havanaclub7 Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 I have a couple of Sir Winstons resting in my humidor after their trip from Down Under. I'm just wondering how they compare to the H. Upmann Monarchs. I'm thinking about getting a couple of those in my next order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrink Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 I just happened to have smoked an '01 Monarch AT tonight out on the deck. Very nice cigar. Smooth, rich tobacco flavors, with just hints of nuts, cocoa and lightly spiced with that trademark Upmann musty taste. Slightly sweet and peppered on the finish. There's nothing like an aged Upmann. But the Sir Winnie is in another class altogether. Yes, it's a relative, but in the same way that a Porsche is related to a VW. With age, the SW is more sophisticated, more subtle, and just plain more classy. I find that I smoke 'em more slowly, just to ponder the complexities that I don't find in the Monarch. BTW, if you go for the Monarchs, get 'em AT. They'll age better than the dress boxes, but even if you smoke 'em young, they will tend to burn and draw better, IME. I think it's a storage issue, and related to the absence of a box press, but what do I know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Presidente Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 Nice comparison Shrink and I don't disagree. When I think Winnies I think of the finest shortbread you have ever eaten. When I think Monarchs I think doughnuts dunked in black coffee. Both good, one great. 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