Cigars and Aging; aligning expectations

[davidl]

I bought a few Partagas D4 tubos a few years ago. After smoking thefirst one, I remember thinking, "Wow, now this is tobacco". So Iproceeded to buy a box, and after smoking the first one, I realized the cigarwas incredibly bland, and almost flavorless. At the time, I immediatelysuspected that it was a fake (didn't know about Czar\FOH at the time).

Turns out, that the cigar was just incredibly young; after 18 months inmy humidor, the cigar was too strong for my palate. The cigar had turned into acompletely different cigar. My father and brother still tell me that that wasone of the best cigars they ever had.

Nowadays, I buy boxes and the young ones seem to be relatively flavorless.Take a box of Mag 46's with 20 months on them – one of the best cigars I have eversmoked. I buy another box of Mag 46s and this time the box has only a fewmonths one it. This time, the cigar has 20% of the flavor of the first one.

When you age your cigars, do you expect them to turn into completelydifferent cigars (like my Partagas D4 example), or just smoothen out a little…whatare your expectations for what your cigar will become with a couple years ageon it.

Likewise, Is it reasonable to expect that my young Mag 46s will turninto what the first box was, or maybe it's just not as good of a box as the firstone?

Not all cigars are created equally, I'm just trying to get a grip on howmuch of the process is in my hands, and how much has to do with the quality ofthe box that I bought..

[Colt45]

I'm just trying to get a grip on howmuch of the process is in my hands, and how much has to do with the quality of the box that I bought..

Personally I believe it always starts and ends with the quality of the cigars in the box. I don't believe any amount of aging

will help an improperly blended, constructed, or ill conceived cigar,

[OZCUBAN]

Personally I believe it always starts and ends with the quality of the cigars in the box. I don't believe any amount of aging

will help an improperly blended, constructed, or ill conceived cigar,

EXACTLY

[kcheek]

Personally I believe it always starts and ends with the quality of the cigars in the box. I don't believe any amount of aging

will help an improperly blended, constructed, or ill conceived cigar,

x3

Not all boxes are created equal and I have always been intrigued by the concept of cigars getting stronger with age. I always assumed it would be the opposite, but many people have experienced the same thing you did with your box of PSD4's. I guess strength and flavor is where the difference lays, maybe?

[Schumi5]

Like others have said, the better the starting point the better the results of the aging. A poor cigar fresh will very rarely turn out to be an excellent cigar with some time. In my personal experience, most of the cigars evolve over time but I would not say they usually become a completely different cigar. I always try and have one relatively fresh to establish a baseline and while virtually all the cigars benefit from the aging, I have always been able to tie a very direct line to how they tasted fresh. With that being said, there defintiely seems to be some truth that certain cigars do go through a 'sleep period' where the tastes become quite muted and underwhleming. The evolution of the cigars with time is definitely part of what makes this such an interesting hobby.

[Ken Gargett]

agree with colt.

your point re the 46's is very valid, tho. have always found them largely bog average till at least 18 - 24 months. then they blossom.

but good aged cigars are a joy and they do leave younger ones, no matter how good, in their wake.

had an old partagas lusi last night - from '98 i think - best cigar for ages. silky, subtle, complex, toasty at the finish. wonderful.

[davidl]

Thanks for your reply’s guys, It’s been a long week at work,I haven’t had time to log in and respond.

I hear what you are all saying, re the starting point. I totally agree. Is it generally agreed on that cigars will get stronger with age?

Like the box of Trinidad Reyes, AGR MAR-11 that I just got - almost flavorless. Should I wait a couple years and expect them to get better, or assume that I got a lower quality batch?

I guess when it comes to cigar flavor, what makes up a good cigar are:

1. Quality of the raw materials...AKA the tobacco, and the oil content
2. Construction - as far as burn effects taste.

I always thought that aging was a way to bring out flavor and complexity in Cigars...but i'm not crystal clear on that anymore.

Ken - do you think your '98 Lusi would have had less flavor if it were 6 months old? Granted, it would be less complex for sure, but what about raw flavor?

