Diplomaticos #2 (April \'05)

[Tave1225]

Diplomatico #2 - 6 1/8 x 52 - April '05

Wrapper was a light brown (natural color) with a few minor veins. Oily and firm to the touch. The pre-light aroma was of tobacco and spices. Used my faithful guillotine cutter.

The first few inches were nothing impressive, straight tobacco taste with some spiciness to it. Half way through the cigar became very nutty, almost coffee like. This is how the smoke was pretty much all the way down. Not bad but nothing to rave about. Last third was okay, did burn hot which made the flavors a bit distorted. Light bodied was my impression. Not very complex, seemed to lack depth, thou a nice refreshing smoke.

Took about an inch or so to start burning evenly, draw was ok until the last third, like I mentioned, when it became a bit hot. Touched up a few times. Took about a hour and half to smoke. Did not nub the cigar because of the hot draw, about a two inches were left. Ash was a dark gray that held well.

Nice refreshing smoke. Seems to be a nice alternative to the Monte #2 and Upmann #2. Found it to be light which probably makes it a nice morning/afternoon smoke.

[connoiseur29]

These cigars require at least a year of aging. I waited 2 years for mine. They are really superb, but patience is required.

[habanohal]

Have you had the 4s or 5s? If so , how do they compare? Thinking of getting a box of the 2s.

I do now prefer the Dippy line over the Monte. But just recieved a 03 ( Thanx Lisa) box of the Especials so will se how those compare.

[Tave1225]

» Have you had the 4s or 5s? If so , how do they compare? Thinking of

» getting a box of the 2s.

»

» I do now prefer the Dippy line over the Monte. But just recieved a 03 (

» Thanx Lisa) box of the Especials so will se how those compare.

Not sure if your question was directed at me or Mr C29, but my two cents:

I've had a three Dip #4s, one from '03 and two from '04 all three were very nice small smokes, sweet and spicy and found them to be medium bodied. Never had the #5 but would assume that their taste profiles are close to that of the #4s. For the price that they go for, I don't think you could go wrong.:-)

[habanohal]

Kewl Beans. Doesnt take much to sell me ;-)

So this might be 1 of my next box purchases

[El Presidente]

Nice review :-D

I really detest hot burns. I find it takes alot away from the flavour of the cigar. Interesting to note that your Dip 2 was firm to the touch and still burn't hot. As a rule this would mean that it is slightly on the dry side or that the blend was wrong.

[Tave1225]

» Nice review :-D

»

» I really detest hot burns. I find it takes alot away from the flavour of

» the cigar. Interesting to note that your Dip 2 was firm to the touch and

» still burn't hot. As a rule this would mean that it is slightly on the dry

» side or that the blend was wrong.

Its funny that you bring up the dryness El Prez., I've noticed a few of my cigars have been drawing hot...but yet I keep my Humidity and temp. at 65% and 63 respectively. Not sure why.:-) :-( :-D

[cigarnv]

Nice review. How would you compare the Dip 2 to the Monte 2 from a flavor perspective? Are they the same blend?

[Tave1225]

» Nice review. How would you compare the Dip 2 to the Monte 2 from a flavor

» perspective? Are they the same blend?

I don't know whether they are the same blend, and I haven't smoke too many Monte#2, but, when Monte #2's are "on" I have found them to be a bomb of a smoke, powerful, woody and spicy. A cigar with alot of character. When a#2 is at it's best not too many cigar can beat it, however, there have been some inconsistentcy problems. The Dip #2 tend to be more light bodied and, they seem to lack the depth and bite that the Monte #2s deliver. So, probably a lighter blend.

[El Presidente]

» » Nice review :-D

» »

» » I really detest hot burns. I find it takes alot away from the flavour

» of

» » the cigar. Interesting to note that your Dip 2 was firm to the touch

» and

» » still burn't hot. As a rule this would mean that it is slightly on the

» dry

» » side or that the blend was wrong.

»

» Its funny that you bring up the dryness El Prez., I've noticed a few of my

» cigars have been drawing hot...but yet I keep my Humidity and temp. at 65%

» and 63 respectively. Not sure why.:-) :-( :-D

Calibrate your hygrometer to ensure it is reading correctly. Assuming it is, raise your humidity to 68% RH.

The blends are definately different between the Monte 2 and the Dip 2.

I find a great Monte 2 to be fuller than a great Dip 2 and the flavour profile of the Monte is classic coffee cream without any of the spice one finds in the Dip 2.

[Fatshotbud]

» These cigars require at least a year of aging. I waited 2 years for mine.

» They are really superb, but patience is required.

Thanks for the review!

[cigardawg]

Thanks for the review. I agree on the aging. However, a couple of years is really all they need to demonstrate some great flavors, IMHO. They are not a full-bodied cigar, somewhat milder than the Monte in my experience. I've some from FEB05 that I have not touched yet. My '02s are almost gone.