<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tom&#039;s Cigar Reviews &#187; Value Cigar</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tomscigars.com/category/value-cigar/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tomscigars.com</link>
	<description>Cigar reviews, ratings, news, stogie reviews, videos</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:04:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>JR Alternative&#8211;Padron Exclusivo</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2012/01/22/jr-alternativepadron-exclusivo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2012/01/22/jr-alternativepadron-exclusivo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 17:32:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JR_Cigars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JR_Knockoffs_cigars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Padron_1962]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/?p=3814</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today’s review is an ultra cheap bundle cigar offered by JR Cigars. They offer alternatives to dozens of cigars. My lifelong friend Jay gave me a couple of these cigars, which are an alternative to the Padron Anniversary Series 1964 Exclusivo. He was basically curious of my opinion. So here it is, my opinion of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today’s review is an ultra cheap bundle cigar offered by JR Cigars. They offer alternatives to dozens of cigars. My lifelong friend Jay gave me a couple of these cigars, which are an alternative to the Padron Anniversary Series 1964 Exclusivo. He was basically curious of my opinion. So here it is, my opinion of the JR Alternative Padron Exclusivo.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper, Binder, &amp; Filler: ???</p>
<p>Size: 5.5 x 50</p>
<p>Price: Bundle of 20 – $31.95</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-Smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The wrapper looked good, with small veins and no noticeable flaws. It had a barnyard smell, and the foot shared the same odor. The cigar was a little spongy when squeezed, with some minor tight spots towards the head. The pre-light draw was free, and had an earthy and woody taste.</p>
<p>The burn required a few decent sized corrections, and the ash held for a bit over an inch.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="1 JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo cigars" border="0" alt="1 JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/1-JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo-cigars.jpg" width="424" height="76" /></p>
<p><span id="more-3814"></span>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The initial few puffs of the first third were earthy. Soon after, the flavor became a little buttery with some of the associated creaminess. The earthiness fell to the background, and I picked up some woody notes. </p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="2 JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo cigars" border="0" alt="2 JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2-JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo-cigars.jpg" width="426" height="71" /></p>
<p>The second third kept the same buttery creamy flavor and smoke feel. When passing smoke through the nose, I could pick up slight earthy notes.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="3 JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo cigars" border="0" alt="3 JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/3-JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo-cigars.jpg" width="434" height="71" /></p>
<p>The last third developed a slight sweet spice, but otherwise remained the same as before. </p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="4 JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo cigars" border="0" alt="4 JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/4-JR_Alternative_Padron_Exclusivo-cigars.jpg" width="430" height="70" /></p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>For a little over a buck, this cigar met it’s price point. Obviously it brought nothing special to the table. It was an OK mild to medium bodied cigar. I have run across much more expensive cigars that offer the same as this one does. Because of that, I say this is not bad. At least there were no bad flavors or harshness. How does it compare to the actual Padron? Give me a break, it isn’t even close. Clearly this is a gimmicky sales tactic, which I’m sure you’ve figured out by now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2012/01/22/jr-alternativepadron-exclusivo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gurkha Park Avenue Maduro</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/10/28/gurkha-park-avenue-maduro/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/10/28/gurkha-park-avenue-maduro/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2011 04:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cigars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maduro]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/10/28/gurkha-park-avenue-maduro/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since I enjoyed the Connecticut wrapped Park Avenue, I figured I’d give this one a try. You can find them online easily and at a pretty cheap price. It is claimed that only 5000 boxes were made. Once they are gone, they are gone. I paired this cigar with water and offer you my thoughts&#8230; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since I enjoyed the <a href="http://www.tomscigars.com/2009/10/20/gurkha-park-avenue-first-impression/">Connecticut wrapped Park Avenue</a>, I figured I’d give this one a try. You can find them online easily and at a pretty cheap price. It is claimed that only 5000 boxes were made. Once they are gone, they are gone. I paired this cigar with water and offer you my thoughts&#8230;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper: Habano Maduro from Jalapa, Nicaragua</p>
