When I smoked one a couple years ago, I found it to be a very pleasant flavor profile with no issues at all. I got that one from Madurofan (remember him) and he raved about them. I Ordered a few some time later and knew they weren't the same blend. I would say it was a cigar that I will remember as top ten from my experience that day.
I am not a Tat fan overall either, personally I think they are a bit overrated due to "scarcity"---but as Kuz said I can see why people like them----but also as he said, not generally for me either. Thats why suprized me about this stick, to paraphrase and change another great line that has been said here about another brand "It tastes just like a Tat, except its good". Barclay Rex Tat was also quite tasty---but other than that-----yup.
When I smoked one a couple years ago, I found it to be a very pleasant flavor profile with no issues at all. I got that one from Madurofan (remember him) and he raved about them. I Ordered a few some time later and knew they weren't the same blend. I would say it was a cigar that I will remember as top ten from my experience that day.
I may be mistaken----but there was the original blend for this stick...and you can find them sitting around still at a few places (PM if youre interested). The El Triunfador then became a totally different blend, but Tat is still releasing the lancero on a limited basis with the "same original composition"----or so the story goes:/
When I smoked one a couple years ago, I found it to be a very pleasant flavor profile with no issues at all. I got that one from Madurofan (remember him) and he raved about them. I Ordered a few some time later and knew they weren't the same blend. I would say it was a cigar that I will remember as top ten from my experience that day.
I may be mistaken----but there was the original blend for this stick...and you can find them sitting around still at a few places (PM if youre interested). The El Triunfador then became a totally different blend, but Tat is still releasing the lancero on a limited basis with the "same original composition"----or so the story goes:/
The most recent red and gold band tasted nothing like the rustic brown label one I found so amazing. It may have been the age or the moment but I didn't get the same wow the next time I burned one. I decided it was a moment to remember not try to recreate.
Gotcha.....totally different blend Kas. The red and gold band are not the same stick as original brown band----justy the same name. There is still a limited release of the brown banded lancero however----a little confusing I know.
When I smoked one a couple years ago, I found it to be a very pleasant flavor profile with no issues at all. I got that one from Madurofan (remember him) and he raved about them. I Ordered a few some time later and knew they weren't the same blend. I would say it was a cigar that I will remember as top ten from my experience that day.
I may be mistaken----but there was the original blend for this stick...and you can find them sitting around still at a few places (PM if youre interested). The El Triunfador then became a totally different blend, but Tat is still releasing the lancero on a limited basis with the "same original composition"----or so the story goes:/
Vulchor, this is what I've been hearing as well, and its the originals that i keep eyeing. Like you said I've never heard a bad review, so I really should just pick some up the next time I order stuff. thanks for all the feedback guys.
Sometimes I feel like it can be hard to get an objective review once the word 'tatuaje' appears before a cigar, so your objectivity is what makes this one a good read.
im not a big tat fan. i have not been wowed by any of his stuff. im never mad at it but i have yet to finish one and think to myself "damn, i need to buy a box of these NOW" as vulchor said above, we all have different tastes. i can see why people like Tatuaje, but they just dont seem to be for me.
boydmcgowan:
I tend to really enjoy almost anything DPG, and have been exploring lanceros . . . a little. So with that combo its only a matter of time before you stumble onto talk of this cigar. I've been looking to pick up a few but haven't actually pulled the trigger yet.
trade for one or two first. i dont consider this to be a DPG cigar even though it is made in the My Father Factory. Pete definitely has his hands in the blend. i look at it as more of a Pete Johnson cigar than a DPG.
Yeah, I'm not sure if I'm a tat fan yet either but I know I like the few Browns that i've had and the red labels quite a bit, and I just picked up a few of the black from Tim and they smell amazing. So I think my chances are good. We'll see, what direction I go in, in a month or so, but I probably will try these sooner rather than later.
La Gloria Mateo (My Personal Blend) (44 x6.75)
Wrapper: Viso criollo Colorado Intermedio From the Azacualpa region of Honduras
Binder: Natural Cameroon Viso
Filler: Dominican Ligero, Habano seco from The Jamastran Vally in Honduras, Nicaraguan Habano viso.
Blender: Kuzi16
Yes, you read this correctly. I have a personal blend.
Well sorta. I only received 20 of them.
On My trip to Nicaragua I found myself in the Blending room at the Plasencia Factory in Estali with hundreds of tobaccos at my disposal and the intent to blend a cigar for me. I had to take my limited knowledge of tobacco and put it to the best use I could.
At the time of this experience I was into nuttier tobacco with sweet, warm undertones. Here is my thought process that I wrote down just days after the blending session.
My fist task in blending was to think of a flavor profile that I want to achieve.
This basic flavor profile will help guide me as I blend.
Since most of the flavor of a cigar comes from the wrapper, this seems like a logical place to start.
