Picking the "Magnificent 7" from current production stock.

[Guest Nekhyludov]

Fun with spreadsheets!  Here are the results of the lists everyone has posted to this thread so far ...

[Danimalia]

Man, Punch Punch is showing up on an awful lot of lists.... Might be my next box purchase. I've only had the DC, which I enjoyed immensely.

[backbone]

Punch Punch

Monte #4

HDM epic 2

CoRo

PLPC

R&J ex#4

Party Luisi

 

[Dave001]

my first choice is of course the monte especial no 1 and 2  then I would go with the cohiba lancero  then the Gloria mdo 4  and yes the pattern is obvious I love my skinnies  trini fundy and then everything else

[Jimmy_jack]

Glad I nabbed a PunchPunch 2014


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LandCruiser]

Monte Especial No 2 

Epi No1 

Punch Punch 

 

My top 3 at the moment - absolutely sublime 

[Smallclub]

19 hours ago, Leopolis Semper Fidelis said:

Especial No. 1 or No. 2, or both?  Sorry to be pedantic!

There's no Especiale No.1. Only the Especiale, and the Especiale No.2. Sorry to be pedantic

[cigcars]

     

7 hours ago, Danimalia said:

Man, Punch Punch is showing up on an awful lot of lists.... Might be my next box purchase. I've only had the DC, which I enjoyed immensely.

    * And I keep seeing how much so many people love the long and skinnies. I've gotten hold of several through the years and I just can't get any flavor or enjoyment out of them   I'm a lonsdale person at the thinnest.  And pyramides, torpedos, perfectos are truly excellent IMHO for me 

[Leopolis Semper Fidelis]

1 hour ago, Smallclub said:

There's no Especiale No.1. Only the Especiale, and the Especiale No.2. Sorry to be pedantic

Merci.  However, according to https://www.cubancigarwebsite.com/brand/montecristo , there is an Especial No. 1 and an Especial No. 2.  Mes excuses for being un pédant.  Sorry about le franglais as well! 

[RijkdeGooier]

45 minutes ago, Leopolis Semper Fidelis said:

Merci.  However, according to https://www.cubancigarwebsite.com/brand/montecristo , there is an Especial No. 1 and an Especial No. 2.  Mes excuses for being un pédant.  Sorry about le franglais as well! 

Oops I'll throw away my boxes of Especial then. They must be fakes ?

The confusion stems from the vitola de galera where they are numbered (Laguito No.1 and No.2) but in the commercial packaging there is no such thing as an Especial No.1  

Even an excellent site can contain small inaccuracies.

PS: this forum contains a lot of info. Might I suggest a search on Montecristo Especial?

  

[Leopolis Semper Fidelis]

3 minutes ago, RijkdeGooier said:

Oops I'll throw away my boxes of Especial then. They must be fakes ?

The confusion stems from the vitola de galera where they are numbered (Laguito No.1 and No.2) but in the commercial packaging there is no such thing as an Especial No.1  

Even an excellent site can contain small inaccuracies.

  

I much appreciate your having cleared up the matter.  Veel dank!

[chris12381]

In no particular order:

Juan Lopez Selección No. 2 

Vegas Robaina Famosos 

Bolivar Belicoso Fino

Punch Double Corona 

Trinidad Coloniales

Cohiba Siglo IV

Hoyo de Monterrey Epicure No. 2

[NSXCIGAR]

2 hours ago, Leopolis Semper Fidelis said:

Merci.  However, according to https://www.cubancigarwebsite.com/brand/montecristo , there is an Especial No. 1 and an Especial No. 2.  Mes excuses for being un pédant.  Sorry about le franglais as well! 

Indeed, CCW is incorrect here, and Alex will be informed. As noted by RijkdeGooier above, correct nomenclature is Especial and Especial No. 2, however boxes of Especial No. 2 are labeled as "Especiales No. 2" as in the image below:

 

[groundhog]

22 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I'm also seeing the Connie A on many lists and I am not aware of any 16 production on these, along with several cigars that I am very doubtful were made in 16. SLR SA is another example I'm seeing people list. This one's been MIA for quite some time as well.

Can anyone who's listing cigars like the HUCA, SLR SA, HUSW or Punch DC confirm that they actually have a 16 box code? This thread is about cigars produced in 2016, not 14 or 15 smoked in 16. 2016 production only.