<p>Binder: Nicaragua</p>
<p>Filler: Nicaragua</p>
<p>Size: Torpedo 6.2 x 52</p>
<p>Price: $3.00</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-Smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The wrapper was blotchy looking and a bit ugly. For the price I don’t expect a pristine dark maduro look. The wrapper had a different smell to it. It was earthy with a mild soapy odor (I swear!). The cigar was rock solidly packed with tobacco. The pre-light draw was a little to stiff for my liking, which I found to be common with these cigars. The pre-light flavor was earthy.</p>
<p>The ash held for around an inch, and the burn required no corrections.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-right-width: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="1 Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro Cigars" border="0" alt="1 Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro Cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/1-Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro-Cigars.jpg" width="504" height="82" /></p>
<p><span id="more-3646"></span>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third started off with earthiness and a mild pepper. After an inch or so, a generic sweetness gradually made it’s way into the flavor profile. I also picked up a hint of woody notes. </p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-right-width: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="2 Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro Cigars" border="0" alt="2 Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro Cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2-Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro-Cigars.jpg" width="505" height="80" /></p>
<p>The second third had a dominant dry cocoa flavor. The earthiness fell into the background. The pepper stayed mild and was easy to move through the sinus. There were woody notes in the background. Simple but not bad.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-right-width: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="3 Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro Cigars" border="0" alt="3 Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro Cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/3-Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro-Cigars.jpg" width="504" height="85" /></p>
<p>The last third continued with the dry cocoa flavor. It almost drowned out everything else, which isn’t a bad thing. The peppery spice through the nose remained mild and had a woody aftertaste. </p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-right-width: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="4 Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro Cigars" border="0" alt="4 Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro Cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/4-Gurkha_Park_Avenue_Maduro-Cigars.jpg" width="504" height="93" /></p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>This was a decent mild to medium bodied cigar for the price. It was pretty uneventful but the flavors were decent. The only bad aspect is construction. Out of the dozen or so that I’ve had, more then half of them had tight draws. I know this is a value cigar, but I expect a good draw. Over all, I prefer the Connecticut wrapped version of this cigar. The flavors just seem to be better and more refined. The Park Avenue is basically just another cigar.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/10/28/gurkha-park-avenue-maduro/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gran Habano&#8211;Habano #3</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/09/27/gran-habanohabano-3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/09/27/gran-habanohabano-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 04:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cigars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gran_habano]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[habano_#3]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/09/27/gran-habanohabano-3/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You know the story by now… I was walking around the local humidor looking for something to review. This is gradually getting more difficult. Look at the cigar review index, I’ve reviewed a shit load of cigars over the years. I eventually ran across this somewhat value priced cigar, and figured why not. I paired [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know the story by now… I was walking around the local humidor looking for something to review. This is gradually getting more difficult. Look at the cigar review index, I’ve reviewed a shit load of cigars over the years. </p>
<p>I eventually ran across this somewhat value priced cigar, and figured why not. I paired up with water and took some notes.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper: Nicaraguan Habano</p>
<p>Binder: Nicaraguan Habano</p>
<p>Filler: Nicaragua, Mexico, Costa Rica</p>
<p>Size: Robusto 5 x 52</p>
<p>Price: $3.61</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-Smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The wrapper had a couple medium sized veins and minimal flaws. The smell of the wrapper was mild cedar. and the foot was more of a sweet earthiness. The cigar was evenly and solidly packed. The pre-light draw had slight resistance, and had a cedary, earthy flavor.</p>
<p>The ash was a bit flakey and held for about an inch. The burn required no corrections.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="1 Gran_Habano_#3 cigars" border="0" alt="1 Gran_Habano_#3 cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/1-Gran_Habano__3-cigars.jpg" width="425" height="80" /></p>
