Another Aging Discussion

[Rogers72]

This may be a rediculous question to some but I'll throw it out there anyway:

I have been seriously into Habanos for about 5 years now and don't have a great deal of experience with long term aging. The oldest cigar that I have smoked was about 8 years old but have a good deal of experience with cigars aged from 2-5 years or so. My question is, Do cigars get stronger with age?

In the MRN book, I see the author rate the strength of each cigar. Example: "3/5, 4/5 after 5 years" or something like that. I interpret that to mean that cigars, at least until some point of diminishing return, strengthen as they age. This is contrary to my very limited experience and to most of what i read elsewhere. What are your thoughts? I have found that i generally prefer cigars with 2-3 years of age over cigars with 5-8 years of age because the older ones lose a little of what I call "strength" even though they often become more "smooth" and "complex".

Did this change with the recent blend changes? Did cigars of the previous decades gain in strength as they aged? Are the new blends more ready to smoke now and less likely to gain strength with age?

[Puros Y Vino]

Hmmm...

I can only offer my personal empirical observations.

I smoked a 40YO Cuban Davidoff No 1 this past summer. The first third was mild/medium. It grew stronger towards the second third and finished off nicely in the third third. Very refined and tasty but not strong. However, I can only imagine this was a strong cigar back in its day(70's - 90's). I wasn't into cigars back then so I'll never know personally.

I have a box of PSD4's from 2008. The first cigars I had out of that box were strong. And I mean "gives you the shakes" strong. Recent samples were rich and more refined, packed with flavour but with only a few hints of strength throughout.

I'd say, that over time a cigar would "soften" in terms of its' blends' strength. And the areas closer to the foot would exhibit more of that "softening" due to plain physics. I.e it gets more exposure to the air/humidity than the sealed head would.

But then again...I've only been smoking cigars for three years..so what do I know?

[cigaraholic]

Do cigars get stronger with age? No.

[CanuckSARTech]

...In the MRN book, I see the author rate the strength of each cigar. Example: "3/5, 4/5 after 5 years" or something like that. I interpret that to mean that cigars, at least until some point of diminishing return, strengthen as they age. This is contrary to my very limited experience and to most of what i read elsewhere. What are your thoughts? I have found that i generally prefer cigars with 2-3 years of age over cigars with 5-8 years of age because the older ones lose a little of what I call "strength" even though they often become more "smooth" and "complex".

Did this change with the recent blend changes? Did cigars of the previous decades gain in strength as they aged? Are the new blends more ready to smoke now and less likely to gain strength with age?

From what I recollect from MRN's book and from just flipping through it a bit to check things out, I don't see any listings where the strength-rating actually goes UP. Everything that I see roughly states, "Strength 4/5, becoming 3/5 with 4 years age".

And either way, no, I myself neither, I don't think that cigars get stronger with age. I agree with the one part you said, where cigars "blend" together good and are nice to smoke right at around 2-3 years of age, and then ones that hit right around 7 years old begin to lose their strength. Although, the part where you said they become more smooth then at 5-8 years, I also agree with that, and IMO, any strength loss is preferable to a much more blended and pleasurable smoke then. I'd rather have the 10-20% strength loss (just a thrown up number) at 5-8 years on a cigar compared to a fresh or 2-3 year old cigar, if I'm able to pick up on 10-20 distinct flavours and tones, compared to only 5-10 when fresher. It just leads to a more pleasurable experience, IMO.

However, even with the recent blend changes, I don't think that cigars can get "stronger" per say with age. Just more refined and well-blended with time.

[dB69]

From what I recollect from MRN's book and from just flipping through it a bit to check things out, I don't see any listings where the strength-rating actually goes UP. Everything that I see roughly states, "Strength 4/5, becoming 3/5 with 4 years age". ...

Just to name a few:

Bolivar Coronas Extra (p.28)

El Rey Del Mundo Tainos (p.146)

H.Upmann Connossieur No.1 (p.170)

H.Upmann Coronas (p.170)

Partagas Lonsdales (p.324)

Punch Super Selection No.2 (p.378)

Actually, I don't believe everything gods or gurus say, but there may be a point still...

[CanuckSARTech]

Just to name a few:

Bolivar Coronas Extra (p.28)

El Rey Del Mundo Tainos (p.146)

H.Upmann Connossieur No.1 (p.170)

H.Upmann Coronas (p.170)

Partagas Lonsdales (p.324)

Punch Super Selection No.2 (p.378)

Actually, I don't believe everything gods or gurus say, but there may be a point still...