I find that Honduran tobacco tends to have the nutty tones to it, so I know what country to start with. I am looking for a good rich flavor from the wrapper so I cannot have it be seco (lowest priming) it will be to mild and will get over powered by the rest of the blend. I cant have it be Ligero due to burn issues and the tendency for ligero to be spicier than I am looking for. This narrows it down to viso. I dont want the leaf to be too fermented or it will lose some of the nut tones that Honduran tobacco has and it may make sweet the dominant flavor. I settle in on a Viso criollo Colorado Intermedio (medium hue and fermentation compared to either a maduro or natural colorado) From the Azacualpa region of Honduras.
The binder seems like the logical next.
I am looking for a sweet leaf that is hearty. this should be able to give me the bit of sweet that i am looking for while still holding the cigar together. When many people think sweet tobacco, they think of Cameroon tobacco. The sweetness and the overall neutrality of the tobacco should compliment the wrapper well. The binder cant be to strong of a leaf because it will over power the wrapper so ligero is out (ligero is also out for combustion issues as well), but i want it to have some impact so Seco is out as well. Viso is again the way to go. I used a Natural Cameroon Viso leaf as binder.
Filler can be tricky.
the filler has to not only compliment itself, but it needs to go well with the wrapper binder combination. Much of the body of the cigar is decided in the filler. I want some body to it but I dont want it to be overbearing. So I will need some ligero. Ligero tends to add a depth of flavor that other tobaccos cannot.
I am looking for a warm undertone almost like a mild cinnamon. my first thought is the Dominican Republic. many of the puros i have had from the DR have had these warm undertones. (the LG, OpusX, Puro de Oro, etc ) so this may be the way to go. The Dominican usually produces tobacco that is a bit milder than that of other countries so I can have the ligero and get the flavor without having the spice and lack of balance.
The next leaf in the blend I want to reflect the nutty notes. I dont want the nut flavors to be one dimensional so the filler should also have some Honduran tobacco. the Jamastran Vally of Honduras Produces some of the richest tobaccos the country can provide, but since i am not looking to add ligero and i am just looking for support to the wrapper I will be using seco. Its rich for seco, but mild for the plant it came from. i am using a Habano seco from The Jamastran Vally in Honduras.
I want an element of complexity in this blend. Nicaragua produces some of the most complex tobacco in the world, and I want some of that in there. the problem is that it can get spicy and powerful quickly. Ligero is right out. seco may get lost in the mix so i am aiming that viso will work well. with any luck this combined with the Dominican Ligero will give me the Cinnamon tones that i am looking for.
so now we have our blend:
wrapper: Viso criollo Colorado Intermedio From the Azacualpa region of Honduras
Binder: Natural Cameroon Viso
and filler: Dominican Ligero, Habano seco from The Jamastran Vally in Honduras, Nicaraguan Habano viso.
all of that is before the first taste.
Hand this list to a roller and tell him to aim for a ring of 44 (to make the wrapper and binder leaves more prominent) and 6.75 inches long (to get complexity from the filler).
he rolls it up and hands it to me.
I did a tasting right then and there and it was good. I had nutty notes and spicy elements.
I was given the option to buy a bundle of my blend if I liked them. Of course I did. They needed a name for them to not confuse them with the others in our group. Were were all giving named as half jokes and that is how I ended up with La Gloria Mateo.
Now, over a year later, I am doing a proper review of the cigar I blended.
I hope I do not suffer from Stockholm Cigar Syndrome (usually a condition that happens in sales reps not blenders) where I have fallen in love with my own product regardless of the quality. I will do my best to remain objective.
The wrapper is rustic in nature. There are some very dominate veins that give the wrapper this look. Adding to the fact that the binder appears to have thicker veins as well, making the wrapper bumpy in more places. The cap looks a little rough as well. There are spots where it isnt exactly flat against the cigar.
The smell to it is hay and a sweet note. It is very unremarkable. The lick on the cap has a sour note to it and little else. After a cut with a double guillotine the ever-so-slightly tight draw has a sweet woody earth feel to it. It seems fairly unique, though not convinced that it is what most would call good. The words good and unique are not synonymous.
The first few puffs after a light with a soft flame are light and slightly sweet. There are nutty tones with a slight nutty musk through the nose. Very late on the finish there is a woody spice note. I say very late on the finish as if the finish was not very short in comparison to most cigars on the market. As the cigar settles in the sweetness sticks
around.
There is an earthy note that takes over for most of the nuttiness, thought that is still there but mainly on the finish. Through the nose is the same but with a touch more spice. The spice seems slightly our of place, keeping the balance from what I want it to be.
The first ash falls after a little over an inch. Shortly after this point the spice in the finish also falls away and the cigar is brought back closer to balance. There is still something a bit off in it. I just cant put my finger on it.
As the middle third starts up the cigar is building in body. The woody notes are taking over and the delicate nutty tones are being covered. A slight bitter note develops late on the finish. While the initial flavor continues to be sweet. Im becoming more aware that the transition from the initial flavor to the finish is where the lack of balance comes in. they ever so slightly dont work with each other.
There is little further development by the half way point.
The final third sees a bit rounder flavor. The bitter note has tapered off and the woody-spice is now prominent through the nose. The nutty flavors are beginning to make a comeback but in a mild form. There is still a decent amount of sweet to it. As the cigar ends there are nutty tones and a light sweetness. The slight better creeps back in and the finish is woody.
