Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Cigar Review: 5 Vegas Limitada 2010

Belicoso, 6.2" x 52 ring gauge, Approx. $5.60

Keith Said:
This the most recent release of the 5 Vegas (pronounced Cinco Vegas) yearly limitada release. In previous years the Limitada cigar featured a blend of 5 countries' tobaccos; this year's release is a 6.2 x 52 belicoso comprised of all Nicaraguan tobacco with at Nicaraguan Habano wrapper.  It is available from only a few online vendors, including Cigars International and Cigar.com.  There isn't a whole lot more info about the composition on those sites and the 5 Vegas site still has the info for the Limitada 2009 up.  I was given this sample at the 2010 Cigar Fest.

Upon looking at the cigar I noticed a .75" crack in the cap of the cigar.  The wrapper was a medium brown with a small amount of mottling and was slightly oily.  I also noticed some spots on the wrapper below the band where it looks like some of the glue got on it.  When felt the wrapper had a slightly bumpy feel with some small veins.  The cigar felt firm to the touch with a slight give.  Once I smelled the wrapper I was greeted to the scent of barnyard and when I smelled the foot it smelled even more of barnyard.  After I clipped it I was rewarded with a fairly free draw and a slight spiciness.

Once I lit it up I immediately got a Nicaraguan spice on the retrohale.  The taste was of black pepper spice and after about .25" I tasted a slight maple syrup flavor.  There was a pretty noticeable taste of cocoa too.  The spice toned down a lot after the first .5".  The ash was a mottled white with some grey and brown in it.  The ash did start to curve after about 1" so I tapped it off.  The burn stayed pretty straight too.  At the end of the first third a couple cracks appeared slightly below the second band.

Throughout the second third the spice would come back on a puff then disappear on the next one.  The taste pretty much stayed the same throughout but I did get some herbal and cinnamon notes.  The burn continued pretty straight and the ash held up well.  The wrapper unfortunately blew up a bit at the end of the second third along the cracks that appeared at the end of the first third.

As I started the final third I took of the bands, and they came off easily.  The body built a bit through the final third of the cigar.  I would call it pretty firm in the medium range.  The spice did build a bit and did become more consistently noticeable in the end.  The cocoa taste disappeared but was replaced by tobacco and leather flavors.  The burn wasn't adversely affected by the wrapper blowing up.  I was surprised that it stayed pretty straight.  The crack in the cap did unfortunately develop into a deeper one going all the way into the filler.

While the cigar was pretty good I don't think I would count this as limitada good.  The cigar would have been a whole lot better if the flavors that showed up in the beginning continued and the construction issues could have been worked out.  If someone gave me this cigar I would gladly smoke it, but I don't think it is one I would purchase again as there are a lot of much better cigars in the $5-$6 range.

Body: 6/10
Strength: 5/10
Complexity: 5/10

AFP Scale
Prelight: 1/2
Construction: .5 /2
Flavor: 4/5
Value: .5/1
Total: 6/10

Dave Said:
I liked the way this cigar looked--a little leathery, a lot oily, a little tooth, a lot of excess glue--okay, I could have done without that last part. The stick was fairly firmly packed head-to-foot. I got a barnyard and manure aroma from the body--not a pleasant smell like that usual is, though--while from the foot I got some cocoa and more barnyard. I thought this might be a good morning cigar, so I took it outside with some Trader Joes' Italian Roast coffee. In the process of cutting mine the wrapper cracked at the head--hopefully it would be manageable. Prelight draw was a little tighter than I prefer and the flavors were sweet but muted and hard to exactly characterize.

Initial light-up had flavors of sweet tobacco on the tongue and a little black pepper through the nose--surprisingly single-dimensional for the start of a Nicaraguan puro. Starting with something good to say: the first third burned slowly and evenly leaving ash the color of concrete. The problem is that there just was not a lot of flavor or character to the cigar so far. There was still tobacco and pepper--and little else. The flavors were not "off" like you might get in a cheap bundle stick, but neither were they something to be enthusiastic about. So far, this "Limitada" had me thinking "Yard-gar."

Fortunately, the flavor picked up a bit in the second third; I started getting hints of cinnamon and a nice nuttiness. Before the coffee I was drinking was overpowering anything in the cigar, but now the two seemed to be going quite well together. Body was definitely in the medium range. Early in the second third the burn started to go crooked, but it did not go too far and by the end of the segment it showed signs of evening out a bit.

The last third was mostly the same but that also make it mostly good. The cracks started causing leaf to flake off the head and the draw never did get to a point of being anything other than marginally good. I have to agree with Keith that this cigar simply does not rise to the level of the term "Limitada." While a perfectly decent smoke at a pretty good price, it was not particularly memorable, especially the first third. If they had chosen to make it a parejo shape, put it in a conventional box (instead of the fairly ridiculous "5" shaped Vegas-looking box) and called it something besides "Limitada" I think I would have had a more favorable opinion of it.

Body: 6/10
Strength: 6/10
Complexity: 4/10

AFP Scale
Prelight: 1.5/2
Construction: 1/2
Flavor: 3.5/5
Value: .5/1
Total: 6.5/10

Agree, disagree, or have your own thoughts you would like to share on this cigar? Please leave a comment and speak your mind!

2 comments:

  1. Just finished one and found the same sporadic flavors that came and went as I smoked it. Didn't have the excess glue, but overall it was a good smoke for the price. I have had better, but there are worse ones out there for the price.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with all the above and add that the ash was blacker and flaked more than I am used to seeing

    ReplyDelete