6x60 Cigars;The New American Trend!

[cigarroverzulu]

145 ring guage....

WTF???

[drjammer]

I don't care what anyone else smokes. And I certainly don't care what a "fad" might be in anything. Whatever makes them happy, God bless them. It's a free cigar world, to each his own. At least they're smoking cigars.I like cigars of all ring gauges -- and enjoy variety. But, I've gotten a hernia smoking some skinnies. I've found the draw is far less consistent on skinnies. I like SMOKE -- so usually (not always) I prefer a cigar with more circumference because it increases the SMOKE volume. To each his own. I'm not a ring gauge snob. I just want to be assured of SMOKE when I'm smoking.

[Ginseng]

I'll have to trust you with the math

I'm thinking blend-wise - how do you fill such fat cigars? The spin is that often it allows for greater complexity, while the reality can often be large scale imbalance.

And personally, I look past country of origin when it comes to this trend. When and how did it all start? Were consumers clamoring for jaw breakers, or did a producer create something that for whatever reason caught on inviting followers.

I have to believe that if the current trends were for thinner gauges, the BHKs, for example, would not be 52 to 56 ring in sizes. If anything, Habanos are the trend followers - while they continue to produce fatter and fatter cigars, a number of NC producers have, over the past couple of years gone back to more moderate / historical sizes, and from what I have read, with good success.

LOL. I agree. In terms of girth, Habanos certainly seems to have been reading from the U.S. market playbook. Let's hope that the non-Cuban product continues to develop in quality instead of simply pushing the boundaries of ostentatious packaging and sensationalist marketing. I'm ready to leave the junk food behind.

Conceptually, at least, complexity must have limits if complexity is considered from the perspective of detection and discrimination and not blending as is traditional. So, if the limits of complexity can be achieved in 42 ring and below, then it stands to reason that going higher might increase some other quantity, but not complexity. Perhaps it's burn consistency or lowered incidence of tight draws or plugging. In other words, structural as opposed to sensorial factors.

In any case, I'm going to smoke a cigar from my long-neglected cabinet of RASS and mull this over.

Wilkey

[Colt45]

Conceptually, at least, complexity must have limits if complexity is considered from the perspective of detection and discrimination and not blending as is traditional.

Very interesting way to look at it, very interesting. As we've all discussed in the past, I'm not sure Cuban cigars are blended for flavor / complexity in the way

we characterize each.

After well over a week of fog, rain, and drizzle, today I was able to smoke one of the last of my '00 Upmann Sir Winston. I was once again reminded that

these could be considered the kings of complexity and flavor - maintaining finesse and medium body.

So it made me think - could something similar be done in a sixty ring cigar, and if so - what would be the point?

Talking a little about packaging, etc - does anyone recall the original Perdomo Immenso? I never smoked one, never considered smoking one - but always

considered it, without disdain, as a novelty. Sometimes I get the feeling that we are quick to crap on NC producers, but give Habanos a bit of a pass.

But from my perspective, they use Cohiba as often as possible - Maduro, Behike - these could have easily been separate lines, but they chose to use the

Cohiba name. Hype, packaging, etc - good cigars maybe - let's remember the recent blind tasting.

And it's not my intention to crap on HSA or any producer. They're all happy to have us put them on a pedestal and take our money. I require something of

value in return.

[earthson]

They're terrible. Like most of y'all, I prefer 42-50 ring gauge. I will smoke a Padron in a 52 or 54 because they seem to have tailored the blend to a big ring gauge. The only good 60 ring gauge I ever tried and liked was the Tatuaje Gran Cojonu

[Ginseng]

Very interesting way to look at it, very interesting. As we've all discussed in the past, I'm not sure Cuban cigars are blended for flavor / complexity in the way we characterize each.

After well over a week of fog, rain, and drizzle, today I was able to smoke one of the last of my '00 Upmann Sir Winston. I was once again reminded that these could be considered the kings of complexity and flavor - maintaining finesse and medium body.

So it made me think - could something similar be done in a sixty ring cigar, and if so - what would be the point?

Talking a little about packaging, etc - does anyone recall the original Perdomo Immenso? I never smoked one, never considered smoking one - but always considered it, without disdain, as a novelty. Sometimes I get the feeling that we are quick to crap on NC producers, but give Habanos a bit of a pass.

But from my perspective, they use Cohiba as often as possible - Maduro, Behike - these could have easily been separate lines, but they chose to use the Cohiba name. Hype, packaging, etc - good cigars maybe - let's remember the recent blind tasting.

And it's not my intention to crap on HSA or any producer. They're all happy to have us put them on a pedestal and take our money. I require something of value in return.

WARNING: Long post & philosophical cigar navel gazing to follow. You may choose to skip this post if smoking anything under a churchill.

My goodness. Some thought provoking points there, Ross. Thank you for sharing your musings. May I riff? But first, let's pull back up two stimulating threads from the past, here and here

I agree. From all the accounts I've read, second and third hand, neither Havanas nor NCs are expressly blended to achieve what the cigar sensualist apprehends: that diverse assortment of aromatic notes that call forth rich associations with their concrete exemplars. For example, a hint of scent reminiscent of almonds, or the translucent sweetness in San Luis Rey that makes me think of sugar cane. How I interpret this is straightforward so allow me to illustrate with an analogy.

