Unicos and Monte #2 Are the Same Cigar

[RickHendeson]

Prove me wrong.

[GasGuy82]

I have yet to enjoy a Monte 2, the Unico I had was magical

[busdriver]

Smoke one of each and you will know.

[RickHendeson]

Smoke one of each and you will know.

I've smoked many of each. This was my conclusion.

[PigFish]

The question then really is this. Were they both good or bad?

I mean what is brand ID really matter? It does not to me... Frankly, I don't believe in it.

Why concentrate on a 'brand identity' if the smoking experience is good or great? It does not really matter then, now does it?

Ultimately, in a monopoly company such is Tabacuba, where brands, rollers and companies have no "company/brand" identity, the cigars, beyond that as individuals will have no "brand" identity.

My guess is that if you pulled 4 cigars 1x M-2, blend them with 1x Unicos and throw in two ringers, you won't have a single person get them right. At most I figure one might get 1 of the 4 with most getting none of them right.

I am just guessing of course but blind tests have shown that cigar board participants either don't know the cigars they claim to know, or that there is no real Cuban cigar brand profile.

Since people often know their own cigars, or they think they do, I will settle for "there is no Cuban brand profile."

I like the thread...!

Cheers -Piggy

[shlomo]

They have different bands. Proof.

[Alien13]

They have different bands. Proof.

Ah, that may be so, but like other things in life, the same product can be produced at one factory, but sent out as different brands. (e.g. bundaberg producing coles/homebrand sugar)

As for the question, I can't say personally what is what as I haven't had either, but I think Piggy hit the nail on the head, if they were both great cigars, then go for whatever one you can get hold of easily (and cheaper if you want to save money).

[godpheonix]

i really think its not down to the cigars( this is assuming the cigars are properly blended) but the person's palate, which can vary quite a lot.some can discern subtle tastes all the way to some not at all. thats makes a hell of a difference.

now in a blind taste test, depending on the brand, i might have difficulties identifying both, but both would tates different to me....like the monte 2 and the unicos for example.

[Fugu]

Ultimately, in a monopoly company such is Tabacuba, where brands, rollers and companies have no "company/brand" identity, the cigars, beyond that as individuals will have no "brand" identity.

My guess is that if you pulled 4 cigars 1x M-2, blend them with 1x Unicos and throw in two ringers, you won't have a single person get them right. At most I figure one might get 1 of the 4 with most getting none of them right.

I am just guessing of course but blind tests have shown that cigar board participants either don't know the cigars they claim to know, or that there is no real Cuban cigar brand profile.

While there is certainly a great portion of truth in it, Pig, I feel this is nevertheless a bit too much generalization, too much exaggeration. Just help me, if I understand this correct, you are saying all cigars of the same vitola are +/- the same, irrespective of their “marca” (I have to admit, the marca-concept being questionable to some extent within Tabacuba/HSA).

But just as an example - take the MdO No 2 and the Party 8-9-8 and I guess even you will agree that you can clearly tell them apart (a clear >80 % hit?). Throw in the new RA ER Alemania, and you have three absolutely different animals. Leaving aside the question whether they are true to ther putative “marca-profile” or not, but these three Dalias are certainly more different than what they share in common, apart from their format and packaging. Other striking examples coming to mind, e.g in the Julieta 2 format.

Yet it might well be the case that the Unicos and the Monte 2 would usually share a very similar profile (I can’t really say, as I don’t smoke a lot of Unicos, usually grabbing a Clasicos, or even a DA, when I long for the VR-“profile”… ). But I believe that this still doesn’t provide a basis to generalize in this way on all marcas/vitolas.

Like this thread and discussion, too!

Paul

[Puros Y Vino]

I doubt it. I just can't find a good consistent stream of Monte2's but have yet to have a bad VR Unico. When an M2 is "on" it does share some of the coffee flavours a Unico consistently delivers.

[bigfunkyg]

Having smoked a fair amount of both I would generally say that the Unicos are fuller bodied that the Monte's. That said, I can understand how one would see similarities between the two as they share many similar charactistics.

[PigFish]

While there is certainly a great portion of truth in it, Pig, I feel this is nevertheless a bit too much generalization, too much exaggeration. Just help me, if I understand this correct, you are saying all cigars of the same vitola are +/- the same, irrespective of their “marca” (I have to admit, the marca-concept being questionable to some extent within Tabacuba/HSA).

But just as an example - take the MdO No 2 and the Party 8-9-8 and I guess even you will agree that you can clearly tell them apart (a clear >80 % hit?). Throw in the new RA ER Alemania, and you have three absolutely different animals. Leaving aside the question whether they are true to ther putative “marca-profile” or not, but these three Dalias are certainly more different than what they share in common, apart from their format and packaging. Other striking examples coming to mind, e.g in the Julieta 2 format.

