Deep Dive: Montecristo Number 3

[El Presidente]

Montecristo Number 3 

The Monte 3 is a wallflower. 

People will fall all over themselves to praise a Trinidad Coloniales but as for a Monte 3? In the main they are just not interested. 

It is such a shame as a good Monte 3 takes the best of the Monte 1 and Monte 4 and goes to a new level. A great Monte 3 will go head to head with a great Trinidad Coloniales.  

 

Montecristo Number 3 

• Do you like Montecristo Number 3 
• Where does it stand compared to other similar cigars. 
• Have you noticed a blend/flavour/body change over the years? If so, approximately when?
• How long does it take you to smoke a Montecristo Number 3 
• Do the poll!

 Montecristo Number 3  

CLICK HERE FOR OTHER DEEP DIVES 

 

[NSXCIGAR]

 A great Monte. I never get tired of reaching for them. Just a bit more class than the 4 and a better vitola as well. Can't recall the last time I had a dud. I find them to perform better and more consistently than the 1. Probably my second favorite Monte behind the DE, although I smoke far more 5s. 

[JohnS]

There's no doubt that they're more consistent than other Montecristo cigars. The question is...why are these overlooked by the majority of casual and seasoned, experienced cigar enthusiasts? Whether one agrees or not, the reasons would probably include these below...

• In comparison to a Montecristo No.4, it doesn't seem too much of a difference in size but it is more expensive factoring in the size difference. (In other words, the Montecristo No.3 is proportionately more expensive for its size in comparison to the Montecristo No.4.)
• There's not much difference in smoking time in relative terms to the time it takes to smoke a Montecristo No.4
• In comparison to the Montecristo No.1 and No.4, which have similar blends, the size of the Montecristo No.3 doesn't effect its strength and body and much as the other two.
• Amongst the classic Montecristo line cigars, the Montecristo No.2 and No.5 offer a different smoking experience.
• Consumers don't feel they need to invest in the Montecristo No.3 when there are so many other Montecristo options.

Personally speaking, I would loathe for the Montecristo No.3 to be discontinued or go into hiatus. Frankly, we need more classic Corona-sized cigars.

[riderpride]

Absolutely love a good corona, and definitely a big fan of these. I tend to reach for the No 4 more, but that's mostly due to time constraints. 

Would love a VR in this vitola.

Cheers!

[NSXCIGAR]

1 hour ago, JohnS said:

In comparison to the Montecristo No.1 and No.4, which have similar blends,

I'm not so sure about this anymore. Since at least 2014 I've found Monte 1s are quite a bit different while the 3 & 4 have remained pretty close to each other. The 1 seems to be "drier" and woodier than the 3 & 4 with a lot more construction and burn issues. I've really moved away from them particularly since the DE is only a few bucks more.

1 hour ago, riderpride said:

Would love a VR in this vitola.

I would too but the Familiar ain't coming back. I'd pay good money for a VR Dalias though.

[BrightonCorgi]

Corona is a perfect vitola when you don't want to go big.  Big fan of Monte No. 3 and was one of the few boxes I made sure to buy before we get to where are with stock & prices of today.

[Fugu]

On 10/6/2022 at 11:33 AM, JohnS said:

There's no doubt that they're more consistent than other Montecristo cigars. The question is...why are these overlooked by the majority of casual and seasoned, experienced cigar enthusiasts? Whether one agrees or not, the reasons would probably include these below...

• In comparison to a Montecristo No.4, it doesn't seem too much of a difference in size but it is more expensive factoring in the size difference. (In other words, the Montecristo No.3 is proportionately more expensive for its size in comparison to the Montecristo No.4.)
• There's not much difference in smoking time in relative terms to the time it takes to smoke a Montecristo No.4
• In comparison to the Montecristo No.1 and No.4, which have similar blends, the size of the Montecristo No.3 doesn't effect its strength and body and much as the other two.
• Amongst the classic Montecristo line cigars, the Montecristo No.2 and No.5 offer a different smoking experience.
• Consumers don't feel they need to invest in the Montecristo No.3 when there are so many other Montecristo options.

Personally speaking, I would loathe for the Montecristo No.3 to be discontinued or go into hiatus. Frankly, we need more classic Corona-sized cigars.