There is nothing spectacular about this cigar but I feel very lucky to have had the opportunity to blend it. Opportunities like this dont happen very often.
I would like to thank Colin Ganley for running/organizing the trip to Nicaragua (cigartourism.com) and Nestor Plasencia Jr and the team at the Plasencia factory in Estali, Nicaragua for making this happen.
Given some time to play with this blend, I am sure I could tweak it to make it better. All-in-all, I am not mad at this first attempt to blend a cigar.
Would a ring gauge increase helped? It sounds like it was lacking body and presence. I enjoyed and was excited about this review.
id say it was medium in body. thats what i was going for. so a ring gauge increase may add more body but i wouldnt want that. the more i think of it the more i would have halved the nicaraguan tobacco in the filler and did one and a half of the honduran. i may have changed out the cameroon binder as well. i think that may have been throwing it out of balance a touch as well. the sweetness was good but on the finish it didnt work. if i was trying to make a cigar to sell, i would not have put this one on the market. it is decent, but not what i think it can be.
3-27-12 been in humidor since 12-9-11
Don Pepin Garcia Cuban Classic Petit Lancero 1977 (5.5 x 38)
Wrapper: Nicaraguan Habano Rosado (corojo 99)
Binder: Nicaraguan
Filler: Nicaraguan
Blender: Don Pepin Garcia
a big thanks to 90+Irishman for getting this to my door.
Every cigar in this particular line (save for the limited edition lancero) is named after a year that is important to the Garcia Family.
According to every bit of info that that I found on-line Don Pepin was born in 1950, got into the cigar business at age 11 (1961) in B
Great review. I do love the DPG CC, but trying to pick my favorite DPG is like trying to pick my favorite food. How can I choose pizza when there is also steak, sushi, and biscuits and gravy? Impossible.
Also, you touched on my biggest pet peeve in cigar marketing: I hate the word "cubanesque." First, I've smoked 1 cuban in my life, so the word means nothing to me. Second, I've seen cigars that have absolutely nothing in common... completely different wrappers, fillers, strengths, country of origin, etc. all described as "cubanesque." So basically, it seems like any cigar that is good is cubanesque, regardless of what it tastes like. Annoying.
Great review. I do love the DPG CC, but trying to pick my favorite DPG is like trying to pick my favorite food. How can I choose pizza when there is also steak, sushi, and biscuits and gravy? Impossible.
Also, you touched on my biggest pet peeve in cigar marketing: I hate the word "cubanesque." First, I've smoked 1 cuban in my life, so the word means nothing to me. Second, I've seen cigars that have absolutely nothing in common... completely different wrappers, fillers, strengths, country of origin, etc. all described as "cubanesque." So basically, it seems like any cigar that is good is cubanesque, regardless of what it tastes like. Annoying.
to me, no other cigars taste like a Cuban cigar. ...just like no other cigars tastes like Nicaraguan cigars, or Honduran cigars... every country has a feel, a taste, or texture to it that makes it unique. so far, all of my favorite cigars are not Cuban even though i have had quite a few.
Great review. I love the CC, and smoke them regularly. I think the robusto retains more of the cubanesque flavors than the lancero, but they are both great sticks. My 2 favorite vitolas for sure.
the black label is an amazingly underrated cigar, and probably my #2 DPG behind the blue label so I'm right there with you on your high opinion of the blend, but I'm really suprized this is your favorite size. I've never had the petite lancero but I've had a few of the Petite Coronas and 4.25 x 40 or whatever it is just didn't give me . . . . "enough" is I think the word I'm looking for. I operate under the theory that the blend drives the size and I've had better luck with the Robusto especially with a year or more on em, So I guess, I need to try a few of these before I write off the small rings in this blend. Plus pig tail caps are just cool as hell.
Also random Question, why the odd sizes for this line?
Also random Question, why the odd sizes for this line?
i thought i read somewhere that they were supposed to in the cuban tradition but after a closer look at the sizes, this cannot be true. I am in the dark on this point as much as i am in the dark about the names of them. the only name i can figure out is the 2001 (6 x 60). 2001 is the year Pepin came to Nicaragua.
Would a ring gauge increase helped? It sounds like it was lacking body and presence. I enjoyed and was excited about this review.
id say it was medium in body. thats what i was going for. so a ring gauge increase may add more body but i wouldnt want that. the more i think of it the more i would have halved the nicaraguan tobacco in the filler and did one and a half of the honduran. i may have changed out the cameroon binder as well. i think that may have been throwing it out of balance a touch as well. the sweetness was good but on the finish it didnt work. if i was trying to make a cigar to sell, i would not have put this one on the market. it is decent, but not what i think it can be.
Also random Question, why the odd sizes for this line?
i thought i read somewhere that they were supposed to in the cuban tradition but after a closer look at the sizes, this cannot be true. I am in the dark on this point as much as i am in the dark about the names of them. the only name i can figure out is the 2001 (6 x 60). 2001 is the year Pepin came to Nicaragua.
