romeo churchills...tubos or untubed

[monte d]

i recently noticed a stronger flavor in the tubed churchills. the untubed seemed smoother yet sporting their own fine taste.

also, the tubos simply state 'churchills' on their labels. anyone prefer one to the other?

[El Presidente]

» i recently noticed a stronger flavor in the tubed churchills. the untubed

» seemed smoother yet sporting their own fine taste.

» also, the tubos simply state 'churchills' on their labels. anyone prefer

» one to the other?

I don't have any real preference. It realy comes down to selecting the best of either tubed or untubed boxes. There is better consistency within the box in untubed however in my opinion the addition of the tube (and hence cedar) changes the ageing process slightly.

[shrink]

I agree that the quality of the cigar, and thus the boxdate, is the most important factor here.

But the RyJ Churchill is one of the few cigars that I prefer in tubos. The others are the RyJ Short Churchill (duh!) and the Upmann Monarcas. These are cigars that I age from 3 to 5 years or more. I'm not sure why, but I find that the tube intensifies the flavors. It's similar to putting a box in a plastic bag, only even more so.

The other reason involves the draw. Tubed cigars aren't box pressed, and therefore are less likely to be tight. This can be important in some vintages.

[monte d]

quite interesting. thank you, people. i seem to have trouble aging cigars, because i want to sample them. i've bought vintage cigars, in the past. once i salted a few boxes away in my wine cellar, left them for several years, and those monte 2s and esplendidos were nothing short of amazing!