<p><span id="more-3586"></span>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third started off with sweet cedar. Through the nose I picked up a smooth peppery spice along with a tad of earthiness. An interesting and hard to describe flavor came about towards the end of this third. I’d almost call it leather, but I’m not certain.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="2 Gran_Habano_#3 cigars" border="0" alt="2 Gran_Habano_#3 cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2-Gran_Habano__3-cigars.jpg" width="427" height="80" /></p>
<p>The second third: It turns out that fruity flavor was more of a sweetness combined with leather. The cedar mixed with those flavors, and most of the time was dominant. When passing smoke through the nose, the woody, peppery spice increased in strength but wasn’t an ass kicker. The smoke feel became smooth with a lingering aftertaste.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="3 Gran_Habano_#3 cigars" border="0" alt="3 Gran_Habano_#3 cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/3-Gran_Habano__3-cigars.jpg" width="425" height="85" /></p>
<p>The last third changed up a bit. The leather, wood, and cedar all became equal in strength. There was a significant increase in creamy sweetness. It stuck to the palate for a nice aftertaste. The spice pretty much remained the same as in the second third.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="4 Gran_Habano_#3 cigars" border="0" alt="4 Gran_Habano_#3 cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/4-Gran_Habano__3-cigars.jpg" width="425" height="86" /></p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>This was a good medium bodied cigar that met it’s price point. I was expecting a completely one dimensional flavor profile. It changed up just enough to make this somewhat value cigar a pleasure to smoke. Some of you picky aficionado&#8217;s may find it lackluster, and I can understand that. But for the price, I say this is worth trying.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/09/27/gran-habanohabano-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Perdomo Cuban Bullet 2.0&#8211;Maduro</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/08/23/perdomo-cuban-bullet-2-0maduro/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/08/23/perdomo-cuban-bullet-2-0maduro/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 04:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cigars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cuban_Bullet_maduro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[perdomo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/08/23/perdomo-cuban-bullet-2-0maduro/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I tried the Cuban seed wrapped version of this cigar awhile back. I remember thinking it was a decent cigar for the price range. When I ran across the Maduro wrapped Cuban Bullet, I thought it was worth trying. What have I got to lose besides a few dollars. So as always, I paired this [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tried the <a href="http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/08/20/perdomo-cuban-bullet-version-2-0/">Cuban seed</a> wrapped version of this cigar awhile back. I remember thinking it was a decent cigar for the price range. When I ran across the Maduro wrapped Cuban Bullet, I thought it was worth trying. What have I got to lose besides a few dollars. So as always, I paired this cigar with water, and offer you my thoughts.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper: Nicaraguan Maduro</p>
<p>Binder/Filler: Nicaraguan</p>
<p>Size: Robusto 5 x 50</p>
<p>Price: Around $3.00</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-Smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The shiny wrapper had small veins and a rugged, bumpy look to it. The smell coming off of the wrapper and foot were earthy, almost a mild compost. The cigar was well packed, and had a hard spot here and there. The pre-light draw had slight resistance, and had a mild earthy flavor.</p>
<p>The ash held for about an inch, and the burn required one minor correction. There was plenty of smoke volume. Clouds of smoke billowed for the entire cigar.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="1 Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro cigars" border="0" alt="1 Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/1-Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro-cigars.jpg" width="398" height="73" /></p>
<p><span id="more-3496"></span>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third had a simple yet decent flavor profile. Up first was a earthy and somewhat woody flavor. I also detected subtle notes of sweet bitterness. It was like the subtle bitterness you get in the aftertaste of chocolate. Through the nose I found a mild pepper with a slightly sweet, maduro-ish finish.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="2 Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro cigars" border="0" alt="2 Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/2-Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro-cigars.jpg" width="398" height="73" /></p>
<p>The second third had an increase of that maduro-ish sweetness. It bordered on being dry cocoa. Like before, there was earthiness with subtle woody notes. The flavor didn’t change when passing smoke through the nose. A mild peppery, sweet spice is the best I can describe it. There was that slight bitter finish present. I covered that in the previous third as well. </p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="3 Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro cigars" border="0" alt="3 Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/3-Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro-cigars.jpg" width="400" height="73" /></p>