While you're technically right, I just wanted to point out that the size you smoked is very close (1/2" shorter) to the Laguito #2 vitola...so while that one in particular does not match any Cuban vitolas, it is in the traditional size range. Of course I'm not telling you anything you don't know, but perhaps others can benefit from that info.
Also random Question, why the odd sizes for this line?
i thought i read somewhere that they were supposed to in the cuban tradition but after a closer look at the sizes, this cannot be true. I am in the dark on this point as much as i am in the dark about the names of them. the only name i can figure out is the 2001 (6 x 60). 2001 is the year Pepin came to Nicaragua.
While you're technically right, I just wanted to point out that the size you smoked is very close (1/2" shorter) to the Laguito #2 vitola...so while that one in particular does not match any Cuban vitolas, it is in the traditional size range. Of course I'm not telling you anything you don't know, but perhaps others can benefit from that info.
you are correct... but the rest of the line is what i was as referring to.
the 1950 is 6 x 52 the 1970 is 5 x 54 the 1973 is a 6 x 60/48 figurado, the 2001 is 6 x 60
these are hardly traditional cuban sizes. the 1952 (4.25 x 40), 1977 (5.5 x 38), and 1979 (5 x 50) are the ones closer to Cuban Tradition. I have a feeling that most of the sizes are all marketing.
AWESOME review Kuzi, you totally nailed the flavor profiles on the head from start to finish! While thats NOT unusual for your reviews, it IS the first time Ive read one and thought "Thats EXACTLY what I got from it!" myself. Not sure what that means, but it makes me happy. LOL
Im a big fan of the Cuban Classic, and prefer it in the 1979 (robusto) size. I should also admit that Ive only had it in one other size (1952) and it was an awful experience.
i keep hearing that the robusto is the way to go with this blend. i will have to check that out. this is a great example of how size can effect flavor. I think at some point i will have to smoke all of these in the line and compare each one to the other in one mega review of an entire line. im not sure i have the time or patience to do that in a short amount of time.
i keep hearing that the robusto is the way to go with this blend. i will have to check that out. this is a great example of how size can effect flavor. I think at some point i will have to smoke all of these in the line and compare each one to the other in one mega review of an entire line. im not sure i have the time or patience to do that in a short amount of time.
its fun to think about though.
From what I've heard from various reps and such, Pepin blends nearly all of his cigars in the robusto size (the exception being some Tatuaje stuff), and they are therefore the best representation of what he wants the blend to taste like. I don't know if that's 100% true (kinda hard to verify that info), but I can say that the robusto version of pretty much all of his stuff that I smoke is typically what I prefer. Matter of fact, I would say he is responsible for my love of the robusto.
From what I've heard from various reps and such, Pepin blends nearly all of his cigars in the robusto size (the exception being some Tatuaje stuff), and they are therefore the best representation of what he wants the blend to taste like. I don't know if that's 100% true (kinda hard to verify that info), but I can say that the robusto version of pretty much all of his stuff that I smoke is typically what I prefer. Matter of fact, I would say he is responsible for my love of the robusto.
that would not surprise me at all. many blenders blend for a specific size. Matt booth blends for 4 x 42 (his "papi chulo") and i have heard others say the toro or corona is what they shoot for. this could explain it.
if i ever find myself in the DPG factory again ill do my best to remember to ask.
it is hard to keep your wits about you in such an amazing environment as that factory. but if im there again, ill try.
Also random Question, why the odd sizes for this line?
i thought i read somewhere that they were supposed to in the cuban tradition but after a closer look at the sizes, this cannot be true. I am in the dark on this point as much as i am in the dark about the names of them. the only name i can figure out is the 2001 (6 x 60). 2001 is the year Pepin came to Nicaragua.
While you're technically right, I just wanted to point out that the size you smoked is very close (1/2" shorter) to the Laguito #2 vitola...so while that one in particular does not match any Cuban vitolas, it is in the traditional size range. Of course I'm not telling you anything you don't know, but perhaps others can benefit from that info.
you are correct... but the rest of the line is what i was as referring to.
the 1950 is 6 x 52 the 1970 is 5 x 54 the 1973 is a 6 x 60/48 figurado, the 2001 is 6 x 60
these are hardly traditional cuban sizes. the 1952 (4.25 x 40), 1977 (5.5 x 38), and 1979 (5 x 50) are the ones closer to Cuban Tradition. I have a feeling that most of the sizes are all marketing.
Thats good info guys, thanks for that.
I didn't realize that the 5.5 x 38 was a traditional size and have never heard of "Laguito" but that makes alot of sense that the sizes that I'm not used to seeing would be more traditional.
I guess the big glaring hole that I see in these sizes is anything between a 40 and 50 ring guage, which is very unusual, especially for a more traditional blender. I am a little bummed that there's no corona extra, corona gorda or lonsdale. Robustos are my sweet spot in this line though, so I can't complain too much.
