Cohiba Siglo 1 help please. Suspicious or...?


Recommended Posts

I'm no Karl Hungus and would like the opinion of some Cohiba experts here.  The story:  I got this Sig 1 box July of 18.  October (or so) of '18 a friend really, really wanted it so I sold it to him.  Had the visited him the other day and he mentioned he was told that the box was fake due to the lack of a missing number on the band that would have only been visible with UV light.  Now, I'd just learned two months ago of the presence of this number and the recent sticks I have at home check out.  Anything '18 or later definitely has the number.  Went back to his home late yesterday and we had a good look at the box.  He only has 5 sticks remaining and is a noob to CCs.  Said they all smoked great so far, but he really doesn't have a good foundation in the marca to be able to discern if they have the familiar Cohiba flavor profile.  See pics below.  Photo heavy, so please bear with me.  I brought a recent Sig 1 box with me that did have the numbers to compare....

His box:  The gov't band has a number that checks with verification. The micro print is present and it matches. It has the UV visible marks in (what I think) are the right places.  None of the bands (he saves old bands...) have the CHB03...  numbers at the band seam.  When did those start?  And should a box from '18 have them?  There is an impossible to photograph diagonal of four white squares to the left of the face that are present on all bands (both boxes) with UV light, whether the number was present or not.  The cigars look absolutely identical to the ones I brought.  In fact, I inserted a "fake" and I can't tell the difference except when I rotate and look for the numbers.  We cut the cap off one of his and unwrapped it.  Looks like long filler with a few pieces to me.  No pubic hair or fingernails or rat droppings etc....  Looking at the box itself and I got to noticing the brand on his slide lid was different than mine.  He said he'd learned that boxes would be reused and as the gov't seal won't come off cleanly that box tops get refinished for the "fakes" and the box reused.  I'd never heard this, but there is a distinct difference in the impressions.  Mine was clean and only lightly pressed into the box on bot the sides and the top.  His looked just like mine on the sides.  The top is not very detailed an pressed much more deeply into the top. The black paint is a matte finish where mine is a semi gloss.  This only after really studying and thinking about what could be different...  After getting home I checked my second Sig 1 box.  They're the only Cohiba SLB I have.  It's nice and clean on the outside as well.  

Can one determine simply from the absence of the band numbers and the suspicious top "brand" that these might be faux?  Am I obsessing too much?  Have the fiends gotten that good at replicating?

Definitely looking forward to your thoughts on these....

IMG_7129.thumb.jpg.0337afd220f3c88c573c6161a720a715.jpg

matching micro print

 

 

IMG_7130.thumb.jpg.554b026b40ec85ad7461b6001d064731.jpgIMG_7131.thumb.jpg.8b0b3b93d922b67c65667e42a1f73e73.jpgIMG_7132.thumb.jpg.4a4c2101a55daa5029b630230dcc843c.jpg

Normal spots for UV verification?

 

IMG_7135.thumb.jpg.207de183e08f54544b65faf49419c0b5.jpg

really hard to see the diag white boxes, but they're there and slightly more blue...

 

IMG_7136.thumb.jpg.c29a0baa4f6e7aabd6a5702b052ab2ff.jpg

Normal construction?

 

IMG_7138.thumb.jpg.83f0d895249174a2f72f4704c4ff2150.jpg

I honestly didn't notice if the "Habanos" lettering was embossed on his box as it was on mine.

 

IMG_7140-1.thumb.jpg.f2f0f9cab64230d7749852e6e3d19475.jpg

his

 

 

IMG_7141.thumb.jpg.28d1be81740cf6ff24a9841a16424837.jpg

mine.  All my SLBs have a slightly impressed lettering and finish that matches the rest of the box.

 

IMG_7142.thumb.jpg.9492c3e25a7e6f6cf794e5db4ced3e76.jpg

His is middle of the front row.

 

IMG_7143.thumb.jpg.a814fc067750b9607d5cfb9ef25c81d6.jpg

No UV numbers on that middle one.  His.

 

IMG_7145.thumb.jpg.0d1c263c3fc7c2025741cb569465ca26.jpg

Side of his box, and again the top below...

IMG_7146.thumb.jpg.65682b8fb0cb7540890264f10b3e8855.jpg

 

IMG_7144.thumb.jpg.0d43542b18ae3156a85896368fef712f.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have moved this here until Monday. 

I am no expert on fakes but they look 100% authentic to me. 

