. when you boost production like this quality will go down. think of it this way: if ferarri boosted the production of the enzo from 501 to 50,000 they would have to hire more people to make them and chances are they would have less skill. they would have to have less rare parts and speed of production would now be a factor. these are all issues Gurkha is facing at this moment by not keeping it small and great.
In that respect, kuzi, it sounds like they're a bit of a microcosm for the whole industry. I think the "maybe you got a bad one" phenomenon is cropping up so often here because the makers haven't figured out how to meet increased demand and still maintain quality. That's strictly a theory, though. I'm pretty much talking out of my ass.
Thought I smelled something...lol. I'd rather pay a tad more for more consistant quality. It's supply and demand but they can only put out so much at one time. If they get to be known for bad quality then their demand will go down no matter how great there product used to be.
I will say the only thing Gurkha and Rolls Royce have in common aside from their ridiculous price tags, is that they are handmade. The difference is one is in an industry that requires that.
kuzi16:
they are in the same legue as Rocky Patel, OpusX, and to an extent, davidoff.
Kuzi here is where strongly disagree with you, they are in the same league as RP whos sticks cost 1/3 of the price. But they aren't in the same class as Davidoff. First and foremost they only produce cigars they don't own and control every aspect of the cigar making from hand picking the seeds and soil to having a standard for how straight the cut on the foot must be.
Another thing that strikes me as odd is that Hansotia has recently come out with the new line of non-Gurkha, Gurkha's which bear his name instead of the Gurkha name. THese are the cheaper Gurkha's, why would you put your name on something inferior. If I made something and came out with a line of that product that was going to bear my name, it would be the best! Just my little rant sorry.
Finally has anyone ever seen a rating of any Gurkha cigar by any major publisher? I hate CA personally but what about Insider or Smoke? Anyone?
WOW, I sounded like a complete cigar snob, and I apologize for that just had to go on a little rant about Gurkha. While I do appreciate some of their cigars, I am rather tired of hearing how they are the "Rolls Royce of Cigars". Just pricing yourself to the high end doesn't make you the high end. Whether I am a fan of their cigars or not is irrelevant. I'm not a Davidoff fan but I have to say they are the "Rolls Royce of Cigars" PERIOD!
Thought I smelled something...lol. I'd rather pay a tad more for more consistant quality. It's supply and demand but they can only put out so much at one time. If they get to be known for bad quality then their demand will go down no matter how great there product used to be.
When the cigar boom of the mid 90'****, cigar makers could not keep up with the demands either so the quality was lower on many brands due to rushing cigars to market...And there were so many Don Nobodys putting out cigars that there was a lot of crappy cigars being sold for way to much.. Quality has improved greatly since then and the"here today gone tomorrow" makers are all pretty much gone..I still think this is a great time to discover and enjoy cigars.
Comments
Size/Shape: Churchill
Time In My Humidor: 2 weeks +
Smoking Time: 1:30
Overall Rating: 9.1
This is a cigar that has a lot of admirers around here, and I can see why. For starters, it's great looking. For seconders, it draws perfectly. Unlit, it tastes of dried fruit -- kind of a blend of raisins, dates, and figs, without really tasting like any of them individually. It also has just a hint of chocolate.
Once lit, it produced lots of smoke (again, always important to me) with good body and a flavor I find I cannot describe. It wasn't the dried fruit flavor anymore. More of a fermented fruit flavor, maybe? Not sweet, but not spicy either, yet very flavorful. And there was definitely an earthiness to it. Like I said, I dunno how to describe it. But there was lots of it, and it was good.
The cigar lit and burned well. It took a couple of minor corrections, but by and large corrected itself. I smoked it until it singed the hairs on my knuckles, and although it's a medium-full cigar, I think even a new smoker could smoke it safely. All in all, quite an accomplished cigar.
the 92 is better than the 90 IMHO. its a RP that i have little issue with. im not running out to buy a box but id be happy if it was in a PIF.
I haven't tried the 90, yet. Looking forward to it, though. Three of each came in the RP sampler I got.
try the punch gran puro, Carlos Torano Virtuoso, gurkha Regent, Camacho Havanna, Bolivar, sancho panza extra fuerte, and the camacho 1962.
that should be a good list of inexpenisve hondurans to try.
Size/Shape: Robustoro (5.7x54)
Time In My Humidor: 1 week
Smoking Time: 1:30
Overall Rating: 8.75
This was a good cigar that fell just short of being a very good cigar. If it'd had just a bit more flavor, it would've been a 9.