From what I've heard from various reps and such, Pepin blends nearly all of his cigars in the robusto size (the exception being some Tatuaje stuff), and they are therefore the best representation of what he wants the blend to taste like. I don't know if that's 100% true (kinda hard to verify that info), but I can say that the robusto version of pretty much all of his stuff that I smoke is typically what I prefer. Matter of fact, I would say he is responsible for my love of the robusto.
that would not surprise me at all. many blenders blend for a specific size. Matt booth blends for 4 x 42 (his "papi chulo") and i have heard others say the toro or corona is what they shoot for. this could explain it.
if i ever find myself in the DPG factory again ill do my best to remember to ask.
it is hard to keep your wits about you in such an amazing environment as that factory. but if im there again, ill try.
Kuzi, if you do remember to ask please do so, I'm sure that I'm not the only one who'd love to know this. Thanks for Bringing it up Todd.
Also random Question, why the odd sizes for this line?
i thought i read somewhere that they were supposed to in the cuban tradition but after a closer look at the sizes, this cannot be true. I am in the dark on this point as much as i am in the dark about the names of them. the only name i can figure out is the 2001 (6 x 60). 2001 is the year Pepin came to Nicaragua.
While you're technically right, I just wanted to point out that the size you smoked is very close (1/2" shorter) to the Laguito #2 vitola...so while that one in particular does not match any Cuban vitolas, it is in the traditional size range. Of course I'm not telling you anything you don't know, but perhaps others can benefit from that info.
you are correct... but the rest of the line is what i was as referring to.
the 1950 is 6 x 52 the 1970 is 5 x 54 the 1973 is a 6 x 60/48 figurado, the 2001 is 6 x 60
these are hardly traditional cuban sizes. the 1952 (4.25 x 40), 1977 (5.5 x 38), and 1979 (5 x 50) are the ones closer to Cuban Tradition. I have a feeling that most of the sizes are all marketing.
And that's why I only made specific mention of the one size...although upon second thought, the belicoso is within the traditional range of figurados, see Bolivar Belicoso Fino...But yes, the remaining sizes are very un-Cubanesque in their dimensions.
4-11-12 been in humidor since 11-14-11
Oliva Serie V Maduro 2010 (6 x 54)
Wrapper: Mexican San Andreas Maduro
Binder: Nicaraguan
Filler: Jalapa Valley Ligero
Blender: Gilberto Oliva Sr, Gilberto Oliva Jr, Carlos Oliva
The Original version of the Oliva Serie V Maduro was released in 2008 as a followup release to the 2007 Oliva Serie V. The Original V was my go to cigar in 2007 as it was for many people. This was one of the more powerful cigars on the market but what set it apart was the approachability of it. When the V maduro hit the market as a limited edition cigar in 2008 there was a mad dash for it. As far as I can piece together, the history of the V maduro blend goes as follows: The original V maduro Had a Connecticut Broadleaf Maduro and was a 52 ring gauge. The 2009 version was also 6.5 x 52 and sported a Nicaraguan Habano Maduro and not the Connecticut leaf. 2010 brought yet another change with upping the ring to a 54, the length down to 6 inches and changing (again) the wrapper leaf, this time to the Mexican San Andreas Maduro. This seems to be (for the time being) the wrapper that Oliva has decided to go with for this cigar. However, the 2011 brought changes yet again; this time to the size and shape only. The 2011 ditches the torpedo and goes with a 6 x 50 toro instead. There are rumors that the filler was changed a tiny bit for the 2011 but the basic Jalapa ligero is still there.
I have yet to smoke the 2010 and was a fan of the 2008 and 2009. I have high hopes for this cigar.
The cigar looks very much like its non-maduro cousin. The only way that an untrained eye could see that it is the maduro version is that is says Maduro to the left of the V on the band. Other than that, the band is the same. Since I am used to the look of the regular V, the V maduro is very unassuming. The wrapper is rugged and tough looking. There is a considerable amount of tooth to it that is more than just visible. It has almost a sandpaper quality to it.
The smell of the cigar before the light is classic sweet earth/peat maduro. The lick on the cap is slightly chocolatey but as the oils linger in the mouth it reveals a hint of spice. After a cut with a double guillotine the draw is firm but not unsmokeable. There is a flavor of a generic sweet, licorice and maybe a hint of coco.
After a light with a soft flame, I am greeted with flavors that are fairly sweet and light with light spicy notes as an undertone. Through the nose the cigar shows much more spice. As the cigar begins to open up a sweet cedar note shows up on the finish. The beginning of this cigar does remind me quite a bit of the original V but with a sweeter overall and a but woodier. I was expecting a bit more spice than what I am getting out of it. This isnt a problem, but an observation. In the first third the ash drops twice. This is unusual for a ring this large. I hesitate to call it a construction issue due to the flawless slow burn, even feel, and perfectly acceptable draw. There maybe something else going on here.
As the middle third starts up a leathery note has shown up. It is actually the dominant flavor. The sweetness has dies down quite a bit. Through the nose is still the same spice but there is also a slight musk in there. The finish has now a touch of coffee to it. The cigar has taken a turn for the savory. The sweet notes have dissipated and a rugged leather cigar remains. Since the smoke is building in strength, this is a welcome change. As the middle third progresses on the spice builds. It is mostly black pepper.