I've had a couple of boxes of Connie A through this year with UTE MAR 16 box codes. But not a single sniff of the Sir Winston. :-(

[Leopolis Semper Fidelis]

18 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

Indeed, CCW is incorrect here, and Alex will be informed. As noted by RijkdeGooier above, correct nomenclature is Especial and Especial No. 2, however boxes of Especial No. 2 are labeled as "Especiales No. 2" as in the image below:

 

Great to have further elucidation provided.  Ever yours in pedantry!

[NSXCIGAR]

6 hours ago, Leopolis Semper Fidelis said:

Great to have further elucidation provided.  Ever yours in pedantry!

My pleasure.

Alex has acknowledged the error and has informed me that CCW has been updated to reflect the cigar's correct name of "Montecristo Especial"

I also pointed out that the Habanos online catalog lists the Laguito No. 2 as the "Especial No. 2". However, as I pointed out above, all photo examples of the No. 2 I can find, both old and new, clearly show the name on the box as "Especiales No. 2". As far as I can tell, the boxes have always stated "Especiales No. 2".

Here's Alex's response to this:

Well, think I have to roll my eyes and say that the name on the box is clearly Especiales, which unfortunately makes Habanos SA wrong about their own product. Yet another of the fun little quirks that make Habanos “unique since 1492.”

[havanaclub]

Well I had my first Punch Punch last night and I would put that in my top 7 for sure. Picked up a few in Cuba a few months ago. Don't know factory code but they were 2016.

I will be looking for a box of the PP now on 24:24


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dominattorney]

On 4/19/2017 at 5:22 PM, Smallclub said:

There's no Especiale No.1. Only the Especiale, and the Especiale No.2. Sorry to be pedantic

And one can only seem to readily locate the no 2 at the moment. 

[zeedubbya]

On 4/19/2017 at 7:22 PM, Smallclub said:

There's no Especiale No.1. Only the Especiale, and the Especiale No.2. Sorry to be pedantic

 

On 4/19/2017 at 9:55 PM, RijkdeGooier said:

Oops I'll throw away my boxes of Especial then. They must be fakes ?

The confusion stems from the vitola de galera where they are numbered (Laguito No.1 and No.2) but in the commercial packaging there is no such thing as an Especial No.1  

Even an excellent site can contain small inaccuracies.

PS: this forum contains a lot of info. Might I suggest a search on Montecristo Especial?

  

....apparently someone needs to notify Min Ron Nee as well...had my wife snap a picture from my copy and send it to me.  Thought I recall seeing it this way before.  I know I know being Pedantic too.  It is an interesting discussion.   

Edit: I don't think you guys are wrong I am just surprised CCW and MRN could have this wrong.  

 

 

 

[landhoney]

You guys better be right about the Punch Punch, just ordered a 50 cab :-)

[anjimj]

1. Cohiba Siglio IV

2. Bolivar CJ

3. Party Lucy

4. Dip 2

5. Party 898

6. H.Upmann Connie A

7. RA Superiors

 

[NSXCIGAR]

9 hours ago, zeedubbya said:

....apparently someone needs to notify Min Ron Nee as well...had my wife snap a picture from my copy and send it to me.  Thought I recall seeing it this way before.  I know I know being Pedantic too.  It is an interesting discussion.   

Edit: I don't think you guys are wrong I am just surprised CCW and MRN could have this wrong.  

It seems MRN was indeed wrong. CCW had in fact based the entry on MRN, but as I posted above, Alex has now acknowledged the error and CCW has been updated to reflect "Montecristo Especial" and "Montecristo Especiales No. 2". Alex surmised than any other sources calling the cigar "Especial No. 1" were using either MRN or CCW for reference.

Both the HSA online catalog and the box itself show "Montecristo Especial", so that's what Alex is going with. The HSA online catalog lists the No. 2 as "Especial No. 2", but the boxes--past and present--appear to have always stated "Montecristo Especiales No. 2", so that's what Alex is going with.