Yet it might well be the case that the Unicos and the Monte 2 would usually share a very similar profile (I can’t really say, as I don’t smoke a lot of Unicos, usually grabbing a Clasicos, or even a DA, when I long for the VR-“profile”… ). But I believe that this still doesn’t provide a basis to generalize in this way on all marcas/vitolas.

Like this thread and discussion, too!

Paul

Yes, you have me! I am often guilty of gross generalizations when it comes to a broad view of Cuban cigars.

Cigars are like people in some respect. We are all the same (generally) on one hand but we are all certainly individuals.

So I trust the individual nature of the individual cigar, like the person, more than the "group" that they belong to. The group, the box, the year, the model, does not matter a lot to me. The vitola matters to me as the physical aspect is quantifiable.

A short fat guy is not going to make it in the NBA as a frail woman will not make it in the NFL. The frail woman my be the head of the physics department at MIT where the 330 lb linebacker can't find the place to pee!

I hang my hat more on vitola than any other aspect of the Cuban cigar. Then I look for total quantity made. The more they make, the worse they 'likely' are! Again, this is a generalization but it is all that I can quantify if I am going to make wise, or presumably wise, choices.

When the Cubans are rushed, they "f" up the cigars... If you have any belief in the "bad year" theories, and understand these generalizations, but don't apply them to all cigars in all cases, you can see my point. You can generalize to a point about anything. While stereotypes cannot be used to judge each individual, we can call that prejudice, it can be used to make a better decision about anything when you have little else to go on. When you are picking your flag football team, you are not going to take the frail female for a center. You could of course be wrong about your choice, but the odds are in favor of you making a better choice if you succumb to a generalization about your needs and the requirements to fill them. Decisions made on facts are the best, but when facts don't exist, then generalizations may have to do!

I am not going to say that there is nothing to brand blending. I am going to present what I have seen in the form of taking part in many double blind taste tests and let that evidence speak for me. Regardless of how many boast, when put to the test, most of us will fail. I don't think it is us! Lots of people can distinguish rums and wines, Coke from Pepsi, but time after time, cigar board blind testings tell a story and one is foolish not use the evidence that is given to them when when it is given to them when looking for facts.

If you say you can determine 3 cigars then so be it. I am not going to call you a liar, I am not the end-all for super tasters. When one mixes up the most popular cigars and asks those to call them blind, most people don't get many, if any right!

You cannot have brand profiles without quality control. We all know that Cuban quality control leaves a lot to be desired. Make your own decision on the facts as you see them!

Cheers! And, Happy New Year! -Piggy

[RickHendeson]

All I know is, I got Pigfish to emerge from his lair for a conversation, and that alone merits me some kind of prize or something.

[LGC]

You cannot have brand profiles without quality control. We all know that Cuban quality control leaves a lot to be desired. Make your own decision on the facts as you see them!

Very important statement right here!!

I am not a supertaster... so my main concern with any cigar is the specific vitola and the OVERALL flavor profile. I'm not looking for, or expecting, sour cherries, stewed prunes, marshmallows, or peanut brittle in my cigars.

[TonyAccardo]

I agree with the OP and Pigfish. I didn't smoke Cubans back in the mid 90's or before so I don't know what the differences between brand profiles were like. What I do know is that I cannot detect any brand profile between the different marcas.

What differences I notice have nothing to do with brands but just the natural differences between leaves off of one plant and the leaves of another. To me, there are bad cigars and good to great cigars but it has nothing to do with brand. This is just my opinion on the subject.

Cuban tobacco is my favorite so a cigar rolled with good to great Cuban tobacco and blended properly is my favorite Cuban cigar. The brand on the band means little to nothing to me. I think it's human nature to want to associate our favorite product with some type of identifying brand. But in the larger picture, I don't think it has as much meaning as some like to think.

[Smallclub]

I think it's human nature to want to associate our favorite product with some type of identifying brand. But in the larger picture, I don't think it has as much meaning as some like to think.

And I think it's human nature to deny the existence of something that one is unable to perceive.

[helix]

A bit off topic but , exactly why I prefer Custom Rolled Cuban Cigars. Take a top level roller/blender , Reynaldo , Yolanda or Alphonso for example, they have dibs to pick and choose their leaf from the sorting warehouse or factory and create a more or less consistent profile/blend of cigar with no construction flaws.

[TonyAccardo]

And I think it's human nature to deny the existence of something that one is unable to perceive.

Yes, I'm sure you're right but how come I can taste distinct differences/brand profiles in non Cuban cigars, beers, differences between foods of the same ilk.

My take on it is that cigar smokers who want to project their superiority in all things cigars/wines so as to separate themselves from other, newer cigar smokers, profess that these distinct differences exist. Oh, and those who cannot, well looks like you're not part of the club.

I do detect differences between marcas but it's my opinion that this has MUCH more to do with the natural differences between tobacco leaves from different plants than it does with the band that's on the cigar. But those are my thoughts. I'm sure what I say here is wrong to you but then my question to you is... What makes you right and myself wrong?

