A Panoply of Inauthenticity

[Ginseng]

I was recently contact by a new member who asked for assistance authenticating some cigars. Soon after we exchanged a few PMs, I received a package of eight cigars for analysis. These were:

Upmann Monarch tubos

Partagas Serie P No. 2

Partagas Shorts from cab

Romeo y Julieta Belicosos

Bolivar Belicosos Finos

Cohiba Siglo VI (x2)

Cohiba Siglo VI tubos

Here are my observations in numbered list format.

1. The cigars were nicely constructed. Most were on the firm side but otherwise, the wrappers were clean, of good quality and applied with expertise. Looking good.

2. All dimensions measured out within acceptable tolerance ranges. The Siglo VI were 2mm long but that is not terribly bad. Still looking good.

3. All the bands were essentially indistinguishable from bands on authentic specimens. Good quality printing, excellent registration of colors and emboss. Die cut properly and centered. Rock on.

4. Smelled strange. There was an unusual and unpleasant bitter, leathery funk to all the cigars. I have never smelled a Havana that did not make me positively drool from the tobacco aroma but these did not smell right. The only cigars that smelled worse to me was a box of fake Bolivar Coronas. I still have this box and I still check in on it occasionally as a reference. Hmm...

5. Curiously uniform wrapper. Here is a photograph of six of these cigars. These sticks span 2004 and 2005 production, 5 different marcas, 4 different factories, 5 different vitolas with ring gauge from 42 to 52 and length from 4-3/8" to 7". But look at how similar these wrappers appear. In my experience, this is a level of uniformity that is at least as good as that often encountered within a single box of Havanas. Something's fishy.

6. The serial number two-letter prefixes on the warranty seals for these boxes are beyond the range which I have personally recorded. His 04 boxes have prefixes of BM, DB, and ES (all produced in NOV!) For my eight 2004 boxes, the span is FD-HD. His 05 box is DB and fourteen of my 2005 boxes span GI-HS.

I would feel a lot more comfortable if I had around 50 boxes from each year so I could draw a more complete picture of the distribution of prefix codes for those two years. As it stands, this observation merely suggests a potential mismatch. It's got me wondering.

7. The use of the discontinued EAR factory code on recent production is a big red flag. As far as I can figure, this code signifying the La Corona factory was last seen on legitimate Habanos around the middle of 2002. It has been seen commonly seen on counterfeit goods starting 2003. I only have one EAR code box and it is a box of SCdLH La Fuerza from NOV01. Both of this guy's EAR boxes are from 2004. Additionally, La Corona did not make either of the two marcas represented by the boxes he has. Finally, it is somewhat unlikely that two boxes from the same factory, produced the same month would have prefixes as far apart as BM and DB. This is not a good sign.

8. Multiple structural and printing differences between the his Siglo VI tube and authentic specimens. I have had Sig VI tubes from three different vendors acquired over about a year and the construction of the tube cap and tube body are unlike the one provided by him. Here are some photos. In the first photo, the legitimate cap uses 16-panel closure at the top while his specimen uses 8-panel. In the second photo, the authentic specimen uses 8-panel at the base of the tube while his specimen uses a cap-piece.

In the absence of definitive information from the manufacturer of the legitimate Cohiba tubes, I can't say for sure that this observation means anything in particular about the legitimacy of his specimens. I can only say that that tube is constructed differently from several others I know to be authentic.

Here are two photos of his tube on the left and one of my tubes on the right. Note the minute but discernible differences in the text/type, indian head, dot pattern, length of the cedar insert, black band below "Cohiba" and gold-tone joint piece. Curiouser and curiouser.

Overall, the the picture painted by these observations leads me to strongly suspect all the cigars to be counterfeit. I did not lay out every step of the analysis of every bit of data that this fellow provided but that more detailed examination suggests that these are almost certainly all fakes. And, when coupled with this quote on the method of procurement, my certainty level approaches 100%

"As far as my source goes everything has been good just hard to verify, I do know that he goes to cuba himself and some how gets them back to the US."

I had the opportunity to smoke the Partagas Shorts from cab that this fellow sent me. Here is my account of that experience.

This cigar is well made with an expertly applied, silky colorado wrapper. Length and ring gauge are right on target. Sniffing the cigar prior to lighting reconfirmed an unusual leathery funk. There was a sweetness that just did not seem characteristic. I cut the cap and checked the draw which turned out to be slightly firm but reasonable. Light up was uneventful.