[Ginseng]

agree with colt.

your point re the 46's is very valid, tho. have always found them largely bog average till at least 18 - 24 months. then they blossom.

but good aged cigars are a joy and they do leave younger ones, no matter how good, in their wake.

had an old partagas lusi last night - from '98 i think - best cigar for ages. silky, subtle, complex, toasty at the finish. wonderful.

Same experience here, especially in regard to the Mag46. In years past, they have been downright insipid when very young. Strong cigars do not necessarily have the most potential, but then one has to define the endpoint to assess progress against it. Is it complexity? Balance? Flavours?

Wilkey

[sam]

It's all a matter of personal taste and prersonal proclivities. I enjoy some young ccs occasionally, such as PSD 2s and most any Bolivar, because of the relatively consistent and classic flavors. And I've got a good buddy with some attention deficit issues (John that can't keep any cigars for more than a few weeks before toasting them up. But for the most part I think any cc is much better with at least 2 years fo age, and preferably more, because the flavors and body settle and blend. I've got a big enough stash of ccs and the patience that I can stick to this preference. It drives me nuts when John buys a box of Edmundos for his summer trip to the lake and smokes them up ROTT. I do agree with the above assessments that no amount of age will make a fair cigar great-- but a year or two will help even a poor batch. I do think the concept of the "sick period" is nonsense --- a sick cigar is just one that needs more time or will never be anything other than just ok. The aging process is linear I think. The pace and available "peak" just vary from brand-to-brand and box-to-box. That's a big part fo the fun and challenge of being an on-line "contraband" cigar enthusiast. Of course, the bottom line is that it's all of matter of personal taste, and I would never question what someone else likes or doesn't I couldn't distinguish a stone fruit flavor from a toasted nut. Just imho. ----sam

[sam]

It's all a matter of personal taste and prersonal proclivities. I enjoy some young ccs occasionally, such as PSD 2s and most any Bolivar, because of the relatively consistent and classic flavors. And I've got a good buddy with some attention deficit issues (John that can't keep any cigars for more than a few weeks before toasting them up. But for the most part I think any cc is much better with at least 2 years fo age, and preferably more, because the flavors and body settle and blend. I've got a big enough stash of ccs and the patience that I can stick to this preference. It drives me nuts when John buys a box of Edmundos for his summer trip to the lake and smokes them up ROTT. I do agree with the above assessments that no amount of age will make a fair cigar great-- but a year or two will help even a poor batch. I do think the concept of the "sick period" is nonsense --- a sick cigar is just one that needs more time or will never be anything other than just ok. The aging process is linear I think. The pace and available "peak" just vary from brand-to-brand and box-to-box. That's a big part fo the fun and challenge of being an on-line "contraband" cigar enthusiast. Of course, the bottom line is that it's all of matter of personal taste, and I would never question what someone else likes or doesn't I couldn't distinguish a stone fruit flavor from a toasted nut. Just imho. ----sam

[sam]

It's all a matter of personal taste and prersonal proclivities. I enjoy some young ccs occasionally, such as PSD 2s and most any Bolivar, because of the relatively consistent and classic flavors. And I've got a good buddy with some attention deficit issues (John that can't keep any cigars for more than a few weeks before toasting them up. But for the most part I think any cc is much better with at least 2 years fo age, and preferably more, because the flavors and body settle and blend. I've got a big enough stash of ccs and the patience that I can stick to this preference. It drives me nuts when John buys a box of Edmundos for his summer trip to the lake and smokes them up ROTT. I do agree with the above assessments that no amount of age will make a fair cigar great-- but a year or two will help even a poor batch. I do think the concept of the "sick period" is nonsense --- a sick cigar is just one that needs more time or will never be anything other than just ok. The aging process is linear I think. The pace and available "peak" just vary from brand-to-brand and box-to-box. That's a big part fo the fun and challenge of being an on-line "contraband" cigar enthusiast. Of course, the bottom line is that it's all of matter of personal taste, and I would never question what someone else likes or doesn't I couldn't distinguish a stone fruit flavor from a toasted nut. Just imho. ----sam

[sam]

Finishing the nite with a 2 year old HQ Edmundo (v cut John). good enough, not great. ----sam