<?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, 27 Jul 2010 04:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Blender&#8217;s Gold</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/07/06/blenders-gold/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/07/06/blenders-gold/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 04:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gold]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/07/06/blenders-gold/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today’s review is an ultra cheap cigar that you may have seen on the shelves at Walgreens or various large chain drug stores. Since they are kept unhumidified, I let this one sit an extra long time in the humidor before reviewing. I couldn’t get exact info on the blend, but who cares, it’s a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today’s review is an ultra cheap cigar that you may have seen on the shelves at Walgreens or various large chain drug stores. Since they are kept unhumidified, I let this one sit an extra long time in the humidor before reviewing. I couldn’t get exact info on the blend, but who cares, it’s a $2.00 cigar. My expectations were low, so with a glass of water I bring to you my review of the Blender’s Gold.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper: Sumatra</p>
<p>Binder: ???</p>
<p>Filler: Longfiller &#8211; Dominican, Nicaraguan, Honduran</p>
<p>Size: Toro 6 x 50</p>
<p>Price: Around $20.00 for bundle of 10 cigars</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-Smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The dark wrapper had a few medium and large veins with an overall rugged tooth appearance. The smell of the wrapper and foot had a strange odor. It reminded me of being downwind from a bum who hasn’t showered in a few days. I know that sounds horrible but it wasn’t that bad. The pre-light draw had slight resistance, and had a simple earthy flavor. The cigar was fairly spongy when squeezed, but was fairly consistent.</p>
<p>The burn drove me crazy in the first third, but went back to normal in the second third. The ash held for about a half an inch.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="1BlendersGold" border="0" alt="1BlendersGold" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/1BlendersGold.jpg" width="533" height="80" /> </p>
<p> <span id="more-2474"></span>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third had smooth earthy flavors. A slight peppery and woody spice was present when passing smoke through the nose. The smoke feel became thick and left a slight coating on the inside of the mouth. </p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="2BlendersGold" border="0" alt="2BlendersGold" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/2BlendersGold.jpg" width="534" height="80" /> </p>
<p>The second third offered nothing new in terms of flavor. Copy my notes from the first third, and paste them here. I know that’s lame to put in a review, but really, nothing happened in the second third. Let’s move on…</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="3BlendersGold" border="0" alt="3BlendersGold" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/3BlendersGold.jpg" width="540" height="79" /> </p>
<p>The last third kept that earthy core flavor. The spice smoothed out but didn’t change in terms of flavor. The smoke feel remained somewhat thick, with an almost leathery aftertaste. </p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="4BlendersGold" border="0" alt="4BlendersGold" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/4BlendersGold.jpg" width="541" height="81" /> </p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>This was an OK low to mid medium bodied cigar. Sure, it was one dimensional and this particular cigar had some burn issues, but as a whole they give you your $2.00 worth. It’s not like every one you smoke will have issues. If you are on a budget, I say give these a try.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/07/06/blenders-gold/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Padilla Obsidian Edicion Especial 2006</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/06/21/padilla-obsidian-edicion-especial-2006/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/06/21/padilla-obsidian-edicion-especial-2006/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 04:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2006]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[edicion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[especial]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obsidian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[padilla]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/06/21/padilla-obsidian-edicion-especial-2006/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I found today’s review at the bottom of the humidor. I don’t know when I picked it up or from who. I suspect the low price and overall appearance prompted me to buy it. All I know is that this is a bundle cigar, and I’ve seen them on the Internet for very low prices. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found today’s review at the bottom of the humidor. I don’t know when I picked it up or from who. I suspect the low price and overall appearance prompted me to buy it. All I know is that this is a bundle cigar, and I’ve seen them on the Internet for very low prices. Like always, this cigar was paired with water, and here are my thoughts.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper: Nicaraguan</p>
<p>Binder: Honduran</p>
<p>Filler: Nicaraguan &amp; Honduran</p>
<p>Size: 6 x 54</p>