I've smoked a few Party Shorts in my time and right away, I noticed that this cigar lacked the signature spicy punch. Also lacking was the pronounced peppery character that asserts itself early on and then settles down into a rich background of medium heavy tobacco. In its place was a mellow, sweet earthiness. This was a mild cigar, mild-medium bodied with a subdued aroma and quite out of character with my experience of the real thing. As the cigar progressed, I made another important observation. The ash was bright white and tight. As some of you may already be aware, tight, bright white ashes are quite uncommon in Cuban cigars. Much more characteristic is a fluffy medium-dark gray, dappled ash. Here is a photograph of the cigar and the first 1.25" of ash.

At this point, I have a strong suspicion that this cigar might not be what it was represented to be. But this remained a suspicion for only a little while longer. Thus far, it wasn't a terrible cigar, just rather nondescript and somewhat bland. At about the 1.5" mark, the cigar had still not developed in any meaningful way and so I decided to stop smoking, let it cool off, and dissect the stub. And that is when all doubt fled from my mind.

As you can see from the following photograph, the filler contains low quality, fragmentary tobacco. Basically, what we have here is a mixed-filler, "sandwich" style cigar. In an authentic totalmente a mano Havana cigar, every leaf is intact and either full, or half leaf. There is never chopped leaf in premium, totally hand made long-filler Cuban cigars. This clinched the diagnosis. Fugazi.

BTW, here is a shot of the foot of the cigar prior to lighting. You can see that the pattern of the bunching is suggestive of the type of construction found in some counterfeits. Andrew Welch illustrates this schematically on his Vitolas website, here. Genuine, high quality handmades often will show a much less structured pattern that I call "Habana Chaos." The leaves are bunched to provide proper structure between ligero and seco/volado tobaccos and this means you won't see a heavy ring of concentrically laid leaves near the outer surface. Keep in mind that this is an observation that is only useful when the concentric-over-core structure is severe.

Wilkey

[El Presidente]

5. Curiously uniform wrapper. Here is a photograph of six of these cigars. These sticks span 2004 and 2005 production, 5 different marcas, 4 different factories, 5 different vitolas with ring gauge from 42 to 52 and length from 4-3/8" to 7". But look at how similar these wrappers appear. In my experience, this is a level of uniformity that is at least as good as that often encountered within a single box of Havanas. Something's fishy.

I have never seen the above

Wilkey...congratulations. What a tremendous exercise in forensic evaluation. I have forwarded your review to a friend at Habanos to reinforce what a true connoisseur is

[Professor Twain]

Wilkey, thanks for providing this detailed analysis, and the accompanying photographs. I had never thought to look at features like the structure inside of the cap, and had always assumed that it would be very difficult to counterfeit a tubo as elaborate as the Siglo VI.

You have done a real service here, your efforts are much appreciated.

[greenpimp]

Excellent analysis. Thanks for sharing your effort.

The fakes seem to be looking better. I saw three boxes of fakes yesterday at a friends. Boxes were almost perfect, code right, triple cap an all. The smell was way off though.

Great pics and step by step. Thanks.

[greenpimp]

oops double post...:-|

[Phailure]

Wow, that is some hardcore analysis of counterfeits. Thanks for the informative post!

[Well Armed]

Best analysis yet!

[genevapics]

Great work Wilkey. I always enjoy your investigative posts. Well done!

[mailman]

» Wow, that is some hardcore analysis of counterfeits. Thanks for the

» informative post!

a job well done, thanks for the info, hopefully i'll never have to use it!

as long as i'm buying here i don't need to worry.

[smokelaw1]

» I was recently contact by a new member who asked for assistance

» authenticating some cigars. Soon after we exchanged a few PMs, I received

» a package of eight cigars for analysis. These were:

»

» Upmann Monarch tubos

» Partagas Serie P No. 2

» Partagas Shorts from cab

» Romeo y Julieta Belicosos

» Bolivar Belicosos Finos

» Cohiba Siglo VI (x2)

» Cohiba Siglo VI tubos

»

» Here are my observations in numbered list format.

» 1. The cigars were nicely constructed. Most were on the firm side

» but otherwise, the wrappers were clean, of good quality and applied with

» expertise. Looking good.

»

» 2. All dimensions measured out within acceptable tolerance ranges.

» The Siglo VI were 2mm long but that is not terribly bad. Still looking

» good.

»

» 3. All the bands were essentially indistinguishable from bands on

» authentic specimens. Good quality printing, excellent registration of

» colors and emboss. Die cut properly and centered. Rock on.