A master carpenter selects the wood, veneer, stain or finish, joinery, and construction techniques he needs to build an artisanal chest or drawers. His concerns are not the mode of appreciation his client will apply. Rather, it is to create the conditions which enable enjoyment of a degree which he feels appropriate to his creation. In other words, the "how" of enjoyment is not his central concern but the "how far" is. In like fashion, the blender creates a cigar out of pieces of leaf that, to him, result in a predictable end product of a given quality at the time of release. Past this moment in time, it is out of his hands. So if one aims to make dog rockets or plonk, then one proceeds accordingly with the end result being that even a "golden palate" wouldn't be able to pull burnt seven-year old Madagascar vanilla or pencil lead from the product. But, if you use diligent and artful methods and great materials, the product will take on a life of its own, well beyond the practical considerations of its creator. It enables more and deeper ways to enjoy it.

On the issue of complexity as something to be valued per se, several posts in the above-referenced threads were insightful to this point. First, complexity needs be defined as a unique and valid dimension of analysis and the consensus seems to be that it is a range of overlapping flavors at any given moment in time. In other words, the instantaneous flavor profile. And this is distinguished from "evolution" or "development" which is defined as change in flavor over time, or the dynamic flavor profile. So for you math heads out there, you could kinda sorta say that development is the function and complexity is its derivative.

As Piggy asserted, one can consider several cigar "characteristics," a term in the same sense as I use "dimension." These include constitution, character, balance, finish, and aftertaste in addition to the two identified in the preceding paragraph. A few of these need further elaboration but the point here being that complexity is only one criterion and the rank ordering of these criteria entails a value judgement whereas evaluating complexity does not. So, while any two able cigar smokers could, in principle, agree on whether a given cigar is more or less complex than another, there is no objective basis for saying complexity should be the paramount quality criterion. This is a long way of getting to my point that sometimes I do not want a cigar with any substantial complexity or development. And I shouldn't feel like a bad cigar enthusiast because of it. Sometimes, flavor quality and intensity trumps all. For example, when I'm working, sweating, flipping meat on a hot grill or mowing. At those times, what I want is a hale and hearty companion. Complexity would be a wasted attribute and pragmatism wins.

Another way to think about the preceding distinction involving value judgments is to ask the question of whether or not a machine can make the determination. If it can be done, then there is no value judgment at play (e.g., measuring capsaicin in a chili pepper using HP liquid chromatography). However, if it requires a human, then there may be judgment making (e.g., deciding which is tastier, a poblano or habanero).

Now, on the question of whether larger ring cigars are necessarily less complex than comparable smaller ring cigars, there's an easy test for that. Have a roller roll a cigar according to a recipe then roll one just like it except that all the filler leaves are doubled in quantity. If they come across as identically or similarly complex, then the proposition is disproved. If, however, there is a significant or substantial reduction in complexity, then this would suggest perhaps a structural limitation on the dimension we perceive as complexity. Perhaps some effect of combustion across a large area inherently nullifies an important contributor to complexity.

One thing is clear about large ring cigars, while they can be curiously devoid of complexity as well as flavor intensity, they can also be made punishingly strong. So this suggests to me that strength is not limited by ring gauge. I'm less sure about complexity.

As I sit here noodling on ideas, I find myself wondering...what's my next cigar going to be.

Thank you for the opportunity and the fodder to stimulate some much needed cigaro-mental exercise.

Wilkey

[riazp]

Cubans have been realesing larger rg cigars over the past years, the Ryj Wide churchill, the Duke at a 54, and If i'm not mistaken the new Partagas serie E 2 will be a 54 rg duke vitola right? I personally will never ever smoke a 6x60 cigar, just not my thing, the robusto is my favorite size because of what i consider the ideal rg to length ratio. I am however looking foward to the serie E 2.

Personally i've come to love the thinner rg's, the cohiba lancero, monte especiale and the trini fundadores, and probably my favorite LE cigar was the 2007 ingenios. PC's are my second favorite vitola, once again due to the exellent rg vs length ratio.

My 2 cents

[brutusthebuckeye]

Saw a Jaime Garcia (by Don 'Pepper')

LOL!!!!!! Don Pepper.......i had one 6x60 i think it was a VSG.....havent smoked any NC's for 2yrs now...

[Guest 321contact]

145 ring guage....

The fire department will probably pull him over. All that smoke... The videos seems more comedic than serious. Only a donkey doer would think that's cool. I'm gonna start the opposite trend, micro cigars wrapped in paper using shredded tobacco. I bet that would sell in billions...

[Colt45]

As I sit here noodling on ideas, I find myself wondering...what's my next cigar going to be.

G,

I think I've come to view complexity simply as a change in flavor, regardless of how, when, how often the changes come. But as time passes, I think I've

devolved a bit, stripped things down - am I enjoying this cigar or not?

But I think for me, the only way to be able to let analyzation go is to have gone through the process of considering all these aspects in the first place. I also

think the process is worthwhile, and I know I will continue to learn - but I also know I will not allow consideration to stand in the way of enjoyment.

[Charltonc]

People are buying 6 by 60 because they think they are getting the most for their money, you have to sell what sells.

[CohibaBehike]

I hate 60 ring gauge cigars, only ever smoked 2 of them and refuse to do it again. I like 50 and below, however, I know a lot of reasons why guys like them. They believe that it leads to a smoother/cooler smoke (which I can see). They also think they get the bang for the buck. Much more manly than a lancero for sure And the tobacco seems to burn slower (now I don't know about this one, but I guess I could see the logic behind it.)

I'll stick to smoking the less manly stuff