<p>Price: Around $3.00</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The dark wrapper was rugged looking, with a few medium to large veins and a toothy appearance. The wrapper had an earthy barnyard-ish odor, while the foot had more of a spice to it. The pre-light draw had slight resistance with a sweet earthy and woody taste. When I pinched the cigar from head to foot, I found it to be densely packed with a minor soft spot or two. </p>
<p>At first the burn required a few major corrections. It mellowed out in the last third. The ash held for about 3/4 inch before falling off.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="1PadillaEspecial2006" border="0" alt="1PadillaEspecial2006" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/1PadillaEspecial2006.jpg" width="543" height="86" />&#160; </p>
<p> <span id="more-2431"></span>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third had a mild earthiness with a spicy pepper. The smoke feel was a bit dry but overall pleasant. </p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="2PadillaEspecial2006" border="0" alt="2PadillaEspecial2006" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/2PadillaEspecial2006.jpg" width="543" height="86" />&#160; </p>
<p>The second third remained simple but good. Those earthy notes lingered pretty far in the background, while a sweet spicy pepper took over. I picked up a secondary dry moch-ish flavor that was aight. A slight bitterness came in as this third ended. This particular bitterness I didn’t care for, but it was very slight and didn’t bother me too much.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="3PadillaEspecial2006" border="0" alt="3PadillaEspecial2006" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/3PadillaEspecial2006.jpg" width="543" height="89" />&#160; </p>
<p>The last third did not change at all in terms of flavor. It may have crept into the upper medium body range, but that’s about it. The bitterness fell even further into the background and was difficult to detect. As for flavors, copy and paste the second third here.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="4PadillaEspecial2006" border="0" alt="4PadillaEspecial2006" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/4PadillaEspecial2006.jpg" width="544" height="98" />&#160; </p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>This was an OK medium to upper medium bodied cigar. It basically fit the price point. In terms of bundle cigars, I would prefer <a href="http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/01/14/tabacos-baez-serie-sf/">this cigar.</a> But that’s just my .02. I think this is worth trying for yourself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/06/21/padilla-obsidian-edicion-especial-2006/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bonita Smoke Shop-House Blend #3 Maduro</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/06/10/bonita-smoke-shop-house-blend-3-maduro/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/06/10/bonita-smoke-shop-house-blend-3-maduro/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 04:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bonita]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[maduro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[number4]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shop]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[smoke]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/06/10/bonita-smoke-shop-house-blend-3-maduro/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not long ago I took a little trip to Bonita Springs, FL to visit the Bonita Smoke Shop. You can get an idea of what kind of place it is by checking out this quick video. The owner, Jackie, gave me one of their house blends to try. I enjoyed it, and picked up a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not long ago I took a little trip to Bonita Springs, FL to visit the <a href="http://www.bonitasmokeshop.com">Bonita Smoke Shop</a>. You can get an idea of what kind of place it is by checking out this <a href="http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/05/23/road-trip-bonita-smoke-shop/">quick video</a>. The owner, Jackie, gave me one of their house blends to try. I enjoyed it, and picked up a few more to review. From what I understand, this is considered their value line, with a premium line that is soon to follow. They also come in a natural wrapper, which I’ll have to try at some point. As always, I paired this cigar with water and bring to you my review.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper: Connecticut broadleaf maduro</p>
<p>Binder: Nicaragua</p>
<p>Filler: Honduras, Nicaragua &amp; Dominican Republic</p>
<p>Size: “No. 3” 6 x 54</p>
<p>Price: $4.45</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Construction &amp; Pre-smoke:</p>
<p>The dark maduro wrapper had a rugged appearance, with some light and dark patches. There is no dying of the wrapper leaf for sure. The wrapper had a nice mild earthy &amp; natural tobacco smell, while the foot had a slight sweet spicy odor. I pinched the cigar from head to foot, and found it to be a little spongy, but evenly packed. This made for a nice free draw that wasn’t too loose. The pre-light draw had a interesting taste that I couldn’t pin down. It was almost sweet but barn yard-ish. That makes no sense, but what can you do…</p>
<p>The burn required one minor touch up, and the ash held for about an inch.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="1BonitaMaduro1" border="0" alt="1BonitaMaduro1" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/1BonitaMaduro1.jpg" width="512" height="79" /> </p>