»

» 4. Smelled strange. There was an unusual and unpleasant bitter,

» leathery funk to all the cigars. I have never smelled a Havana that did

» not make me positively drool from the tobacco aroma but these did not

» smell right. The only cigars that smelled worse to me was a box of fake

» Bolivar Coronas. I still have this box and I still check in on it

» occasionally as a reference. Hmm...

»

» 5. Curiously uniform wrapper. Here is a photograph of six of these

» cigars. These sticks span 2004 and 2005 production, 5 different

» marcas, 4 different factories, 5 different vitolas with ring

» gauge from 42 to 52 and length from 4-3/8" to 7". But look at

» how similar these wrappers appear. In my experience, this is a level of

» uniformity that is at least as good as that often encountered

» within a single box of Havanas. Something's fishy.

»

»

» 6. The serial number two-letter prefixes on the warranty seals for

» these boxes are beyond the range which I have personally recorded. His 04

» boxes have prefixes of BM, DB, and ES (all produced in NOV!) For my eight

» 2004 boxes, the span is FD-HD. His 05 box is DB and fourteen of my 2005

» boxes span GI-HS.

»

» I would feel a lot more comfortable if I had around 50 boxes from each

» year so I could draw a more complete picture of the distribution of prefix

» codes for those two years. As it stands, this observation merely

» suggests a potential mismatch. It's got me wondering.

»

» 7. The use of the discontinued EAR factory code on recent

» production is a big red flag. As far as I can figure, this code

» signifying the La Corona factory was last seen on legitimate Habanos

» around the middle of 2002. It has been seen commonly seen on counterfeit

» goods starting 2003. I only have one EAR code box and it is a box of SCdLH

» La Fuerza from NOV01. Both of this guy's EAR boxes are from 2004.

» Additionally, La Corona did not make either of the two marcas represented

» by the boxes he has. Finally, it is somewhat unlikely that two boxes from

» the same factory, produced the same month would have prefixes as far apart

» as BM and DB. This is not a good sign.

»

» 8. Multiple structural and printing differences between the his

» Siglo VI tube and authentic specimens. I have had Sig VI tubes from three

» different vendors acquired over about a year and the construction of the

» tube cap and tube body are unlike the one provided by him. Here are some

» photos. In the first photo, the legitimate cap uses 16-panel closure at

» the top while his specimen uses 8-panel. In the second photo, the

» authentic specimen uses 8-panel at the base of the tube while his specimen

» uses a cap-piece.

»

»

»

» In the absence of definitive information from the manufacturer of the

» legitimate Cohiba tubes, I can't say for sure that this observation means

» anything in particular about the legitimacy of his specimens. I can only

» say that that tube is constructed differently from several others I know

» to be authentic.

»

» Here are two photos of his tube on the left and one of my tubes on the

» right. Note the minute but discernible differences in the text/type,

» indian head, dot pattern, length of the cedar insert, black band below

» "Cohiba" and gold-tone joint piece. Curiouser and curiouser.

»

»

»

» Overall, the the picture painted by these observations leads me to

» strongly suspect all the cigars to be counterfeit. I did not lay out every

» step of the analysis of every bit of data that this fellow provided but

» that more detailed examination suggests that these are almost

» certainly all fakes. And, when coupled with this quote on the method

» of procurement, my certainty level approaches 100%

»

» "As far as my source goes everything has been good just hard to

» verify, I do know that he goes to cuba himself and some how gets them back

» to the US."

»

» I had the opportunity to smoke the Partagas Shorts from cab that this

» fellow sent me. Here is my account of that experience.

»

» This cigar is well made with an expertly applied, silky colorado wrapper.

» Length and ring gauge are right on target. Sniffing the cigar prior to

» lighting reconfirmed an unusual leathery funk. There was a sweetness that

» just did not seem characteristic. I cut the cap and checked the draw which

» turned out to be slightly firm but reasonable. Light up was uneventful.

»

» I've smoked a few Party Shorts in my time and right away, I noticed that

» this cigar lacked the signature spicy punch. Also lacking was the

» pronounced peppery character that asserts itself early on and then settles

» down into a rich background of medium heavy tobacco. In its place was a

» mellow, sweet earthiness. This was a mild cigar, mild-medium bodied with a

» subdued aroma and quite out of character with my experience of the real

» thing. As the cigar progressed, I made another important observation. The

» ash was bright white and tight. As some of you may already be aware,

» tight, bright white ashes are quite uncommon in Cuban cigars. Much more

» characteristic is a fluffy medium-dark gray, dappled ash. Here is a

» photograph of the cigar and the first 1.25" of ash.

