Bolivar Deathmatch! Fake and genuine go head to head

[Ginseng]

What happens when you smoke a fake, a charlatan, a bogus stick, a counterfeit at the same time as you smoke the genuine article? Well, I wanted to find out.

Here is a record of my recent smoking session with a genuine Bolivar Petit Corona (as the Bolivar Tubos No.2) and a Bolivar Coronas of questionable authenticity. The Bolivar Coronas in this review was provided by a fellow cigar club member. He had purchased the box from an internet source that seemed legitimate and had no prior record of selling bogus sticks. In fact, no one I spoke with had ever even heard of this vendor. The Tubos No.2 came from our very own Czar.

The following photographs will detail some of the physical and cosmetic differences. But first let me comment on the sensory characteristics from smoking. I smoked these two sticks in parallel. That means I lit them both up at the same time and smoked them together, puffing on one for a little while and then switching to the other. This is but one way to do a head-to-head comparison. Another would be to smoke one right after the other.

The Coronas lit up fine but from the very first puffs, was harsh and thin. I have never smoked a Cuban cigar that burned my throat, but this one did. In addition to the nasty bite, there was a strange metallic taste and a distinct off-flavor that was like something burnt but I could not say what. It just wasn't pleasant. The draw was easy as was expected from seeing the loose bunching at the foot. When I pushed smoke up through my nose, I found it a bit acrid and again, harsh. There was a distinct lack of earthiness or leatheriness. Tobacco was there of course, but with a serious lack of complexity, depth or body. In fact, it tasted quite raw, or underfermented. Throughout its length, the flavor profile did not change at all, remaining tobacco-like but not getting any more intense or deeper. Toward the last inch, it did get stronger and a little fuller. At this point, it was almost a decent cheap smoke. Overall, this was a poor cigar with a flavor profile that was distinctly un-Cuban.

The Petit Corona lit up fine as well and from the first puffs, was rich and earthy. There was a distinct creaminess to the smoke and there was no harshness. Instead, there were dashes of black and white pepper spicing things up. The draw was noticeably tighter than that of the Coronas but still quite acceptable. The cigar delivered nice deep tobacco flavor and gradually got richer and stronger as time passed. I noticed some nuttiness but also plenty of earthy and leathery notes that made it delicious and satisfying. The cigar stayed full and a little creamy to the end. It started to get a bit harsh near the nub but I was also having to puff a little harder to keep it lit. Overall, this PC was reminiscent of Boli PC, CJ and to a lesser degree the CE that I have smoked. Overall, a comforting and satisfying cigar.

Now, onto the pictures.

1. Here are the two cigars side by side. The Corona is on the right, the Petit Corona (authentic) on the left. This one was taken in sunlight. You can see that the wrapper on the Corona does not seem smooth and silky like the one on the PC. The PC's wrapper was resilient and fine unlike the Corona's which felt hard and coarse.

2. Here are the two cigars side by side again. This time, the Corona is on the left. The light is shining down on the cigars at a grazing angle to accentuate surface texture. As you can see, the PC looks leathery but the Corona looks ashen and the word that comes to mind is "sickly." Just a note, the Corona did not have the rich, tobacco pre-light aroma of the PC.

3. I normally like to lick the cap a bit before cutting to make the leaf a little softer for cutting. And I like to taste the wrapper leaf. Call me weird. But after you take a look at the cap on the Coronas (on the right), you'll understand why there was no way I was going to put my tongue on this tumorous-looking thing.

4. Here is a shot of the heads after clipping. I used a double-bladed guillotine but I was careful to only remove the cap and not cut the bunch underneath. As you can see, the PC on the left has a bunch that is flush cut, a fact that in a large part accounts for the "flat head" seen on many authentic Habanos. Heads that seem more or less flat are the result of variations in the closing up of the wrapper at the head under the cap. The bunch under the cap of the Corona is ragged and uneven with the filler leaves protruding to different degrees. BTW, I remove as much of the cap as I can, the reason is to make use of all the air channels in the bunch and to avoid tar build-up.

5. As the smoking began, I immediately noticed a dramatic difference in the ash. The Corona had a snow white ash that was tight and had large "pimples" on the surface. It was completely uniform without striations or patches of grey. In my experience, this is quite uncommon in Cuban cigars. I have, however, seen it exemplified in cigars using Honduran binder/wrapper. In contrast, the PC had a fluffy medium gray ash with plentiful patches of darker gray. This was an appearance that I have seen with many different Cuban brands. There were fine white "pimples" on this ash, much resembling that seen on OpusX ash.

6. Here is the first of two forensic shots. This first one is of the large filler leaf I found upon unwrapping the Corona. What's noteworthy here is the presence of a massive stem. I suspect this had something to do with the reoccurring razor-thin run I had on one side. In fact, if you look at the picture of the cut head, you can actually see it sticking out prominently at the 12-o'clock position. This stick was almost the girth of a chopstick and, IMO, highly unlikely that it would have made it into genuine Cuban production.

7. This second forensic shot shows the difference in binder leaves. The PC had a binder that was very similar to that found in other Cuban cigars (heck, even good cigars of NC type) I've taken apart. Thick, resilient and leathery. The Corona, however, had a binder that was fragile and thin.