Geeesh, well I'll be befuddled. Good spotting, dB69.

I've never even spotted that before. For example, for the Bolivar Coronas Extra listing:

"Strength 4/5 (3 to 6 years old), 5/5, 6 to 15 years old, 4/5, 15 years of age onwards.

Minimum aging of 5 years recommended for Semi Plain Boxes, Cabinets 8 years."

Pretty interesting, actually. I also note that down below that, in the blue type (Author's Interesting Note), that he has:

"The cigars might taste smooth at 8 to 10 years old, but the rich flavours are gone. This is the risk of not aging cigars by yourself."

Now, from what I get in that, is that obviously....things aren't perfect with that book. I don't think anyone is insinuating "god or guru" status there.

But, I'm almost wondering with that is if he's doing a combination of both "strength" (what most think of as that kick, the nicotine hit, if you will) and "flavour" (the various tastes available to the cigar smoker). It's so hard to say, and I really personally do not care either way - I know my tastes, and I know that while cigars' strength may mellow and diminish over time, that there are peaks and valleys at play for the bouquet of flavours that are available. Some cigars peak at different times, differing amounts of years down the road.

I think that the strength can't really increase over time (it's not like a cigar can somehow accumulate more nicotine), but that with the refinement and blending of the cigar and it's tobacco over time, that certain additional elements can be more beneficially released while smoking, leading to a stronger hit of flavour. So, maybe not a strength increase, but a flavour increase, in that there's more of it available to enjoy as the tobacco matures. There's definitely a variance noticable in the ash of a fresh cigar compared to an aged cigar - more beneficial combustion, or what have you, to aged tobacco, that enables more of it to be able to be burned, consumed, and enjoyed. Certain elements might not be as combustable in fresh tobacco, compared to aged.

Again, all this is just my thoughts, and I may be completely speaking out of my arse. It's just what I've experienced, anyways.

Nevertheless, it's too hard to cipher through what MRN meant with some of those number ratings then. And I'm pretty sure that he also makes a discinction in his book, about the differences between "strength", "flavour", "mouthfeel", etc., etc., as many of us do. There's definitely a difference, and yet a correlation also, between strength and flavour. And who knows if he's doing a combination of both strength and flavour in those ratings with some of those cigars, accidental or intended.

But, his book is just that, a book. Not the bible or a certified and vetted textbook, etc. A lot that's up for debate in there.

[joeypots]

In MRN look at the entries for H. Upman The "strength, if measured by the intensity of tobacco taste"

H U cigars are deceitfully mild and bland when young.

The tobacco taste increases with time...."

Page 167

He clearly shows writes that the Sir Winstons strength is 3/5 before 6 to 8 years and increases to 4/5 at 8 years.

If you have the book, look at what he says about the Upman #2.

I think the book is a curiosity and his tasting opinions are suspect. The book is poorly edited and has numerous mistakes. There is a lot of good information there, but it is just information from a very knowledgeable collector of cigars who wrote a book. It is not the last word on anything.

[MontrealRon]

"The cigars might taste smooth at 8 to 10 years old, but the rich flavours are gone. This is the risk of not aging cigars by yourself."

I think that in this quote MRN is referring to cases where some merchants may push cigars

to quicker maturation by manipulating their storage conditions.

Higher temperatures especially will cause a quicker, but poorer maturation.

He is warning here about the dangers of purchasing vintage boxes of the BCEs

from less than very reputable sources.

[MontrealRon]

In my rather limited experience, I have noted that all Upmanns tend to get

stronger and richer over time.

This is easy to test if you smoke any box over several years.

By far the very strongest cigars that I own are all Upmann machine-mades -

'92 Belvederes, and '95 Aromaticos.

Since they were purchased recently, for all I know they were dynamite from day one,

but I surely cannot imagine that they have have lost power over the years!

My experience with Mag 46 is that they smoke well, but are mild cigars, when very young,

then close down, becoming bland for several years, before re-opening,

richer and stronger than ever, and continuing to get stronger as time goes on.

Even the lower-end Coronas Majors seem to follow the same pattern.

In a somewhat different way, Punch Punch also seems to open up with time.

