• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

2003 Monte's

mhn

mhn

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
674
I'm looking for some feedback from some people w/ more ISOM exp than myself.

I have read in a couple of places that the '03 Monte's are very very good and given some age will be better than the '98's are (was that a really good year or something?, why would they be compared to that year).

What do you guys think?

peace,
Mike
 
Everything that you read states that the worst years for quality issues were 1999,2000,2001. Things were supposed to have turned around in 2002 and gotten even better in 2003. I have avoided those production years based on recommendations of people who know much more than I know. The 2003 cigars that I have bought look good but it will take years to see how well they age. Having said that I would buy 98 and older to smoke now and 2003 to put away for a few years.

Just my $.02
 
Good point IB, I would not smoke the 2003 now, heck even the 2002's are a little young as almost every Havana will be much better with some age to them.
 
I disagree with the 2000 & 2001 comment. IMO late 2000 cigars are very good as are all the cigars I've had from 2001. A lot of the problem stemmed (no pun intended) from the 1999 & 2000 codes and mainly due to the wrappers used in the cigars. From what I've read it was due to a change in wrappers that is the primary cause for the problems with many of the '99 & '00 cigars.

The 2002s are good, maybe even a little better than the 2001 but not by a whole lot. The 2003s are also very good and I wouldn't say that they are too young to smoke... I was just gifted a PSD4 last week with a 9/03 code... I smoked it last Thursday and I will tell you that although it did taste a little young the flavors were fantastic as was it's strength.... it will definitely get better with time but I'd smoke 'em right now if I could get them from my buddy... LOL!

Wade
 
I'm not a fan of the Monte line at all. The whole line has been mediocre for the past 5 years. But, with that said, the #2 is much improved in '02 and '03 and are smoking well RIGHT NOW!!!

Don't be afraid to get and smoke '03's now. I'm sure they'll be even better in 4-5 years as they mature, but it's nice to finally enjoy a Monte again.

:)
 
doohnibor said:
I'm not a fan of the Monte line at all. The whole line has been mediocre for the past 5 years. But, with that said, the #2 is much improved in '02 and '03 and are smoking well RIGHT NOW!!!

Don't be afraid to get and smoke '03's now. I'm sure they'll be even better in 4-5 years as they mature, but it's nice to finally enjoy a Monte again.

:)
Click to expand...
I just got a box of Monte #2 2003's a few weeks ago. I couldn't restrain myself, so I smoked one the very first day. It was good, but not impressive. I waited two weeks and had another one last night, it was very very good, addictive even. The 2003's are definately ready to burn right now, but I agree that they will be even better with age.

Take care, Bacchus
 
mhn said:
I'm looking for some feedback from some people w/ more ISOM exp than myself.

I have read in a couple of places that the '03 Monte's are very very good and given some age will be better than the '98's are (was that a really good year or something?, why would they be compared to that year).

What do you guys think?

peace,
Mike
Click to expand...
In my experience cigars have that thing - I think it is called violata? that term used in wine ratings. Basicially some years are "better" than other years. Most of the time this will be an indivudal taste thing, but when you hear the same thing form many sources... holds at least a little more weight in my mind.

The 1998 production of ISOM's were very good and I can say that in my records/rating book, with few exceptions, 1998 ISOM cigars rated higher than the same cigar from another year. Whether this is a cigar aging issue or not, I have no idea, I am still learning this myself, but I can say that the 1998 production cigars I have had have really been great cigars. Likewise the 1996 cigars I have had have been really good as well.

Sam
 
Have to disagree about the 2000 and 2001 cigars. A box of 2000 VR Famosos I split with a member here were fantastic. Haad a couple of 2001 that were very good also. Think it depends on the cigar as always, have heard of a couple of 2003 that weren't good at all. Perhaps they will be better with age?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top