Fogo – Connecticut

Fogo is a fairly new brand from the same guys who own Brazil Cigars and Tobacco. If that sounds familiar, these are the same people who make Dona Flor Brazilian puro’s. I’m a huge fan of those cigars. Ed and I have reviewed them a few times. When Dana Sheldon, the president of the company, came to Ed’s 5th anniversary celebration, he let me know of this new line. I was surprised that there was not a drop of tobacco in it from Brazil. What does Fogo mean? I think it translates to “Fire.” Hence the volcano on the band. Dana was kind enough to give me samples of two blends, the Connecticut and Habano wrapped version. Stay tuned for that review. In the mean time, I offer you my thoughts on the Fogo Connecticut. As always, I paired this cigar with PUR filtered water.


Wrapper: Connecticut seed grown in Ecuador

Binder: Nicaragua

Filler: Nicaragua

Size: 5 x 54

Price: Around $5.00


Pre-Smoke & Construction:

The light brown wrapper had a nice appearance with minimal flaws. A few small veins and a little bit of a toothy appearance is about it. The wrapper had an odor of earthiness and natural tobacco, while the foot had more of a wood with mild spice aroma. The cigar was very firm and evenly packed. The pre-light draw was a little snug, but within my tolerance. The pre-smoke taste was toasty and woody.

The ash held for an inch, and the burn required a couple minor corrections.




First third was mild in body with simple flavors. Mild earthy notes were in the background. A toasty nuttiness was up next, with a slight peppery spice on the retro-hale.


The second third was very similar to the first, but there were some differences. Some draws had a creamy feel, and others were crisp and toasty. Passing smoke through the nose, that spicy pepper slightly increased in strength. The smoke coated the inside of the mouth and the body increased into the upper mild range. Otherwise, the earthy and nutty flavors were the same.


The last third increased in strength a little. Although the flavor profile didn’t really change, it seemed more refined and smooth. The smoke feel became a little creamier with a nice spicy aftertaste.



This was a good mild bodied cigar. The flavors were simple but good. If I were to complain, the flavor profile was one dimensional and similar to many Connecticut wrapped cigars. Personally, I really enjoy this smoke with coffee. This is quite a departure from my coveted Dona Flor brand, but I see the market that this cigar is aimed at. If you like mild and reasonably priced cigars, I would have to recommend the Fogo Connecticut.

Tags: , , , , , ,

This entry was posted on Monday, June 28th, 2010 at 12:00 am and is filed under Cigar Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

7 Responses to “Fogo – Connecticut”

hogman June 28th, 2010 at 9:17 am

Tom this sounds like a great morning smoke and the pricie point is pretty nice as well.

doug June 29th, 2010 at 1:15 pm

I’ve been smoking these for about 8 months.It has become my favorite.I always keep these on hand and probably smoke 5-10 of them a week.

Tom June 30th, 2010 at 4:06 pm

Tom and Dana are both great guys. I really wish their Dona Flor cigars were readily available for the masses. I hope whatever they do is a success.

steve lembo June 9th, 2011 at 3:18 pm

goodafternoon,where can i purchase the cigars? fogo. I havnt been able to fine them online….. please respond.

Dean February 23rd, 2012 at 4:07 am

Love this cigar, for the price it’s the best deal going. I will tell everone I know.

Jeff Andrews May 11th, 2012 at 8:53 am

Hi, I am trying to get in touch with your marketing manager or trade show coordinator. We have some really great modular and fabric displays that are super cool here:

Can you please let me know when you typically plan your Trade Show Displays?

Jeff Andrews
Production Prints

fifa 16 hack April 24th, 2016 at 4:26 am

AnesonGib , W2S , Nepenthez , Nick28T , Bateson87 and matthdgamer all declare to have
been hacked.

Leave a Reply