8. The final photo in this exposé involves the "Cuban Triple Cap," a characteristic of the style of finishing up the head which, when it is missing, is often touted as suggestive of fakery. This sequence of snapshots taken from the Front, Right, Back and Left show the famous triple cap in all its glory. The triple cap technique of finishing is described here and does not, in fact, use three pieces of wrapper. Also, the triple cap is only visible from certain directions. In other words, if your cigar does not show a triple cap from at least two of the four directions, then perhaps you have reason to worry. This does not hold true for figurados such as the Piramides. The Corona, on the left, never shows a triple cap and instead of the tight wrapping you see on the PC on the right, a large flap of the wrapper is simply flung around the head twice.

In total, I employed three modes of analysis. First, visual inspection of external features of the cigar and packaging. Second, forensic analysis of the internal materials and construction of the cigar. Third and most conclusively, the taste test. This particular fugazy actually failed at the very first level. But other, better counterfeits (such as the Siglo VI I recently tested) did not conclusively flunk until the third level.

It is my hope that this exercise will be of use to all who love the pleasures of the Cuban leaf, especially those new to the art. Truly, a trusted supplier is a valuable asset, but your own knowledge and understanding of the aspects of Habanos is also a worthy a protection against fraud and fakery. If you are truly earnest about this hobby, you'll take the time and apply the effort to understand these seemingly simple and disposable little bundles of leaves. And if you do, then worlds of sublime pleasure await you.

Wilkey

[genevapics]

What can one say but, "WOW!" It's late, so I will need to post my thoughts later on. In the mean time... Great Job. Well done. You put alot of effort into this post and it shows.

[raney]

Whoa Wilkey -

That was a fantastic post... probably the best overall exposé of fakery I have seen yet.

Bravo!

[Jimmy2]

You need a manicure buddy those nail's are a little to long....

[Phailure]

Thanks for the interesting post on fakes!

[gehrig24]

I have to agree with the others. You give great detail and the pictures are just fantasic.

[The Privateer]

Fantastic post, and lots of effort put in. Thanks!

[skid11]

Very Good post....................... Well done, great photos and well written

[Fatshotbud]

» Very Good post....................... Well done, great photos and well

» written

Great job Wilkey - off subject but, what camera is in use? The pictures really accent your work!

Thanks - BUD

[Ginseng]

» » Very Good post....................... Well done, great photos and well

» » written

»

» Great job Wilkey - off subject but, what camera is in use? The pictures

» really accent your work!

»

» Thanks - BUD

Jimmy2,

Dammit, I spent hours on this and you bust on my fingernails? No soup for you! :-P Believe it or not, I cut my nails a day or two later. I hate long nails and they were driving me crazy. But seeing as how this was my semester break, I decided to relax my normal hygiene standards.

Fatshotbud,

I use a Sony DCR-PC120BT digital (MiniDV) video cam in digipic mode. I wish I had a good digital camera but I got this in 2002 for the birth of my daughter and it's been serving me well these years.

Wilkey

[strayvector]

Nicely done, Wilkey.

[Duckguy]

» Nicely done, Wilkey.

Agreed. I really appreciate the time and attention; I'm grateful for any of this type of information so that I may educate myself. I had been following this near daily on the original forum...nice to see some closure.

Josh

[Ginseng]

» » Nicely done, Wilkey.

»

» Agreed. I really appreciate the time and attention; I'm grateful for any

» of this type of information so that I may educate myself. I had been

» following this near daily on the original forum...nice to see some

» closure.

»

» Josh

My pleasure. On the original forum, the owner of these cigars posted photos of the warranty sticker for this box of fake Bolivars as well as a 10-ct SLB of genuine Cohiba Siglo VI. From the appearance of the paper and the UV-ink coat of arms on both boxes, I am even more certain that this box is fake. Well, 105% certain now.

What he found was that the UV-printed coat of arms did not match that of the Cohibas and the paper glowed with an uncharacteristic blue-white cast which indicates the use of paper that contains UV-brighteners.

Also, the serial number does not seem quite right either.

Wilkey

[Loki]

Very nice attention to detail in this post.

Good job Wilkey.

[J-ROD]

Nicely done, loved the pics.

Thanks for "taking one for the team":-D

[MrQ]

Nice job, thanks for the creative post,very cool:clap:

[El Presidente]

Great job Wilkey

You are without peer as head of our own CSI unit. ;-)

Your report must be elevated to our Review Section.

[Ginseng]

» Great job Wilkey

»

» You are without peer as head of our own CSI unit. ;-)

»

» Your report must be elevated to our Review Section.

I guess I should have posted this in the Reviews forum, eh? Perhaps this can be moved.

Thanks Prez!

[pizzabob]

MY GOD MAN!!

What an excellent review! Being a Bolivar LOVER, I certainly appreciate your efforts... now I must see the CZAR to pick me up some of those PCs, to supplement my Belicosos Finos! (which are just fantastic, by the way- Thanks ROB!)

[SeanGAR]

Wow ... what an awesome expose. THANK YOU!

[SuperT]

Thank you for the review, amazing detail!

-T

[alexgtp]

Wilkey..

I hope you use the copy and paste features...LOL!!:-D

BTW Im still trying to recover from that cigar..:-D

[Mel]

Wilkey that is one of the best posts I have ever seen. Pro done bro.

[PJ_CEONAD_CC]

Really nice work!!!!

[Van55]

Thanks. Each picture is worth 1000 words or even more!