I thought it had more of the characteristics of the t52, but that is not a problem in my mind.
it wasnt a problem in my mind either. I enjoy the T52 more than the No.9. i think i was about 10 minutes in when i began thinking that this was more like the T52 than the No.9. i just wanted to be sure of it before i put it in print. by the time i put it down i was sure of it.
I thought it had more of the characteristics of the t52, but that is not a problem in my mind.
it wasnt a problem in my mind either. I enjoy the T52 more than the No.9. i think i was about 10 minutes in when i began thinking that this was more like the T52 than the No.9. i just wanted to be sure of it before i put it in print. by the time i put it down i was sure of it.
I agree they share characteristics... but the sweetness of the SA maduro wrapper is undeniable, imo. I guess to me that adds a character that keeps it familiar to both the no. 9 and T52, while still making it it's own stand alone cigar.
i didnt say it tasted exactly like it. i just feel its closer to the T52. this is a good example of how binder plays on the blend. I suspect that the binder in this cigar has more influence than the wrapper.
Face off sounds like an interesting smoke. Didn't know about it till I saw you guys talking about it. Reading about it makes it seem like this should of been an annual thing.
Question Kuzi, do you smoke really slow? A 6X50 in two hours is a long time in my book and I personally run into burn issues and relights if I take that long. I know you've recommended the slower approach which is why I ask, but I've hoenstly only had churchills last that long
Thanks for the review! Sorry you got one with a tight draw. I've not had one with less than perfect draw to date, and they typically have chewy, billowing smoke. Looks like you may need another couple to try
Comments