 

* Ken..I know you can't be 90% authentic.....I did this just for you. :D

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just received my box of Siglo I with date code REG NOV 18 and none of my bands have the UV code either.  The bands do show the four squares over the C in Cohiba under UV though.  All the box markings are on par and the cigars themselves look legit from what I can tell.  Maybe a batch of bands got out without the code?  That's what I'm telling myself anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russians call it "Woe from wit". You have become a serious expert ☺
Neither I nor my friends met fake siglo I. 
In the examination of cigars should be a systematic approach. There are direct and indirect signs. A very important seller, and also in fact the taste of the cigars. I see the original siglo I here, everything else is about the quality of the packaging.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my immediate thoughts....   Who would bother with the modest Siglo 1?  

For fakes using the most expensive components - bands, stickers  and box, cigars - is secondary. Therefore, fakes of small format practically does not occur. It is profitable to sell a fake large format it is more expensive. Siglo I is also quite time-consuming to rolling 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BuzzArd said:

One of my immediate thoughts....   Who would bother with the modest Siglo 1?  

+1

Every LCDH in Havana had SLB of Siglo I and II on each of my last 3 trips. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

* Ken..I know you can't be 90% authentic.....I did this just for you. :D

In the next video review, can you please work in a part where you tell Ken that "this cigar is very very unique"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please mail those to me for further authenticity testing and closer inspection.  Written analysis of unbiased findings will be reported back promptly.  They look fake from the picture so don’t waste your precious storage space!       ?????‍♂️

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, El Presidente said:

We had this box returned yesterday because the brainiac said there was short filler in the cigar. 

It is hard to reason with those so petrified of fakes that they end up shooting themselves in the foot. 

 

RASS One.jpg

RASS is my fave. Those should be destroyed by fire. Please send to me for proper disposal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those look 100% to me. I have several CoRo boxes from Pres and some slight differences in the burning of the Cohiba in the cedar sheet but no cause for concern.
I recall a member here getting a Siglo ribbon on his CoRo box, one that Pres displayed on a thread. Cuba being Cuba!
I also recall a member here getting a box of Siglo V I think it was that had cigars with the old band and new Cohiba band in the box. Around the 2014 switch. No cause for concern.
So seeing some bands without the UV tells me they are just older ones phasing out. Maybe it would be more of a concern if in 2020 some bands don’t have the UV markings. And I agree with others, why Siglo I?

BTW, those RASS look outstanding, cannot understand how some people think


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

the bands were missing the Alpha-numeric code bc they were trimmed with a scissor.  They're made to fit vitolas 38-47, and since the Perla vitola of Siglo I is a 40rg, they probably didn't want that much slack wrapping around the cigar. If you take the time to look closely at your cigar bands when removed, you'll notice this alot on smaller vitolas.  Virtually every Exquisitos is trimmed in this manner as well due to it's oddball vitola.  Those cigars are genuine as far as I can tell from photos.  RIP to the chopped Siglo I who gave it's life in vain ??

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I'm not sure why anyone thinks short filler is the key to determining fakes. Fakes have moved waaay past that. As if it's difficult to obtain cheap Mexican long filler. 

I've seen fakes so good in Tijuana only someone with a lot of experience with that cigar could tell. Real boxes and real bands are often used. The cigars look great. Darker wrappers seem easier to obtain so I've seen a lot of fake Cohiba Maduro 5 over the last few years. 

As a general rule, only the Global brands are faked. And small formats like Perlas or Minutos almost never. As @Cigar Salute points out a smaller format takes the same or more time to make as any other parejo and also uses the same half leaf of precious wrapper. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2019 at 9:06 PM, La_Tigre said:

Every LCDH in Havana had SLB of Siglo I and II on each of my last 3 trips. 

I would say that Siglo I & II are the most carried cigars in Cuban LCDHs at least every time I've been there. Usually an entire corner of the walk in is dedicated to those two cigars. Monte 2 and 4 are a close second.

I've rarely seen Siglo III-VI at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I would say that Siglo I & II are the most carried cigars in Cuban LCDHs at least every time I've been there. Usually an entire corner of the walk in is dedicated to those two cigars. Monte 2 and 4 are a close second.

I've rarely seen Siglo III-VI at all. 

I’ll usually see a random box of III and IV. Never V or VI on the shelves.

Point being nobody is counterfeiting Siglo I when there is plenty of supply compared to a much more desirable vitola. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, you probably have a better eye than me, but i think legit. Best way to know is to smoke them. Im huge sig 2 smoker. Send me the box i will give a full diagnostic after i smoke them all. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.