Entering the final third and the profile continues to be much like the middle third. The only difference being a nutty note appearing every now and then. As it marches to the finish, coffee becomes more prominent in the mix. The power has built to the expected medium-full that I expected. The flavor has remained about where it was at the mid point. I feel that this is throwing the cigar out of balance a bit. The wood notes have started to return as well but only as an afterthought. It is mainly a coffee flavor that is almost to a bitter.
The cigar ends with the same. There is no bite at the end and no heating up at all.
Overall, the cigar is exactly what one would expect out of a V but with a sweeter note and more of a coffee feel to it. this isn't a life altering cigar but it is a solid stick. If you like the V like I do, give the V maduro a try. It is a slightly different view on a familiar cigar.
Comments
Side note, I love the simple band.
thanks for all the feedback though kuzi.
La Gloria Mateo (My Personal Blend) (44 x6.75)
Wrapper: Viso criollo Colorado Intermedio From the Azacualpa region of Honduras
Binder: Natural Cameroon Viso
Filler: Dominican Ligero, Habano seco from The Jamastran Vally in Honduras, Nicaraguan Habano viso.
Blender: Kuzi16
Yes, you read this correctly. I have a personal blend.
Well sorta. I only received 20 of them.
On My trip to Nicaragua I found myself in the Blending room at the Plasencia Factory in Estali with hundreds of tobaccos at my disposal and the intent to blend a cigar for me. I had to take my limited knowledge of tobacco and put it to the best use I could.
At the time of this experience I was into nuttier tobacco with sweet, warm undertones. Here is my thought process that I wrote down just days after the blending session.
My fist task in blending was to think of a flavor profile that I want to achieve.
This basic flavor profile will help guide me as I blend.
Since most of the flavor of a cigar comes from the wrapper, this seems like a logical place to start. I find that Honduran tobacco tends to have the nutty tones to it, so I know what country to start with. I am looking for a good rich flavor from the wrapper so I cannot have it be seco (lowest priming) it will be to mild and will get over powered by the rest of the blend. I cant have it be Ligero due to burn issues and the tendency for ligero to be spicier than I am looking for. This narrows it down to viso. I dont want the leaf to be too fermented or it will lose some of the nut tones that Honduran tobacco has and it may make sweet the dominant flavor. I settle in on a Viso criollo Colorado Intermedio (medium hue and fermentation compared to either a maduro or natural colorado) From the Azacualpa region of Honduras.
The binder seems like the logical next.
I am looking for a sweet leaf that is hearty. this should be able to give me the bit of sweet that i am looking for while still holding the cigar together. When many people think sweet tobacco, they think of Cameroon tobacco. The sweetness and the overall neutrality of the tobacco should compliment the wrapper well. The binder cant be to strong of a leaf because it will over power the wrapper so ligero is out (ligero is also out for combustion issues as well), but i want it to have some impact so Seco is out as well. Viso is again the way to go. I used a Natural Cameroon Viso leaf as binder.
Filler can be tricky.
the filler has to not only compliment itself, but it needs to go well with the wrapper binder combination. Much of the body of the cigar is decided in the filler. I want some body to it but I dont want it to be overbearing. So I will need some ligero. Ligero tends to add a depth of flavor that other tobaccos cannot.
I am looking for a warm undertone almost like a mild cinnamon. my first thought is the Dominican Republic. many of the puros i have had from the DR have had these warm undertones. (the LG, OpusX, Puro de Oro, etc ) so this may be the way to go. The Dominican usually produces tobacco that is a bit milder than that of other countries so I can have the ligero and get the flavor without having the spice and lack of balance.
The next leaf in the blend I want to reflect the nutty notes. I dont want the nut flavors to be one dimensional so the filler should also have some Honduran tobacco. the Jamastran Vally of Honduras Produces some of the richest tobaccos the country can provide, but since i am not looking to add ligero and i am just looking for support to the wrapper I will be using seco. Its rich for seco, but mild for the plant it came from. i am using a Habano seco from The Jamastran Vally in Honduras.
I want an element of complexity in this blend. Nicaragua produces some of the most complex tobacco in the world, and I want some of that in there. the problem is that it can get spicy and powerful quickly. Ligero is right out. seco may get lost in the mix so i am aiming that viso will work well. with any luck this combined with the Dominican Ligero will give me the Cinnamon tones that i am looking for.
so now we have our blend:
wrapper: Viso criollo Colorado Intermedio From the Azacualpa region of Honduras
Binder: Natural Cameroon Viso
and filler: Dominican Ligero, Habano seco from The Jamastran Vally in Honduras, Nicaraguan Habano viso.
all of that is before the first taste.
Hand this list to a roller and tell him to aim for a ring of 44 (to make the wrapper and binder leaves more prominent) and 6.75 inches long (to get complexity from the filler). he rolls it up and hands it to me.
I did a tasting right then and there and it was good. I had nutty notes and spicy elements.
I was given the option to buy a bundle of my blend if I liked them. Of course I did. They needed a name for them to not confuse them with the others in our group. Were were all giving named as half jokes and that is how I ended up with La Gloria Mateo.
