Production dates for non-Cuban cigars

I have always wanted to know why the non-Cuban cigar boxes come without the production date except fews like Fuente and Padron(they just provide the year). I asked this question to couple of cigar makers and not convinced with their explanation. Does anyone have a logical answer to this question?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

blurr

I've always wondered the same, and I've brought up this a few times on the board a few years back hoping it would be seen by mfgrs. Just a simple month and year stamped on the box, its common sense so what are they avoiding by not doing it. Curious to hear what the excuses or explanations you heard from NC manufacturers where rip. Its BS, why don't they do it?

taythegibs

ive only bought one box but i was able to find out when the b&m got it so i wrote that date on it, imo it would be a nice addition that wouldnt take that much to add.

kuzi16

its probably a mix of a few things.
in cuba there is one overall parent company for all cigars run by the government. this may make it easier to code things in a uniform fashion at a uniform poin t in production.

with the heavy use of aging tobacco and aging rooms in the non-Cuban market aging a cigar is less noticeable than a Cuban cigar. this gives us the question: what date would you put on the box? the date the cigars were boxed? the date they went into the aging room? the date they were rolled? the vintage of the tobacco?

i know that Cuban cigars are boxed right after being rolled and there is a very predictable time frame from field to cigar box making the code a useful tool.

this is not as predictable in a non-Cuban. there may be Dominican ligero from 2004 in the filler right next to a honduran Viso from 2008.

im also fairly sure that the word "consistency" needs to come into play.

non-Cuban manufacturers do everything they can to have a line of cigars be the same from year to year where as Cuban cigars seem to be more prone to one vintage being better than another. For example the HdM Le Hoyo Des Dieux from 2003 are almost legendary at this point. why isnt anyone talking about the 04? do those suck? they were produced that year. its supposed to be the same cigar, but clearly it isnt.
this does not happen in many non-Cuban cigars. the only one i can think of is the OpusX (last truly great vintage for those was 06).

if non-Cubans are trying to be consistent from year to year, why would they date them?

blurr

That makes sense kuzi, never thought about different seasons or years being rolled into the same blend. I guess the only thing I would like is uniformity, maybe if they all just started stamping the "rolled on" date on the box. That way even if the blend has different years of tobacco, and even if they went to an aging room for a year before being boxed up, they could at least put a rolled on date just so you have an idea. Just personally that's how I would like to consider how old a cigar is, from the roll date plus a general idea of the vintage of the leaves.

rzaman

I see what you are saying but it doesn't hurt to say wrapper, binder, fillers are from certain year. At the same time the production year under the box. I will say Cubans are also very carefully about consistency and quality control last 5-7 years. Both manufacturers do everything they can to be consistent. I haven't had any Cuban with bad construction latley. I am not including Behike or the LEs nor i am talking about those mass production RyY tubos. After visiting both Cuba and Nicaraguan tobacco farming and the production, I can say that both countries are proactive about the quality control. There are always some bad cigars from every cigar producing countries. I do not buy the negetive marketing about the Cuban poor construction any longer. In fact, I give extra credits to the Cubans for being so humble about their excellent cigars. At the same time, I appreciate some excellent non-Cuban cigars.

kuzi16:
its probably a mix of a few things.
in cuba there is one overall parent company for all cigars run by the government. this may make it easier to code things in a uniform fashion at a uniform poin t in production.

with the heavy use of aging tobacco and aging rooms in the non-Cuban market aging a cigar is less noticeable than a Cuban cigar. this gives us the question: what date would you put on the box? the date the cigars were boxed? the date they went into the aging room? the date they were rolled? the vintage of the tobacco?

i know that Cuban cigars are boxed right after being rolled and there is a very predictable time frame from field to cigar box making the code a useful tool.

this is not as predictable in a non-Cuban. there may be Dominican ligero from 2004 in the filler right next to a honduran Viso from 2008.

im also fairly sure that the word "consistency" needs to come into play.

non-Cuban manufacturers do everything they can to have a line of cigars be the same from year to year where as Cuban cigars seem to be more prone to one vintage being better than another. For example the HdM Le Hoyo Des Dieux from 2003 are almost legendary at this point. why isnt anyone talking about the 04? do those suck? they were produced that year. its supposed to be the same cigar, but clearly it isnt.
this does not happen in many non-Cuban cigars. the only one i can think of is the OpusX (last truly great vintage for those was 06).

if non-Cubans are trying to be consistent from year to year, why would they date them?

catfishbluezz

I think most companies probably don't date the wrapper, binder, fillers due to going up thir blends, while a Henke can because he won't give up his tobacco. I agree it is needed on boxes, as some NC need age and others don't fare well at all. If I was a liga fan, no way I'd buy a 2 year old No 9 box. I would easily buy a box of Cabaiguan though if it was 3 years old. It's a bad practice, and should be corrected IMO. If thy we're concerned with quality control, they'd age their tobaccos longer so they don't taste like sh$t the first year or two. Since they don't, at least let us know how long we need to store it to age some finish into it.

rzaman

Very interesting observation Ashera cat. Your palate has been to precised now a days that you only like super smooth aged cigars.