I'm surprised that MRN would refer to the cigar as the "Especial No. 1" as there's no indication "No. 1" was ever used for this cigar. Anyone using "No. 1" is ostensibly sourcing MRN or CCW. Prior to 2001 (MRN first ed.), no one would ever have used "No. 1" in the name. I'm guessing that perhaps an old Cubatabaco catalog may have had it erroneously listed that way, and that's what he went from. I wonder if this error will slip by in MRN's third edition. I think this thread is the first time anywhere it's actually been caught.

[RijkdeGooier]

8 hours ago, zeedubbya said:

 

....apparently someone needs to notify Min Ron Nee as well...had my wife snap a picture from my copy and send it to me.  Thought I recall seeing it this way before.  I know I know being Pedantic too.  It is an interesting discussion.   

Edit: I don't think you guys are wrong I am just surprised CCW and MRN could have this wrong.  

 

 

 

Both have done a great job and I use both extensively and with gratitude. But in the end however good, and they are very very good CCW and MRN have a different name than currently used by Habanos SA.

Maybe they were renamed at some point who knows?

This from the Habanos SA vitolario  

 http://www.habanos.com/en/vitolario/

For me this settles the dispute, I'll call them what the sellers names them, although it could very well be that Habanos has made a mistake too.

[NSXCIGAR]

1 hour ago, RijkdeGooier said:

Both have done a great job and I use both extensively and with gratitude. But in the end however good, and they are very very good CCW and MRN have a different name than currently used by Habanos SA.

Maybe they were renamed at some point who knows?

This from the Habanos SA vitolario  

 http://www.habanos.com/en/vitolario/

For me this settles the dispute, I'll call them what the sellers names them, although it could very well be that Habanos has made a mistake too.

Not anymore--as I mentioned, CCW now correctly reflects "Montecristo Especial". In this case, the Habanos online catalog (vitolario) and the box labeling now agree. As far as I can tell the only source of this cigar ever being called "Especial No. 1" came from, and originated with, MRN. I do find it odd that MRN would do this, but I chalk it up to either a simple confusion or oversight (the Davidoff Nos. 1 & 2 and the Vegueros Especiales Nos. 1 & 2 are also Laguito Nos. 1 & 2) or possibly an old Cubatabaco or Habanos guide listing the cigar this way, which would also have been an oversight on their part. All photos I can find of the cigar box--even old boxes that appear to be from the 60s and 70s or even earlier--show "Montecristo Especial". I don't think this cigar was ever called anything different, at least not post-Rev.

The Especiales No. 2 is the one that gets tricky as the HSA online guide states "Especial No. 2" but the boxes, past and present, all state "Especiales No. 2". Alex is deferring to the boxes on this one and concluding HSA's own online catalog is wrong. In this case, the seller is calling the cigar two different things. In Alex's opinion, the box that has not changed in decades is the more reliable source than is the online catalog. 

[Leopolis Semper Fidelis]

2 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

Not anymore--as I mentioned, CCW now correctly reflects "Montecristo Especial". In this case, the Habanos online catalog (vitolario) and the box labeling now agree. As far as I can tell the only source of this cigar ever being called "Especial No. 1" came from, and originated with, MRN. I do find it odd that MRN would do this, but I chalk it up to either a simple confusion or oversight (the Davidoff Nos. 1 & 2 and the Vegueros Especiales Nos. 1 & 2 are also Laguito Nos. 1 & 2) or possibly an old Cubatabaco or Habanos guide listing the cigar this way, which would also have been an oversight on their part. All photos I can find of the cigar box--even old boxes that appear to be from the 60s and 70s or even earlier--show "Montecristo Especial". I don't think this cigar was ever called anything different, at least not post-Rev.

The Especiales No. 2 is the one that gets tricky as the HSA online guide states "Especial No. 2" but the boxes, past and present, all state "Especiales No. 2". Alex is deferring to the boxes on this one and concluding HSA's own online catalog is wrong. In this case, the seller is calling the cigar two different things. In Alex's opinion, the box that has not changed in decades is the more reliable source than is the online catalog. 

Who would have thought that a supposed exercise in pedantry could open up such a can of worms?!  Thank you, one and all, for your contributions to what may appear to some to be mere nit-picking, but to yours truly, "it is an interesting discussion" (zeedubbya) .  Welcome to the wacky, weird and wonderful world of habanos where all sorts of tiny gems are brought constantly to light.  Being a pedant has its uses...