Montecristo No. 5 Cigar - 1 Single

After a very dissapointing experience with the Montecristo No. 4 I thought I'd pull this out and give it a wirl. Straight away I noticed the cigar felt very tight like the No. 4. Lit it up and found the same very tight unsmokable draw. I have heard good things about these cigars but they seem to be rolled very tight and for me just unsmokable. A real shame. I will continue on in my experementing adventure :)

Creamy, with leather and hints of spice. I tried two of these; the first was fine with a slightly tight draw, the second had a very tight draw and uneven burn. The flavour's nice, but I won't return to this size Monty; there are numerous better and cheaper options available. My score is an average of the two cigars.

I had one of these with a morning coffee on the weekend and the 2 went very well together. Loads of smoke for such a small guy, great flavour and burnt well. For some reason I got a bit of a menthol taste, has anyone else experienced that? No idea where it came from but still I enjoyed the cigar from start to finish.

I sampled this with a pint of London Pride ale after watching England draw 1 - 1 with Russia in the European Championships. Thought I was in for another disappointment as on lighting the flavours were rather nondescript to say the least. However this was short lived as after the first quarter inch it just got better and better. Very smooth and without a trace of bitterness. Compares very favourably with the Media Corona which I think I still prefer, but only just. And at around £1 cheaper quite good value.

Reviewed by Joe Gellman I finished breakfast and had a half cup (we use the French cups, you know, the ones you use two hands to hold) of Cubita coffee left and decided to go to the terrace (actually, a deck over the garage where I do most of my smoking) and finish the coffee and smoke a No. 5. The cigar measures 4" x 40 (mine measured 4" x 41 and though it has been described as having a ring gauge of 40 or 42, I find this to be part of the manner of storage. I will buy a few at the factory in Cuba next October and measure them to try my hypothesis) and is a mighty little might, when aged properly (as this was, thank you, C.GARS Ltd) I get a kick out of the oft overused tripe that this vitola is the brand's poorest make. Well, it that is true, all the vitolas are of my liking, the poorest still good enough for my tastes. I found the cigar to be as full bodied as the No. 4 and a tad fuller than the No. 3 corona. It lit well and burned evenly to the last. This is a quick smoke, though I lingered with it and the last of the coffee for 25 minutes. As with the Joyitas, the ash was solid, medium to dark in colour, listing a tad to the right (well, there was a breeze and that might have affected the burn). I flicked the ash after 2 inches and felt it crunch under my finger. The smoke had woody and sweet overtones, reminiscent of a bouquet of wild flowers, gentle yet enough to stir the imagination. The smoke wafted slowly and formed a haze about the Apricot tree behind where I was sitting, and hung there until the gentle breeze swept it away. I think this cigar was aged less than one year and had only a hint of oil, just showing itself enough to make the cigar a tad blotchy from this new emanation. The flavour did not grow through the entire length of the cigar until, that is, the last two puffs - then I noticed a very strong finish, akin to when you smell a rose but then get the full aroma when you stick your nose into the flesh of the petals. While the cigar has been described as 'herbaceous', I did not find this supply to follow that note, but, rather, I think this selection had some light personality. I suspect that this supply was very well aged which lent to it's flavour and aroma. Once again the adage that age will mature a good cigar comes true.