<p>The last third had virtually no change. The sweetness picked up in strength, but otherwise things held steady and consistent. Copy and paste my comments from the second third here.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="4 Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro cigars" border="0" alt="4 Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro cigars" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/4-Perdomo_Cuban_Bullet_Maduro-cigars.jpg" width="397" height="75" /></p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>This was a decent medium bodied cigar. It was pretty much what I expected. A fairly simple, one dimensional cigar with no WOW factor. For you picky bastards who demand a complex flavor profile, this cigar isn’t for you. If you are looking for a decent cigar at a reasonable price, you may want to give this a chance. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/08/23/perdomo-cuban-bullet-2-0maduro/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don Tomas Clasico Maduro</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/07/12/don-tomas-clasico-maduro/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/07/12/don-tomas-clasico-maduro/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2011 07:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cigars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[don_tomas_clasico_maduro]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/07/12/don-tomas-clasico-maduro/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No big build up on the Don Tomas Clasico Maduro. I was browsing a local humidor, and saw this budget friendly cigar. It looked decent and had a decent price. I figured why not? So read on and see how the Don Tomas Clasico Maduro treated me… &#160; Wrapper:Connecticut broadleaf Binder: Connecticut broadleaf Filler: Honduras, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No big build up on the Don Tomas Clasico Maduro. I was browsing a local humidor, and saw this budget friendly cigar. It looked decent and had a decent price. I figured why not? So read on and see how the Don Tomas Clasico Maduro treated me…</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper:Connecticut broadleaf</p>
<p>Binder: Connecticut broadleaf</p>
<p>Filler: Honduras, Nicaragua</p>
<p>Size: Robusto 5.5 x 50</p>
<p>Price: $3.50</p>
<p>Bought by me</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-Smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The brown wrapper was almost velvety looking. It was a rugged with some bumps and veins as well. The smell of the wrapper and foot was a simple grassiness. The cigar was a little soft when squeezed, and had some tight spots here and there. The pre-light draw was a little on the stiff side, and had a dark sweet flavor.</p>
<p>The burn required one minor correction, and the ash held for around an inch. The tight draw loosened up in the first third.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="1 Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro Cigar" border="0" alt="1 Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro Cigar" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/1-Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro-Cigar.jpg" width="486" height="81" /></p>
<p><span id="more-3409"></span>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third opened up with a simple earthiness with pepper through the nose. After about 10 minutes in, a generic sweetness introduced itself. The smoke feel was dry with a woody aftertaste. It may not sound like much, but it wasn’t bad at all.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="2 Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro Cigar" border="0" alt="2 Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro Cigar" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/2-Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro-Cigar.jpg" width="490" height="82" /></p>
<p>The second third switched things up a bit. The main flavor was a sweet and coffee-ish. Behind it was woodiness. Through the nose, that pepper didn’t go anywhere. The aftertaste remained dry and woody. The more I smoked, the richer the flavors seemed to get.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="3 Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro Cigar" border="0" alt="3 Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro Cigar" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/3-Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro-Cigar.jpg" width="488" height="87" /></p>
<p>The last third had a dominant sweet/coffee-ish flavor. The sweetness was almost like mocha but may have been more similar to a dry cocoa. Like before, passing smoke through the nose produced a nice pepper. The aftertaste had earthy notes with a sweet tinge.</p>
<p><img style="background-image: none; border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; margin: 0px 10px 5px 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px" title="4 Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro Cigar" border="0" alt="4 Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro Cigar" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/4-Don_Tomas_Clasico_Maduro-Cigar.jpg" width="490" height="93" /></p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>This was a decent medium bodied cigar. Sure, there was nothing that made me say “WOW!” But this is a $3.50 cigar, and for that, I think it meets it’s price point. I was expecting another cheap h-hum smoking experience, but I was pleasantly surprised. If a budget smoke interests you, this one is worth a try.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2011/07/12/don-tomas-clasico-maduro/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

