Recommended Posts

Posted

Hi Rob,

I have been thinking for some time now about this question but have

hesitated to ask but somehow it keeps coming back in my mind so, here we go. :angry:

When the Czar first came out, you did a video review of the prototype with Ken (Jun. 26th 2010),

and you described the Czar as a big "Celestiales Fino" which it was indeed on the video. meaning a flat head

and a cut pointed end.

On the 19th of Oct. 2010 you made a final video review of the Czar on the deck

with Smithy and Keith from Dubai but I noticed that the Czar did not have the same shape as the

prototype on the first video but you still described it as a "Celestiales Fino" when it's more on a "Figurado"

shape with it's closed pointed head and cut pointed end.

Please don't get me wrong, I love the Czar the way it is, I was just wondering why the change on the shape

but keeping the same vitola name ?

Just a question from the peanut gallery :D

Posted

Interesting question, Guy. While I don't think either could add/detract from the finished product, I think it was just a small cosmetic tweak. Hard for me to say though - I'm not a blender, nor do I even have mine in hand to try yet.

I guess it's just the evolution of a great product. But neat observation - the initial celestiales fino idea got me intrigued from the get-go.

Another question with this Rob, is what are the actual finished sizes of these two customs - ring gauge and inches? I can't find it "defiinitive" anywhere.

Posted

You are spot on Guy.

The flat cap has appeared to have "fallen off" my rollers' radar somewhere between approval and production :stir:

I have raised it but the new batch is already almost finished so we will get back to the "plan" on the following batch if we continue.

it's Cuba :clap:

All in all he has done a remarkable job. All Tampa and Czars are rolled by the same roller who is a master roller but not in any way famous. having one roller is good for consistency but it will keep supplies to a minimal level which is the way I will like it.

After discussions, I will have various samples of a 6 inch x 38 gauge cigar this time around for some tastings on the deck. All going well I will bring those on board by March. I will have to think of a name. If you have any ideas chime in!

Posted
Another question with this Rob, is what are the actual finished sizes of these two customs - ring gauge and inches? I can't find it "defiinitive" anywhere.

You know...I have never actually measured them as outside of my brief we really concentrated on the blend :stir:

The Tampa is 7¼ in (shaggy foot can vary) and 43-44RG.

The Czar is 6¾ in, and up to 52 RG at the widest point.

Posted
You are spot on Guy.

After discussions, I will have various samples of a 6 inch x 38 gauge cigar this time around for some tastings on the deck. All going well I will bring those on board by March. I will have to think of a name. If you have any ideas chime in!

If the profile is in line with the late, lamented SCD#3,

perhaps "La Bomba" or "La Bombita"...

Posted
I would very much like to mirror a profile of a SDC #3 married to a Monte Especial No 2.

I would stand in line and camp out all night to get a custom with that flavor profile and that size. The Cohiba CE when rolled well is tops for me.

I think a name that incorporates the word "Especiales" is fitting.

Posted
I would very much like to mirror a profile of a SDC #3 married to a Monte Especial No 2.

The child of such a marriage will be beautiful for sure!

Maybe "Angelito"...

Posted
You know...I have never actually measured them as outside of my brief we really concentrated on the blend :stir:

The Tampa is 7¼ in (shaggy foot can vary) and 43-44RG.

The Czar is 6¾ in, and up to 52 RG at the widest point.

Very much appreciated - it helps me for my notes, and I don't yet have mine in hand to measure. Thank you.

Posted
I would very much like to mirror a profile of a SDC #3 married to a Monte Especial No 2.

I know I said earlier that I'd like a lighter, Trinidad-esque profile. But damn, Rob, this sounds very intriguing and appealing, especially when matched up with the stated profiles of the Czar and Tampa.

Very cool.

Posted
I would very much like to mirror a profile of a SDC #3 married to a Monte Especial No 2.

Sounds like Perfection to me.

Posted
After discussions, I will have various samples of a 6 inch x 38 gauge cigar this time around for some tastings on the deck. All going well I will bring those on board by March. I will have to think of a name. If you have any ideas chime in!

"Discontinue This!"

"El Piggy"

Posted
After discussions, I will have various samples of a 6 inch x 38 gauge cigar this time around for some tastings on the deck. All going well I will bring those on board by March. I will have to think of a name. If you have any ideas chime in!

I'd say either the "Habano" or the "Connaisseur". Either name goes, I'd think, to complete the trilogy.

With the "Habano" name, you have the history of the location and the brand. ["Czar" reflects the Australian location, which has become a bit of a mecca for the best of the best lately. :rolleyes: "Tampa", while honouring Chuck, also connotates the history of Florida (now Miami more, but historically more in Tampa) of the American cigar manufacturing boom of years back. Going for the Cuban locale completes the location triangle, I think.]

But then, for "Connaisseur", with the stated sizing and flavour profile of this new cigar, it seems that the name will help evoke the profile of all of those special cigars that have unfortunately been going to the wayside, and the size profile that seems to be in the gunsights of H S.A.

My thoughts/nominations.

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.