I smoked through a box or so of these, and they never found my favor. Construction fine but flavor mediocre. Thought I was getting something better--I was smoking Padron--but no, boring and average.
+1 on aging them a bit.
+1 on the Londres vitola. There’s something about that thin ring gauge and higher ratio of wrapper to filler that really brings out the best of the Padron profile, IMO.
+1 on aging them a bit.
+1 on the Londres vitola. There’s something about that thin ring gauge and higher ratio of wrapper to filler that really brings out the best of the Padron profile, IMO.
Yes, the more expensive Padron stuff is objectively more interesting, but a few years on the core lines in any size will make them worth way more than the modest asking price.
Based on the tobaccos you seem to enjoy, Salt, I’d suggest checking out the Dunbarton Sobremesa Cervantes Fino (maybe my favorite cigar ever) and the Dunbarton Sin Compromiso Varita Magica.
Shane, thank you for your recommends, but I no longer smoke. I'm still on the forum because it's the next best thing to smoking.I can second the above.
I am of course biased, because I have a deep appreciation and respect for Padron cigars, but I believe they are possibly among the highest quality and consistent cigar brands. Neither of which always translate to an enjoyment of their flavor, because there are plenty that don't feel the same as me.
Personally, I have been smoking the Padron core "Thousand series" line for a decade, and I have never purchased a full box, despite loving them. The cigars are great for what they are, that classic Nicaraguan puro, rolled to a high quality and consistency.
There's no issue in not liking that flavor profile, I tire of the typical "Coffee and tobacco Spice," flavor profile so common in cigars and reach for something more "Out there" very commonly.
But that basic core flavor in this series is done very well IMO. I don't think I came to appreciate Padron cigars until I had come across duds in other lines that were heralded to great fanfare only to be unimpressive, to say the least. I used to roll my eyes at those that obsessed over even burning and consistent cigars, but I know now that I was ignorant of the whole concept. Buying poorly rolled Cubans at great expense furthered my appreciation for stuff made by Padron.
I have a couple of their different vitolas in the core line that are 5+ years old and I'll be interested to sample them with even more age. Fondling one recently, it looked and smelled amazing.
But my current cigar journey is pretty simple - Will my next order be a box or Liga Privada T52's or No. 9's?
-Matt
I've heard that before but I don't necessarily believe it. The Anniversario line sure seems to be rolled tighter. Flavor wise, I can believe it.Padron uses the exact, same tobacco for the 2000 as they use for the Anniversarios -- except it is not aged.
So, if you have a humidor, and some time, put up some 2000s and wait a few years. You will have Anniversarios at a fraction of the regular expense.
This is not a theory, it is something I've done and experienced personally.
Interesting. I've gotten the same impression from reading the Padron website, but then the 1926 and 1964 lines are so different in profiles, with the 1926 being much harsher with a pronounced bass note. I always figured it's all Padron tobacco, but finer leaves were saved for the Anniversaries/Family Reserve with them being blended differently.Padron uses the exact, same tobacco for the 2000 as they use for the Anniversarios -- except it is not aged.
So, if you have a humidor, and some time, put up some 2000s and wait a few years. You will have Anniversarios at a fraction of the regular expense.
This is not a theory, it is something I've done and experienced personally.