As it is, I would describe this as a classic cigar. That is, it doesn't taste like anything as much as it tastes like a cigar. The first half is peppery, and the last third or so has a sweet, herbal undertone. It produces lots of smoke, and has lots of body. More body than flavor, actually, if that makes any sense. It struck me as milder than DPG cigars generally are reputed to be. (I've only had one DPG, myself -- a 601 -- and it was stronger than this, IIRC.) It's still a medium-strength cigar, I'd say, but not a bruiser.
I smoked this more slowly than I normally smoke, not because of any trait of the cigar, but because I was more focused on what I was reading. I almost always read while I smoke. My attention is usually 50/50; this time it was more like 70/30. Anyway, I assume the slowness must have affected my experience with this cigar in some way, though I won't try to guess how. Just thought it was worth mentioning.
The cigar lit and drew well, and burned evenly despite spending a lot of time by itself. I like that. It speaks of really good construction, I think. It even went completely out, once, and retained its good flavor and body even after being relit. Another good sign.
All in all, this is a good smoke. If it and the Graycliff are typical of the Legends line, this is a happy time to be a cigar smoker.
Size/Shape: Churchill
Time In My Humidor: 2 weeks
Smoking Time: 1:30
Overall Rating: 7.0
According to ccom's description, "They spared no expense in the creation of this cigar. It is so densely filled that it requires quite a time devotion to smoke it the whole way through."
They should have spared a bit of expense and filled it less densely. Unlit, this cigar shows a lot of promise. It has a lovely maduro wrapper, which smells like those chocolate-covered raisins you buy at the movie theater. Unfortunately, as soon as I cut it and tested the draw, I knew I was in trouble. Tight. Very tight. Unevenly tight.
Sure enough, it started canoeing within a few puffs, and required constant corrective lighting. Worse, it was darn near impossible to get a good mouthful of smoke from it. It wasn't that it wasn't producing a lot of smoke. It was. I just couldn't get much of it to come home to papa. If you've ever tried to drink a milkshake through a swizzle stick, you get the idea. When I could get a useful amount of smoke, the flavor was very nice -- rich & complex: the only reason the overall rating didn't drop into the 6s. The problem was, I almost never could get that much smoke.
After having nursed it past the halfway point, the whole thing decided it didn't want to burn. So now the corrective lighting was more like just plain relighting every few minutes. What's more, the draw got even worse. With about 2.5 inches left, it went out again and I gave up.
I've had 4 Gurkha cigars, now, and 3 of the 4 have had moderate to serious problems. The Centurian didn't produce much flavor, while this one and the second Sherpa I smoked had construction problems. The only really good smoke I've had from this premium brand was the first Sherpa, which was fantastic. At $2 each, I can afford to have some misses with the Sherpas; these other 2, though, are $15 and $20. Gurkha has just flat gotta do better than this. Period.
(NB: It should be noted that the Gurkha Legend is not part of the Legends series, but one of Gurkha's own standard lines.)
I'll continue exploring the Gurkhas I have on hand -- from you and others here, or from the COTM starter -- but I won't be buying any unless those show me something MUCH better than what I've seen thus far.
As far as price Vs. quality goes, I'd take an Oliva any day over a Gurkha.
you needed two of them. one to drive and one for parts. gurkha has had some quality issues recently but i still think that they offer more taste and complexity than almost any other brand out there now. they are in the same legue as Rocky Patel, OpusX, and to an extent, davidoff.
I feel that gurkhas slip in quality is due to biting off more than they can chew. they want a bigger share of the market. how do you do that? make a wider selection of cigars and make more of them. when you boost production like this quality will go down. think of it this way: if ferarri boosted the production of the enzo from 501 to 50,000 they would have to hire more people to make them and chances are they would have less skill. they would have to have less rare parts and speed of production would now be a factor. these are all issues Gurkha is facing at this moment by not keeping it small and great.
Cigar: Romeo y Julieta Reserva Real
Size/Shape: Toro
Time In My Humidor: 3 weeks
Smoking Time: 1:30
Overall Rating: 8.75
I'm upgrading this cigar a quarter point.
Another thing that strikes me as odd is that Hansotia has recently come out with the new line of non-Gurkha, Gurkha's which bear his name instead of the Gurkha name. THese are the cheaper Gurkha's, why would you put your name on something inferior. If I made something and came out with a line of that product that was going to bear my name, it would be the best! Just my little rant sorry.
Finally has anyone ever seen a rating of any Gurkha cigar by any major publisher? I hate CA personally but what about Insider or Smoke? Anyone?