»

»

» At this point, I have a strong suspicion that this cigar might not be what

» it was represented to be. But this remained a suspicion for only a little

» while longer. Thus far, it wasn't a terrible cigar, just rather

» nondescript and somewhat bland. At about the 1.5" mark, the cigar had

» still not developed in any meaningful way and so I decided to stop

» smoking, let it cool off, and dissect the stub. And that is when all doubt

» fled from my mind.

»

» As you can see from the following photograph, the filler contains low

» quality, fragmentary tobacco. Basically, what we have here is a

» mixed-filler, "sandwich" style cigar. In an authentic totalmente a

» mano Havana cigar, every leaf is intact and either full, or half leaf.

» There is never chopped leaf in premium, totally hand made

» long-filler Cuban cigars. This clinched the diagnosis. Fugazi.

»

»

» BTW, here is a shot of the foot of the cigar prior to lighting. You can

» see that the pattern of the bunching is suggestive of the type of

» construction found in some counterfeits. Andrew Welch illustrates this

» schematically on his Vitolas website,

» here. Genuine,

» high quality handmades often will show a much less structured pattern that

» I call "Habana Chaos." The leaves are bunched to provide proper structure

» between ligero and seco/volado tobaccos and this means you won't see a

» heavy ring of concentrically laid leaves near the outer surface. Keep in

» mind that this is an observation that is only useful when the

» concentric-over-core structure is severe.

»

»

» Wilkey

Pfft...cut and paste job from another forum. COme up with some orginal material would you?

Just kidding of course, great job Wilkey. You are truly an asset to the community. You could really make a career out of investigating counterfeits.

[Ginseng]

» 5. Curiously uniform wrapper. Here is a photograph of six of these cigars.

» These sticks span 2004 and 2005 production, 5 different marcas, 4

» different factories, 5 different vitolas with ring gauge from 42 to 52 and

» length from 4-3/8" to 7". But look at how similar these wrappers appear. In

» my experience, this is a level of uniformity that is at least as good as

» that often encountered within a single box of Havanas. Something's fishy.

»

»

» I have never seen the above

»

» Wilkey...congratulations. What a tremendous exercise in forensic

» evaluation. I have forwarded your review to a friend at Habanos to

» reinforce what a true connoisseur is

Thanks, Rob.

I haven't had much time to do much of anything this Summer but when this request came in, I knew I'd have to take it on. I expect the packaging and a few more samples of each cigar in the mail in the next week or so. I'll come back and provide an analysis of the packaging as a follow-on.

Greenpimp,

Often it's the smell that gives them away. I have never smelled a Havana cigar that did not make me want to sniff, sniff, sniff and smoke. Counterfeits never seem to smell right and that is certainly due to the legendary quality of Cuba's tobacco.

Mailman,

You are right on that account. In fact, I use cigars from Czar as reference material in these analyses.

Josh,

What're ya doing? Following me around or something?

Wilkey

[smokelaw1]

» » »

» Josh,

» What're ya doing? Following me around or something?

»

» Wilkey

I was here first. Maybe, I don't know.

[Vetteman]

Interesting read. Thanks for the effort (analysis and post)!

[anacostiakat]

Damn fine job of Sherlocking Brother! Thanks!!

[purosdave]

Very nicely done.

[Mel]

» Very nicely done.

Good Lord man could a real Cuban pass your test?? Way well done mate.

[gyosa]

Holy SMOKES , batman !!!

Well done !!

-bk

[cigardawg]

Ah, Professor Wilkey strikes again. Nice job! Excellent analysis!

[CWS]

A truly impressive and artful job of uncloaking the imposter. Thank you

[wasch_24]

Absolutely amazing.

[purosdave]

:-D One question... Why is there a fly in the picture of the dissected cigar?

[CIGARHead]

» :-D One question... Why is there a fly in the picture of the dissected

» cigar?

That there is one a dem there mutant tobbacky beatles.:-|

[greenpimp]

» :-D One question... Why is there a fly in the picture of the dissected

» cigar?

It's a cicada. Drone on and on and on in August...

[Ginseng]

» » :-D One question... Why is there a fly in the picture of the dissected

» » cigar?

»

» It's a cicada. Drone on and on and on in August...

Yes sir, that's a cicada. We're in the season now and occasionally I find a dead one on the driveway. My daughter loves to pick them up and scare my wife with them. :-D

Wilkey

[purosdave]

You guys made me go google cicada! Interesting creatures!