Tave1225 Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 I've had a box of these for about 6 months now. Never having one, and being regularly compared to the Monte No. 2, I decided to "crack" the box and try one after a heavy breakfast this morning. The wrapper was of a dark shade. slightly lighter than a maduro. A bit oily, it was smooth with little veins noted and firm. (perhaps an indication of the draw that was to follow). The prelight aroma was of cedar and tobacco. From the first draw the cigar had a nice "punch" to it. Woodiness and spiciness were predominant. The burn was smooth and even, however, the draw was a bit tight. Not sure if it was due to the cigar being too "well" filled or maybe I didn't cut the cigar high enough. The last third was pretty good, the woodiness continued and some chocolate flavors were noted. The cigar did become a bit rough towards the end, but never harsh or overpowering. Maybe too much "bite" would be the best way to describe it. Creamy smoke, dark ash that held strong. Good price and despite the tight draw, a very good smoke. It was a long smoke and maybe not for everyone. Hopefully with some time the rest of the box will losen up a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idesign Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 I would be happy to make these my next purchase... I've only had a couple, but they were both very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anacostiakat Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 I prefer these over the MOnte #2. Better consistency. Got a half box left that I am going to let sit for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokiethebear Posted April 19, 2006 Share Posted April 19, 2006 » I prefer these over the MOnte #2. Better consistency. Got a half box left » that I am going to let sit for a while. I do too. I would take the Upmann over the Monte anyday. Then again, I'm an H.Upmann *****.:-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Presidente Posted April 20, 2006 Share Posted April 20, 2006 Upmnn 2 V Monte 2 is very much a box to box proposition. Have enjoyed great examples of both recently (post 04). Have also seen plenty of bad ones. Upmann 2 is certainly significantly fuller in body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenpimp Posted April 20, 2006 Share Posted April 20, 2006 I've gone through 2 boxes of '04 #2s that have been wondeful. Got 2 more aging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josie67 Posted April 20, 2006 Share Posted April 20, 2006 I too agree that the Upmann is fuller bodied than the Monte, and I love them both equally as much. I personally have not had a bad Upmann 2 yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cigardawg Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 If both cigars are "on", I think the H Upmann just edges out the Montecristo. However, I like the Montecristo relatively young (have some '04s that are smoking great). For my palate, the H Upmann No. 2 needs significantly more time in the humidor. My '01s are just now coming around for my tastes....yummmmy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olotti Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 » Upmnn 2 V Monte 2 is very much a box to box proposition. Have enjoyed great » examples of both recently (post 04). Have also seen plenty of bad ones. » » Upmann 2 is certainly significantly fuller in body I smoked a few of each and prefer the Upmann #2 because of it's fuller body also have had better consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now