catfishbluezz:
I think most companies probably don't date the wrapper, binder, fillers due to going up thir blends, while a Henke can because he won't give up his tobacco. I agree it is needed on boxes, as some NC need age and others don't fare well at all. If I was a liga fan, no way I'd buy a 2 year old No 9 box. I would easily buy a box of Cabaiguan though if it was 3 years old. It's a bad practice, and should be corrected IMO. If thy we're concerned with quality control, they'd age their tobaccos longer so they don't taste like sh$t the first year or two. Since they don't, at least let us know how long we need to store it to age some finish into it.

rzaman

BTW, I can't wait to smoke an aged cigar with you and do a dual review.

rzaman:
Very interesting observation Ashera cat. Your palate has been to precised now a days that you only like super smooth aged cigars.
catfishbluezz:
I think most companies probably don't date the wrapper, binder, fillers due to going up thir blends, while a Henke can because he won't give up his tobacco. I agree it is needed on boxes, as some NC need age and others don't fare well at all. If I was a liga fan, no way I'd buy a 2 year old No 9 box. I would easily buy a box of Cabaiguan though if it was 3 years old. It's a bad practice, and should be corrected IMO. If thy we're concerned with quality control, they'd age their tobaccos longer so they don't taste like sh$t the first year or two. Since they don't, at least let us know how long we need to store it to age some finish into it.

catfishbluezz

rzaman:
BTW, I can't wait to smoke an aged cigar with you and do a dual review.
rzaman:
Very interesting observation Ashera cat. Your palate has been to precised now a days that you only like super smooth aged cigars.
catfishbluezz:
I think most companies probably don't date the wrapper, binder, fillers due to going up thir blends, while a Henke can because he won't give up his tobacco. I agree it is needed on boxes, as some NC need age and others don't fare well at all. If I was a liga fan, no way I'd buy a 2 year old No 9 box. I would easily buy a box of Cabaiguan though if it was 3 years old. It's a bad practice, and should be corrected IMO. If thy we're concerned with quality control, they'd age their tobaccos longer so they don't taste like sh$t the first year or two. Since they don't, at least let us know how long we need to store it to age some finish into it.

that would be very weird, because to do so we would not be able to communicate our thoughts and would have to notate silently so as not to askew the other persons subjectivity.

For me the aging thing has just come down to I have enough cigars that when I buy them, I can put them away for 6 months or so and forget about them. If I don't like them, put them down again. I think as we collect, we experience things like say the 2009 Canaiguan I had today. I've had several from this time and they are incredibly smooth, but not so much ROTT. So as I experience more cigars, I either buy them as I know they will be good now, or improve with time, so aging is very important to me when it comes to cigars I like. I have to decide whether or not waiting a year or two is worth it. It's hard for me to spend money on something that is not good now, and will only improve slightly with 2-5 years, while others just get better and better as they mature. I really enjoy comparing and contrasting ROTT and aged blends and may look to do more in the future with reviews.

catfishbluezz

But yeah...a dual review would rule! I'm starting grad school any day, but may make it a point to go to Nica ok the next year or so as I have to save money for school for now. Either that or we should go to Pro Cigar and meet Henke.

kuzi16

rzaman:
I see what you are saying but it doesn't hurt to say wrapper, binder, fillers are from certain year. At the same time the production year under the box. I will say Cubans are also very carefully about consistency and quality control last 5-7 years. Both manufacturers do everything they can to be consistent. I haven't had any Cuban with bad construction latley. I am not including Behike or the LEs nor i am talking about those mass production RyY tubos. After visiting both Cuba and Nicaraguan tobacco farming and the production, I can say that both countries are proactive about the quality control. There are always some bad cigars from every cigar producing countries. I do not buy the negetive marketing about the Cuban poor construction any longer. In fact, I give extra credits to the Cubans for being so humble about their excellent cigars. At the same time, I appreciate some excellent non-Cuban cigars.

maybe the words "quality control" wasnt quite what i was going for.

no matter where someone grows tobacco there will be environmental inconsistencies from year to year. when you have a blend of many different regions and countries it is easier to blend a way these elements. when you have a puro that is a bit harder to do. it isnt a "quality issue" at all, rather a difference in vintage.

the more i think about this non-Cuban box code issue the more i think that a boxed date would work. the date that the cigars we put in boxes, or even just the month, could actually be a good tool. the boxed date is the date the manufacturer believes that the cigars are good for consumption. it really would help to know if a box is aged or not.

Lee.mcglynn

catfishbluezz:
I think most companies probably don't date the wrapper, binder, fillers due to going up thir blends, while a Henke can because he won't give up his tobacco. I agree it is needed on boxes, as some NC need age and others don't fare well at all. If I was a liga fan, no way I'd buy a 2 year old No 9 box. I would easily buy a box of Cabaiguan though if it was 3 years old. It's a bad practice, and should be corrected IMO. If thy we're concerned with quality control, they'd age their tobaccos longer so they don't taste like sh$t the first year or two. Since they don't, at least let us know how long we need to store it to age some finish into it.

lmao as I do agree there are some that taste like poo rott but some that are good no matter what! Padron is one of the sneaky companies that slip the date in there but IMO don't need aging as bad as most and the maddys are just ready to go anytime! I do agree that more companies should date everything but I don't thing some would sell as good if they did. No matter how long they have been sitting I always put the date when I got them and judge from there...