Smaller Vitola.....


Recommended Posts

I Am trying a MC Tubos right now, its the smallest vitola I have tried. I see what some of you say about them being a bit better than the larger gauge, seems to be a bit more flavorful, with more clear tastes, maybe a little milder.....or is it possibly just this particular cigar? Or maybe age? This is 3 yrs young.First one I have tried. I must say, the first quarter is very good.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love and stock multiple boxes of all the 42 ring Montes. Except the 5, its just a tease! I also love the Especial 1 and 2 as well. While the No. 2 (pyramid) was my first CC, and the one that really opened my eyes to CCs in general I think the flavor delivery is more complex and a bit crisper in the smaller gauges. When I want rich, in the face creamy chocolate I go for a No. 2, when I'm looking for the chocolate,  citrus, and some coffee/cream on the edges I reach for whichever 38 or 42 gauge suites my desired smoking time. I would guess that about 80% of my stock is Sub 46 gauge, another 12%-15% Robusto, Hermoso 4 and Churchill/DC and a very small percentage devoted to some Mag 56s, some 56 gauge farmies, and a few other odds and ends.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't tried the MC Tubos, but I do agree that many 42 and smaller ring gauge cigars have an intensity of flavors that is less common with larger sticks. Some of the richest tasting sticks I've had have been skinnies - LGC MdO 4, Monte 4, Bolivar Tubos 2, HUPC... 

I would venture to guess that many larger cigars are filled with volado, which burns well but doesn't have much flavor.  In a skinny cigar, there's not much room for "filler" once the ligero and seco have been bunched.  This is pure speculation on my part, though 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't tried the MC Tubos, but I do agree that many 42 and smaller ring gauge cigars have an intensity of flavors that is less common with larger sticks. Some of the richest tasting sticks I've had have been skinnies - LGC MdO 4, Monte 4, Bolivar Tubos 2, HUPC... 

I would venture to guess that many larger cigars are filled with volado, which burns well but doesn't have much flavor.  In a skinny cigar, there's not much room for "filler" once the ligero and seco have been bunched.  This is pure speculation on my part, though 



I've thought that for awhile now as well, only makes sense that the smaller the Rg the less room for filler. Love me some LGC MdO 4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mycroft said:

On the other hand thin cigars have more tight draw problems, which is bloody annoying. But that is another story.

I'll happily take a tight draw over a windtunnel volado roll any day.  :cigar:

Thanks for tracking those vids down and for the summary! Excellent post - perfectly explained! :2thumbs:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mycroft said:

There is a pretty good explanation of this (and other good stuff) somewhere in this series of videos where El Pres interviews the Cuban 'master' cigar blender/roller Ramses Herrera

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGAWiPfExIc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9rWMRcGxjw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJjyGvwzL3w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifspY-Ki2Bc&t=5s

To summarize what Herrera says in a simplistic way:

Thin cigars burn inherently easier than fat ones. Presumably for the same reason sticks burn easier than logs (surface area to mass ratio). So fat cigars need relatively more volado (the leaf that burns easily with no flavor) so that they can burn right. To have the same strength as a thinner cigar, they then need a higher ratio of ligero (strong flavor) to seco (subtle flavor). If they have the same ratio then the extra volado in the fat cigar would create a cigar with less overall flavour. In general this means that a fat cigar will tend to be either milder or heavier (less subtle) than a thin one. Which is presumably why some people here say that smaller ring gauge cigars tend to be more intense, or more subtle.

Obviously this physics problem can be overcome by a particular blend, and there are some brilliant fat cigars. But it is easier to mess it up and make a large ring gauge cigar with no flavour. And it is hard to be consistent with the fine balance needed for the fat cigar from batch to batch and year to year.

As an extreme example take a lancero with no volado at all. Whatever you do to the mix of seco to ligero you will not end up with a flavorless cigar. It will just be either more subtle or more strong. But a fat cigar with not enough ligero will be pretty much tasteless. Not enough volado, or mixed wrongly, and it won't burn properly.

Which is why I never buy large production fat cigars like Partagas D4s, or Monte 2s. I had a great D4 the other day that a friend gave me, but too many of those I have tried have been just bland to my taste. And over time I see very little consistency in large ring gauge cigars. Whereas the thinner cigars seem much less hit or miss flavourwise.

On the other hand thin cigars have more tight draw problems, which is bloody annoying. But that is another story.

 

Great info and vids, thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer PCs and minutos like the SCDLH El Principe and Party Short. Another favorite size is the Dalia, which I wish more blends were offered in. The intensity of flavor and better burn characteristics make me enjoy the smoke more rather than fussing over keeping it burning properly. That being said, I have had some double coronas, salomons, and torpedos that were mind blowing...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Engineer99 said:

I prefer PCs and minutos like the SCDLH El Principe and Party Short. Another favorite size is the Dalia, which I wish more blends were offered in. The intensity of flavor and better burn characteristics make me enjoy the smoke more rather than fussing over keeping it burning properly. That being said, I have had some double coronas, salomons, and torpedos that were mind blowing...

With the way the cigar world is changing, DC's don't feel like a large ring gauge anymore, when looking at ratio of width to length.  They feel appropriately proportioned after having my share of over 50 RG.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Am trying a MC Tubos right now, its the smallest vitola I have tried. I see what some of you say about them being a bit better than the larger gauge, seems to be a bit more flavorful, with more clear tastes, maybe a little milder.....or is it possibly just this particular cigar? Or maybe age? This is 3 yrs young.First one I have tried. I must say, the first quarter is very good.  


I have a box from 2011. Half left awesome smoke


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 is my preferred size for sure. It feel right in my hand. I prefer the shorter smoke time as well. I think you'll find a TON of cigars that you will like in that range. The previously mentioned Trinidad Reyes are really good, the RASCC is stout, and my favorites would be the Boli PC or the Monte 4 for a consistent but enjoyable smoke. I have some tins of HUHCs on the way that I'm excited to try too. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer 44-46 ring gauge...Corona and Corona Gorda sizes are the best IMO. (Siglo IV!!!)

I do like a Churchill on occasion for a longer after dinner smoke. I also like to smoke PCs slowly for a nice 45 min smoke.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.