What's the diff

[ajgagnon]

I was just trolling through the HSA vitolario today and noticed two Churchills in the H. Upmann catalogue. When I looked around for reviews, it certainly seems people love the Sir Winstons. So, what's with the Monarchs?

[adic88]

The Monarchs were discontinued quite some time ago, i believe. Doesn't make sense to have two cigars of roughly the same vitola from the same branch, so i guess they decided to cut one.

[Colt45]

It's my understanding that a somewhat "higher grade" of tobacco is used for the the Sir Winston, versus the tobacco which was used for the Monarch.

[greenpimp]

Completely different profile, both wonderful cigars in my opinion. The Monarch was a bit earthier, darker flavors with more coffee. A bit more mongrel but a wonderful cigar. The Winston is more about class and balance, with classic Upmann flavors but an intensity on the second half that is quite unique.

A real shame that the Monarch was cut. One of my favorite cigars and aged was a real treat.

[Stalebread]

(snip) A real shame that the Monarch was cut. One of my favorite cigars and aged was a real treat.

Absolutely. One of my all-time best cigars was a Monarch A/T from '98. Had it a couple of years ago and still talk about it.

Of course, Sir Winstons are great, too.

Your description of the two makes sense to me.

[Mr.T]

Total shame they cut the Monarch. I'm sitting on a glorious 07 A/T box from the Czar's. The couple I've had have been great with the quality and construction superb. The tobacco they use is still very good. These have years ahead of them. I've not had the Winnie before, but I find the Monarchs to be a rustic cigar wiht coffee, wood and leather. I also get the barnyeard aroma. Worth looking for in my opinion.

[PigFish]

When I was a C-hill smoker I used to really enjoy the Monarch.

Somehow I always get confused with these names. I am going form memory now but I believe there are Upmann Monarca Tubos, Monarchs and Sir Winnies.

I tended to buy the Monarchs (no tube) and less money than the SW. I am cheap and found little difference in the cigar when tasting back to back cigars of similar years.

I just sent a '98 Monarch to Bart, perhaps he will do a review if he reads the thread. On the other hand I can pull out another one and review it myself, but I am not really in the mood for 2+ hours of smoking. I tend to like shorter cigars; unless I am with friends I get bored smoking alone for more than an hour.-Piggy

[Bartolomeo]

I just sent a '98 Monarch to Bart, perhaps he will do a review if he reads the thread. On the other hand I can pull out another one and review it myself, but I am not really in the mood for 2+ hours of smoking. I tend to like shorter cigars; unless I am with friends I get bored smoking alone for more than an hour.-Piggy

Letting it rest but yes, review to follow when I smoke it

Bart

[PigFish]

... I think I sent you a Monarca Ryan. Jesus, like I said, I can't get the names right half the time. I smoked one today, and unfortunately it was awful. I hope yours is better mate; I hate to send a mate a dog rocket! With a little time I may post a review. -Ray

[BobLobLaw]

The Monarchs are discontinued? When did that happen?

[bassman]

The Monarchs are discontinued? When did that happen?

I think 2007 was the last year of production. Very nice cigar. Seriously avoid 99-01 production. I've found a lot of excellent 01 cigars, but the Monarch has a high % of plugs & poor draws.

[jedipastor]

I've never smoked either, but I've assumed it's like the Partagas Mille Flur and the PCE. Same exact size, very different smokes (MF uses lower grade tobacco, though it's still a great smoke IMVHO).

[CanuckSARTech]

I've got a single or two of the tubed Monarchs, from 2007 or 2006 I believe (from a tubos sampler, bought in mid-2007).

Sounds like I may have to fire up that bad boy this spring....

[CDNeh]

Rob did a review of the Monarca EST ENR 2008 a while ago very entertaining, see link below.

http://www.friendsofhabanos.com/forum/inde...&hl=Monarca