<p> <span id="more-2396"></span>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third started with nice earthy notes in the background. A coffee-ish flavor came in with a tinge of nuttiness. When exhaling though the nose, there was pepper that had a nice, yet easy “Nic-Zing.” That phrase referrers to a sensation you often get from Nicaraguan tobacco. One of the <a href="http://www.cigarmedia.tv/">Dog Watch</a> guys came up with that phrase. Anyway.. Back to the cigar. The smoke was plentiful and as I progressed it became thicker feeling.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="2BonitaMaduro1" border="0" alt="2BonitaMaduro1" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/2BonitaMaduro1.jpg" width="506" height="76" /> </p>
<p>As I dug into the second third, a sweet flavor came in. It was like adding sugar to your coffee, but just a little bit. Eventually the coffee went back to it’s black coffee taste. The sweetness was mild yet typical maduro, and eventually developed into mocha. As time went on the sweet mocha increased in strength to match the coffee. Lastly, the pepper mellowed out and became more of a sweet spice with a nice zing.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="3BonitaMaduro1" border="0" alt="3BonitaMaduro1" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/3BonitaMaduro1.jpg" width="513" height="77" /> </p>
<p>The last third stayed pretty much the same as the second third. The main difference was some draws would have a dominant mocha flavor. Other draws would have coffee as the dominant flavor. The sweet peppery spice remained and had a slight zing. There may have been some woody notes in there somewhere as well.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="4BonitaMaduro1" border="0" alt="4BonitaMaduro1" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/4BonitaMaduro1.jpg" width="513" height="84" /> </p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>This was a good medium bodied cigar. Considering most store “House blends” are cheap generic bundle sticks, I am always leery of them. The Bonita house blend was a pleasant surprise that I actually enjoyed, and they are consistent. Before you haters say I am just pandering to a site sponsor, I can assure you I am not. Had I not liked it, you would hear about it here. For a nice cheap smoke, I have to recommend giving this a try.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/06/10/bonita-smoke-shop-house-blend-3-maduro/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Drew Estate &#8211; La Vieja Habana</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/04/24/drew-estate-la-vieja-habana/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/04/24/drew-estate-la-vieja-habana/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Apr 2010 04:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drew]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[habana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[la]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vieja]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/04/24/drew-estate-la-vieja-habana/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The La Vieja Habana is Drew Estates first brand, which was introduced in the mid 90’s. They come in four wrapper variations, the Cuban Corojo, Cameroon, Maduro, and Connecticut. I am doing the Cuban Corojo version. Unlike their flagship Acid line, this is a traditional cigar with no infused flavoring, and it&#160; contains mixed filler. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The La Vieja Habana is Drew Estates first brand, which was introduced in the mid 90’s. They come in four wrapper variations, the Cuban Corojo, Cameroon, Maduro, and Connecticut. I am doing the Cuban Corojo version. Unlike their flagship Acid line, this is a traditional cigar with no infused flavoring, and it&#160; contains mixed filler. They claim this to be medium bodied with lots of flavors. I paired up with water and jotted down my thoughts.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper: Cuban Corojo</p>
<p>Binder/Filler: Esteli &amp; Jalapa Valley, Nicaragua</p>
<p>Size: 6 x 54</p>
<p>Price: Around $3.00</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-Smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The wrapper was a little rough looking, with medium veins and quite a few bumps. Squeezing the cigar, I found it to be very spongy. The wrapper had a strange sweet, almost floral odor to it. The foot had that same odor along with woody notes. The pre-light draw was free, and had an earthy and woody flavor.</p>
<p>The burn required a few minor corrections, and the ash held for about half an inch. Pretty much typical of a short or mixed filler cigar.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="1DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo" border="0" alt="1DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/1DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo.jpg" width="510" height="79" /></p>
<p> <span id="more-2181"></span>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third began with an easy earthy and natural tobacco taste. After about an inch, a slight spice kicked in. As I progressed towards the end of this third, the spice became a little peppery and increased in strength, but remained in the mild to medium bodied range.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="2DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo" border="0" alt="2DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/2DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo.jpg" width="504" height="78" /></p>