Now, over a year later, I am doing a proper review of the cigar I blended.
I hope I do not suffer from Stockholm Cigar Syndrome (usually a condition that happens in sales reps not blenders) where I have fallen in love with my own product regardless of the quality. I will do my best to remain objective.
The wrapper is rustic in nature. There are some very dominate veins that give the wrapper this look. Adding to the fact that the binder appears to have thicker veins as well, making the wrapper bumpy in more places. The cap looks a little rough as well. There are spots where it isnt exactly flat against the cigar.
The smell to it is hay and a sweet note. It is very unremarkable. The lick on the cap has a sour note to it and little else. After a cut with a double guillotine the ever-so-slightly tight draw has a sweet woody earth feel to it. It seems fairly unique, though not convinced that it is what most would call good. The words good and unique are not synonymous.
The first few puffs after a light with a soft flame are light and slightly sweet. There are nutty tones with a slight nutty musk through the nose. Very late on the finish there is a woody spice note. I say very late on the finish as if the finish was not very short in comparison to most cigars on the market. As the cigar settles in the sweetness sticks around.
There is an earthy note that takes over for most of the nuttiness, thought that is still there but mainly on the finish. Through the nose is the same but with a touch more spice. The spice seems slightly our of place, keeping the balance from what I want it to be.
The first ash falls after a little over an inch. Shortly after this point the spice in the finish also falls away and the cigar is brought back closer to balance. There is still something a bit off in it. I just cant put my finger on it.
As the middle third starts up the cigar is building in body. The woody notes are taking over and the delicate nutty tones are being covered. A slight bitter note develops late on the finish. While the initial flavor continues to be sweet. Im becoming more aware that the transition from the initial flavor to the finish is where the lack of balance comes in. they ever so slightly dont work with each other.
There is little further development by the half way point.
The final third sees a bit rounder flavor. The bitter note has tapered off and the woody-spice is now prominent through the nose. The nutty flavors are beginning to make a comeback but in a mild form. There is still a decent amount of sweet to it. As the cigar ends there are nutty tones and a light sweetness. The slight better creeps back in and the finish is woody.
There is nothing spectacular about this cigar but I feel very lucky to have had the opportunity to blend it. Opportunities like this dont happen very often.
I would like to thank Colin Ganley for running/organizing the trip to Nicaragua (cigartourism.com) and Nestor Plasencia Jr and the team at the Plasencia factory in Estali, Nicaragua for making this happen.
Given some time to play with this blend, I am sure I could tweak it to make it better. All-in-all, I am not mad at this first attempt to blend a cigar.
Burn time: 2 hours
Burn: 9
Draw: 9
Taste: 8
Aftertaste: 8
Construction: 8
Balance: 8
Feel: 9
Overall: 8.4 of 10
if you like my reviews, please see my blog and follow me on twitter (@KuzisCigar) or Facebook
if i was trying to make a cigar to sell, i would not have put this one on the market. it is decent, but not what i think it can be.
Don Pepin Garcia Cuban Classic Petit Lancero 1977 (5.5 x 38)
Wrapper: Nicaraguan Habano Rosado (corojo 99)
Binder: Nicaraguan
Filler: Nicaraguan
Blender: Don Pepin Garcia
a big thanks to 90+Irishman for getting this to my door.
Every cigar in this particular line (save for the limited edition lancero) is named after a year that is important to the Garcia Family.
According to every bit of info that that I found on-line Don Pepin was born in 1950, got into the cigar business at age 11 (1961) in B
Also, you touched on my biggest pet peeve in cigar marketing: I hate the word "cubanesque." First, I've smoked 1 cuban in my life, so the word means nothing to me. Second, I've seen cigars that have absolutely nothing in common... completely different wrappers, fillers, strengths, country of origin, etc. all described as "cubanesque." So basically, it seems like any cigar that is good is cubanesque, regardless of what it tastes like. Annoying.
...just like no other cigars tastes like Nicaraguan cigars, or Honduran cigars...
every country has a feel, a taste, or texture to it that makes it unique. so far, all of my favorite cigars are not Cuban even though i have had quite a few.
the black label is an amazingly underrated cigar, and probably my #2 DPG behind the blue label so I'm right there with you on your high opinion of the blend, but I'm really suprized this is your favorite size. I've never had the petite lancero but I've had a few of the Petite Coronas and 4.25 x 40 or whatever it is just didn't give me . . . . "enough" is I think the word I'm looking for. I operate under the theory that the blend drives the size and I've had better luck with the Robusto especially with a year or more on em, So I guess, I need to try a few of these before I write off the small rings in this blend. Plus pig tail caps are just cool as hell.
Also random Question, why the odd sizes for this line?
the 1950 is 6 x 52
the 1970 is 5 x 54
the 1973 is a 6 x 60/48 figurado,
the 2001 is 6 x 60
these are hardly traditional cuban sizes. the 1952 (4.25 x 40), 1977 (5.5 x 38), and 1979 (5 x 50) are the ones closer to Cuban Tradition. I have a feeling that most of the sizes are all marketing.