[shlomo]

A regular cigar smoker is given an unbanded PSD4 and an Epi 2. They are told what the 2 cigars are, but not which is which.

If this cigar smoker cannot pick the two apart, then I suggest this cigar smoker save alot of money and stick with Jose Piedra.

Of course many Cuban cigars taste similar. All they are is rolled tobacco, all from the same small area of the world. I am far from a supertaster, but can certainly pull out a few characteristics from cigars. Good, bad, rough, smooth, harsh, creamy, rich, thin....general terms. No stewed fruit (ha!), rock fruit, avocado dip, boiled cabbage, lion's piss, etc....

Rick, to you Monte 2 and VR Unico are the same, so buy whatever is on sale!

I wonder why people buy Cohiba, Trinidad or REs then?

[Colt45]

What differences I notice have nothing to do with brands but just the natural differences between leaves off of one plant and the leaves of another. T

I do detect differences between marcas but it's my opinion that this has MUCH more to do with the natural differences between tobacco leaves from different plants

A.K.A blending - which is not static. Blenders (should) taste and adjust over the course of a harvest and from harvest to harvest. They are said to try and maintain "brand" characteristics. How this is executed is certainly not consistent. Perhaps branding does not matter - Chevy or Ford, Ferrari or Lamborghini - they're all cars.

I've said many times that I've come to feel that Cuban cigars share more similarities than they have differences, and I'm another who will take quality over badging every time.

P.S. I believe that the characteristics often associated with a "brand" are suggested by smokers, and not necessarily intended by blenders. We taste caramel, stone fruit, pond mung - I doubt cigars are blended with these attributes in mind.

[NSXCIGAR]

I certainly don't claim to have a super-human palate but I'll be a monkey's uncle if I couldn't detect a difference between a Monte 4 and a Siglo II. Now, I'm not claiming I could determine the vitola blind. I'm saying I could determine they are different blends/brands.

As far as the Unicos Vs Monte 2, the last Unicos I smoked last week was better than any Monte 2 I've had in years. There were flavors in it that were uncommon to any Montecristo I've had as a brand. If you had told me it was a Monte, I would have been surprised but I wouldn't have argued with you too loudly since there is quite a bit of variation in QC. But If it was a back to-back test I could tell you they were probably different blends, and therefore different brands.

I agree QC is the main issue with production techniques and blending also a factor. The brand characteristics are there much of the time but sometimes they're not or very hard to detect giving the appearance of uniformity. I'm also conceding it's possible for the cigars to go out the door with the wrong bands on them. I'm quite sure that's happened. Which is why I hesitate to say there is always brand differentiation. But when QC is high there should be and I believe there still is.

[JohnS]

Prove me wrong.

They have different bands. Proof.

I thought the onus was on proving your argument Rick! At the very least, different bands does suggest difference, physically but okay, if we quantify taste, you certainly have a point (although I'd suggest there is a slight difference in blends but cede the similarities).

So what is the moral of the story here? The consensus seems to be that Montecristo No.2's are not as consistent as Vegas Robaina Unicos. Also, Unicos offer a good cigar smoking experience. Hence, in light of the fact that Vegas Robaina most probably will be scaled back in the near future, the obvious thing to do is to pick up a box (if or when you see it offered on the next 24:24 listing) so it's in your rotation and you can reach for it in 3 to 5 years time.

[MIKA27]

There's no comparison between a Monte 2 and a VR Unicos.

VR Unicos would have to be my favorite cigar EVER, a real spice bomb that evolves throughout, Medium to full strength.

It was only the day before yesterday, Bolivar (Mike) and I discussed amongst many topics, our least favorite cigar and you know what is my least favorite? A Monte 2.

IMO and taste, the only thing they share for me is the hint of roast coffee, Monte 2 is nowhere near as spicy or full. It's also more woody and creamy compared to a VR unicos.

If they were the same, I wouldn't dislike a Monte 2 but my natural tastes repel from these and I've always wondered why as I do like other Montecristos. I think the Monte 2's for me at least, are overrated.

[cigarbigboy]

what throws a ringer in this is that even within the same box, of the same year, one cigar presentation and flavors aren't always the same.

[Notsocleaver]

I think of blends as kinda being like venn diagrams. Certain blends have a lot of overlap, some very little. Within those blends, a certain batch will fit within the circle, but not necessarily encompass the whole circle. Some boxes might seem more peppery, chocolaty, etc. So if you take a certain box from blend A that might skew to the right and compare it to a box from blend b that skews to the left, they might taste really similar.

I generally think I can tell the difference between a HDM#2 and a PSD4, but my last box of Epicures was unusually spicy, and if I smoked a particular cigar from that box unbanded, I might not be sure if it was a particularly creamy PSD4, or peppery HdM.