<p>The second third had the spice overtaking the earthy flavors. Every now and then I would get a slight sweetness, but it wasn’t consistent. The smoke became someone creamy, with a lot of smoke volume.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="3DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo" border="0" alt="3DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/3DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo.jpg" width="498" height="81" /></p>
<p>The last third had no new flavors. The earthy flavors were there along with the spice. The creaminess of the smoke increased slightly, as did the sweetness. The smoke volume remained huge. Clouds of smoke billowed out of this ting at all times.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="4DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo" border="0" alt="4DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/4DrewEstate_LaViejaHabanaCorojo.jpg" width="496" height="85" /></p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>For the price, this was a decent mild to medium bodied cigar. It is pretty much in line with what I expected. There is no wow factor, and it is basically one dimensional. I enjoyed the huge smoke volume and smoothness. If I were to complain, I would say it was the burn rate. I didn’t time it, but I burnt though this cigar quickly. If you are trying cheaper cigars, I’d say this is worth checking out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/04/24/drew-estate-la-vieja-habana/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>EO No. 21</title>
		<link>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/03/30/eo-no-21/</link>
		<comments>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/03/30/eo-no-21/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 04:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cigar Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value Cigar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[21]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/03/30/eo-no-21/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The EO No. 21 is a bundle cigar containing long filler tobacco. I was looking for a decent morning cigar at a low cost, and came across today’s review. EO (Erik Espinosa &#38; Eddie Ortega) are responsible for some great cigars, like the Cubao and 601. When I came across the No. 21 at the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The EO No. 21 is a bundle cigar containing long filler tobacco. I was looking for a decent morning cigar at a low cost, and came across today’s review. EO (Erik Espinosa &amp; Eddie Ortega) are responsible for some great cigars, like the <a href="http://www.tomscigars.com/2009/10/15/cubao/">Cubao</a> and 601. When I came across the No. 21 at the <a href="http://www.bonitasmokeshop.com/eo_21_bundled_cigars_1.htm">Bonita Smoke Shop</a>, I figured it would be worth a shot. Normally I drink coffee with a cigar like this, but for the review I did the usual water. Let’s see how it went…</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Wrapper: Ecuadorian Connecticut</p>
<p>Binder: Nicaragua</p>
<p>Filler: Panama/Honduran</p>
<p>Size: Toro 6 x 52</p>
<p>Price: Around $40.00 for a bundle of 21</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Pre-smoke &amp; Construction:</p>
<p>The light tan Connecticut wrapper looked a little rough, with a few medium sized veins here and there. It had a slight odor of wood and soil, as did the foot. The pre-light draw was a little loose, and had an earthy/woody flavor. Overall, the cigar was evenly packed and a little spongy when squeezed.</p>
<p>The burn required a few minor touch up’s, and the ash held for an inch.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="1EO21" border="0" alt="1EO21" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/1EO21.jpg" width="525" height="81" /> </p>
<p> <span id="more-2106"></span>
<p>Flavor:</p>
<p>The first third had a mild toasty nutty flavor. A very slight earthiness combined with a mild spice. As this third came to a close, the smoke took on a slight buttery creamy feel.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="2EO21" border="0" alt="2EO21" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/2EO21.jpg" width="529" height="86" /> </p>
<p>In the second third, the smoke volume increased. A buttery aftertaste coated the inside of the mouth for awhile after being exhaled. Like before, the main flavors were nutty with a toasty sensation. The spice increased in strength, but only a little bit.</p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="3EO21" border="0" alt="3EO21" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/3EO21.jpg" width="532" height="87" /> </p>
<p>Not a whole lot really changed in the last third. An increase of coffee notes and in increase in body to upper mild. But other then that, things were consistent. </p>
<p><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="4EO21" border="0" alt="4EO21" src="http://www.tomscigars.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/4EO21.jpg" width="536" height="86" /> </p>
<p>Conclusion:</p>
<p>This was a pleasant mild to upper mild bodied cigar. The flavors were what I consider common for a Connecticut wrapped cigar. I was expecting a decent mild bodied cigar without a lot of complexities, and that’s what I got. I’ve smoked plenty of these in the morning with coffee, and it pairs well. If a mild cigar at an affordable price is what you are looking for, this one is worth a try.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.tomscigars.com/2010/03/30/eo-no-21/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