I think this is spot on. Actually, the Monte 3 is pretty much in line with the Cervantes price wise (considering length and official weight), but it’s the No. 4 that has always been the ‘bargain’ among its peers. So, better (read: cheaper) is the enemy of good?! We all know which consequences come with the volume production of the No. 4 (in fact not so true anymore from my experience). So, absolutely speaking, for price, blend and construction consistency, from a plain rational standpoint, the No. 3 is probably the “best” of the parejos. Still, I also find myself reaching more for the 4 and 5. As to why this is so I have no clearcut answer. Most likely it’s the added commitment in time and money. The No. 4 and 5 are (great) everyday-cigars, and while I wouldn’t say “overlooked”, the No. 3, and even more so the No. 1, are already in the realm “special” cigars for me.

That said, not much beats the enjoyment of a great Coronas.

[Hollywood Ninja]

About the only smoke I've gone deep on in my humidor. Favorite size.

Sent from my SM-G996U1 using Tapatalk

[NSXCIGAR]

22 hours ago, Fugu said:

Actually, the Monte 3 is pretty much in line with the Cervantes price wise

I think it's a combination of that and Coronas being a very unpopular vitola. Monte 3 prices have always leaned toward Monte 1 and Monte 4's (and 5's) massive production means there's constant downward price pressure on them. Monte 3 gets stuck in retail hell. 

By the way, I'm smoking a 2018 Monte 3 now. Solid as always. I'd say it's not even close to peak. The tanginess is just starting to come out. I'd say another 3-5 years will be ideal which is pretty consistent with my finding Monte peaking at 7-10 years. 

[joeypots]

I used to be able to get with 4 or 5 years on them on a vintage page of a great vendor. Those days are long gone. I love the  vitola, it’s a great one hour smoke, perfect for the short get together after work with the guys. And, infinitely better than the dreck available at the local cigar merchants. I don’t understand why the petit corona over shadows the corona vitola. I’ll take a corona anyday. I have’t had one for a while but there are a few sleeping. 

[NSXCIGAR]

18 hours ago, joeypots said:

I don’t understand why the petit corona over shadows the corona vitola.

I don't understand why 52+ RG has become all the rage either. 

There may be no better illustration of the preference change from Corona to Petit Corona than the Monte 3 and 4. The Monte 3 was the best selling CC until the late 90s when the 4 overtook it. By the early 2000s Coronas and Lonsdales were becoming shelf sitters.

Not sure what happened but it happened between 1997-2002. I remember in the late 90s LCDH shelves were stocked with plenty of them. Punch & Partagas Coronas, Boli Coronas, Lonsdales. Churchills too. 

[Sir Diggamus]

I get this cigar and love it. I think a few points you made @JohnS definitely hit the mark as I have experienced them. Particularly in the fact that traditionally the price between the no.4 and no.3 has been significant, but no so much between the no.3 and no.1, so I think people overlook the no.3 because they can get a cigar in the same RG with close to an additional inch for just a bit more money. I just noticed @NSXCIGAR points this out too. I love a good PC, but always thought the Corona was a cigar to enjoy if you had time, while the PC always feels like a cigar to smoke if you don't have a lot of time. Would the Corona be popular if brought back for most marcas? Or would it be better have the Lonsadale return in those same marcas? 

I find the Monte no.3 when on can have rich cocoa, coffee, and spice flavors, tons of mocha. I think the blending on the ones I have enjoyed early 2000s up to maybe 2015 had a much richer and fuller body than the examples I have tried from 2015 on. It could just be age, but those earlier years seemed to have a lot more umph in them. 

One thing I used to love about this cigar was the ability to buy them in 10 count boxes. It was the perfect add on to several orders I placed over my early years of getting into cigars. And they were almost always "on" while the no.4 can be seriously hit or miss. 

[BettyHumpder]

what's there not to get? the corona is, imho, cuba's best vitola. i'm smoking through my 2018 stash right now and they are glorious. when they're smoking right it's cocoa and spice all the way through. i've got an overpacked one in the dry box right now. i may just burn it this evening. 

[EnigmatiC]

As a big fan of the corona vitola I love Monte 3s. Just delicious cigars at the perfect size that used to have a great price.

[Capn_Jackson]

I like it better than the 4, although I have so many 4’s and not many 3’s.

[Jerryvonkramer]

I recently revisited the entire Monte classic line 1-5, having one every other day. For me, by far, the 3 was the star: creamy, chocolate, a little fruit, generous Cuban twang, just a chocolate bomb. The 4 really didn't hit the same notes for me. 

[MagicalBikeRide]

One of my fav Monte’s. Love the vitola and when these are good, I get all kinds of chocolate and savoury spice. My experience with them has been somewhat different to the Monte No1.