This is one case where I agree with MRN that many smokers' disappointment with this cigar

may be due to smoking them too young.

[El Presidente]

I tend to agree with the increasing intensity of Upmanns over time. Surprisingly it is almost the opposite with Montecristo.

[CanuckSARTech]

I tend to agree with the increasing intensity of Upmanns over time. Surprisingly it is almost the opposite with Montecristo.

Hey, what are you doing on here at 7:50 AM on a Sunday morning, Brisbane time??? That early, on a Sunday morning,....on your BIRTHDAY WEEKEND??!?!?!?

Sounds like the friends and family didn't keep you up long enough last night ....your age might indeed be catching up with you.

[dB69]

To me the man or men behind the letters MRN is/are gods or gurus, there is so much experience behind the words in that book. All of my respect to his/their work! Maybe I would be understood clearer if used term "very experienced" instead "gods or gurus". (Just to explain my usage of the mentioned words which were not for any negative as someone might interpret it.)

I also tend to use the word strength for the strength of flavours. The reason is that I cannot think that someone would smoke cigars because of nicotine. So, the amount of nicotine is secondary thing in cigars - but not when talking about aging potential of course. Hmmm.. this is a difficult subject to talk about. Personally I notice the aging potential by smelling the cigars. Good ones do have a particular smell, which I just cannot describe. The smell may be caused by nicotine, I'm not sure. Maybe you know what I'm talking about.. I'm not the experienced one, but this is my discovery, if I may call it so.

Very interesting comments about H.Upmann here, I think I have to buy some for the future.

I have been very disappointed to Upmanns and also Punches, the reason must be that I have smoked them so very young.

This is a very good subject, I just wish I could speak and write better English.

[Dbone]

I've really enjoyed following the discussion in this topic. Tons of quality content and plenty of opinions. As time goes by and my cigars get older, discovery of whatever changes take place is exciting.

Beyond cigars, I've been trying to wrap my head around this with other common indulgences which get better with age, mainly flavor. I love a great 60 day dry aged steak, 15 year scotch, and beautifully aged cheese. Can you relate aging of steak to a cigar? The argument could be made either way. They do all have one thing in common, flavors change as they age and eventually all flavor will diminish past it's prime. It's completely possible our conscious or subconscious prefers aged cigars, or cheese for that matter, because of the patience and care involved required in the aging process to get it right. Also these items are limited and "special" because they have been aged. Age brings on greater appeal.

Based on some of this though, I can totaly understand how person "A" can love a cigar, cheese, steak, scotch... fresh, and person B enjoy them with age. My brother loves chocolate ice cream, I like vanilla. No ones right or wrong, it's just personal preference.

Back on cigars. I have experienced a HUGE flavor change when I dry box a cigar. Example could be the Mag 46. Stored within my cabinet at 65 / 65, these '09 Mag 46's are a bit heavy, not harsh but they do have a very heavy or full long finish. Yeah, you can taste them the next day! Dry boxed for a couple days, the core flavor is intensified, much more distinct and noticeable, with a considerable shorter tighter finish. Is this similar to what any of you experience with "cigar aging"? Guess what I'm asking, does dry boxing & aging provide the similar results? Or are they two completely different beast.

I know I've gone a bit off track on this thread, thanks for reading though Everyone has contributed great content! This is a topic I love to learn more on, although it will come with time.

[Colt45]

Beyond cigars, I've been trying to wrap my head around this with other common indulgences which get better with age, mainly flavor. I love a great 60 day dry aged steak, 15 year scotch, and beautifully aged cheese. Can you relate aging of steak to a cigar?

I think in some ways the comparisons could be made, and I find your points to be thought provoking. But in other ways, I'm not always so sure - I've used the

cigar / wine analogy many times, but have come to feel it's probably not the best.

Wine, cheese, spirits, are products which are produced in bulk. Perhaps wine would be the easiest way for me to explain my thoughts. Grapes are harvested

from a single or multiple vineyards or areas, etc. They are then processed in quantity where it all becomes "one", so to speak. Even blended wines which are

aged separately then brought together just before bottling in essence are one big product.

But I think a cigar is different. The leaves may come from the same plot, be processed at the same time the same way. But they are still separate leaves

brought together at rolling. Maybe that leaf got just a little more sun, that one fermented at a different way in the bale, etc. I guess I just think there are

more possible variables with cigars.