Im a big fan of the Cuban Classic, and prefer it in the 1979 (robusto) size. I should also admit that Ive only had it in one other size (1952) and it was an awful experience.
its fun to think about though.
if i ever find myself in the DPG factory again ill do my best to remember to ask.
it is hard to keep your wits about you in such an amazing environment as that factory. but if im there again, ill try.
I didn't realize that the 5.5 x 38 was a traditional size and have never heard of "Laguito" but that makes alot of sense that the sizes that I'm not used to seeing would be more traditional.
I guess the big glaring hole that I see in these sizes is anything between a 40 and 50 ring guage, which is very unusual, especially for a more traditional blender. I am a little bummed that there's no corona extra, corona gorda or lonsdale. Robustos are my sweet spot in this line though, so I can't complain too much.
La Gloria Cubana Artesanos Retro Especiale Habanero (6
Oliva Serie V Maduro 2010 (6 x 54)
Wrapper: Mexican San Andreas Maduro
Binder: Nicaraguan
Filler: Jalapa Valley Ligero
Blender: Gilberto Oliva Sr, Gilberto Oliva Jr, Carlos Oliva
The Original version of the Oliva Serie V Maduro was released in 2008 as a followup release to the 2007 Oliva Serie V. The Original V was my go to cigar in 2007 as it was for many people. This was one of the more powerful cigars on the market but what set it apart was the approachability of it. When the V maduro hit the market as a limited edition cigar in 2008 there was a mad dash for it. As far as I can piece together, the history of the V maduro blend goes as follows: The original V maduro Had a Connecticut Broadleaf Maduro and was a 52 ring gauge. The 2009 version was also 6.5 x 52 and sported a Nicaraguan Habano Maduro and not the Connecticut leaf. 2010 brought yet another change with upping the ring to a 54, the length down to 6 inches and changing (again) the wrapper leaf, this time to the Mexican San Andreas Maduro. This seems to be (for the time being) the wrapper that Oliva has decided to go with for this cigar. However, the 2011 brought changes yet again; this time to the size and shape only. The 2011 ditches the torpedo and goes with a 6 x 50 toro instead. There are rumors that the filler was changed a tiny bit for the 2011 but the basic Jalapa ligero is still there.
I have yet to smoke the 2010 and was a fan of the 2008 and 2009. I have high hopes for this cigar.
The cigar looks very much like its non-maduro cousin. The only way that an untrained eye could see that it is the maduro version is that is says Maduro to the left of the V on the band. Other than that, the band is the same. Since I am used to the look of the regular V, the V maduro is very unassuming. The wrapper is rugged and tough looking. There is a considerable amount of tooth to it that is more than just visible. It has almost a sandpaper quality to it.
The smell of the cigar before the light is classic sweet earth/peat maduro. The lick on the cap is slightly chocolatey but as the oils linger in the mouth it reveals a hint of spice. After a cut with a double guillotine the draw is firm but not unsmokeable. There is a flavor of a generic sweet, licorice and maybe a hint of coco.
After a light with a soft flame, I am greeted with flavors that are fairly sweet and light with light spicy notes as an undertone. Through the nose the cigar shows much more spice. As the cigar begins to open up a sweet cedar note shows up on the finish. The beginning of this cigar does remind me quite a bit of the original V but with a sweeter overall and a but woodier. I was expecting a bit more spice than what I am getting out of it. This isnt a problem, but an observation. In the first third the ash drops twice. This is unusual for a ring this large. I hesitate to call it a construction issue due to the flawless slow burn, even feel, and perfectly acceptable draw. There maybe something else going on here.
As the middle third starts up a leathery note has shown up. It is actually the dominant flavor. The sweetness has dies down quite a bit. Through the nose is still the same spice but there is also a slight musk in there. The finish has now a touch of coffee to it. The cigar has taken a turn for the savory. The sweet notes have dissipated and a rugged leather cigar remains. Since the smoke is building in strength, this is a welcome change. As the middle third progresses on the spice builds. It is mostly black pepper.
Entering the final third and the profile continues to be much like the middle third. The only difference being a nutty note appearing every now and then. As it marches to the finish, coffee becomes more prominent in the mix. The power has built to the expected medium-full that I expected. The flavor has remained about where it was at the mid point. I feel that this is throwing the cigar out of balance a bit. The wood notes have started to return as well but only as an afterthought. It is mainly a coffee flavor that is almost to a bitter.
The cigar ends with the same. There is no bite at the end and no heating up at all.
Overall, the cigar is exactly what one would expect out of a V but with a sweeter note and more of a coffee feel to it. this isn't a life altering cigar but it is a solid stick. If you like the V like I do, give the V maduro a try. It is a slightly different view on a familiar cigar.
Burn time: 2 hours 10 minutes
Burn: 10
Draw: 8
Taste: 9
Aftertaste: 9
Construction: 9
Balance: 8
Feel: 8
Overall: 8.7 of 10
if you like my reviews, please see my blog and follow me on twitter (@KuzisCigar) or Facebook