Professor Sila Double Robusto


Active Member
Dec 30, 2006
This thread will review:

Name: Professor Sila Double Robusto (Torpedo)
Size: 6 x 50
Wrapper: CON seed Natural
Binder: UNK
Filler: DR
MSRP: 20 cigars in a BOX for $100
Price Payed: $37
Stated Strength: Supremely Mild
Comments: These cigars are produced in the DR and have a sweetened tip. The advertisement compares them to and as a possible replacement to Nat Sherman's Hobart/Harrington/Hampton line. These are a long filler blend and they were purchased about 8 months ago.

For original thread discussion see Start Up Thread

To keep it standard, we would rate the cigars in three categories.

A) Appearance--How the cigar looks, how the pre-light smell is, the wrapper, etc.

B) Taste---How is the taste? Spicy, strong, bland, airball, etc. How did the taste progress, etc.

C) Construction---How did the cigar perform in terms of draw, burn, ash, etc.

To rate the cigars we would use a number from 5 to 10, 5 being one you would not even give Fidel to smoke and ten being a damm good cigar. The final rating number would be determined by the following:

A + B + (1.5)C divided by 3.5. This is similar to how Cigar Magazine does it but it is a little different. I realize that this is not perfect and there may be better ways but this would work also. Thanks for the reviews!!


Habeas Punkus
May 6, 2008
Okay, I am going to preface my review by saying that I generally HATE any kind of flavored cigars. I will take this opportunity to reiterate that I have sworn violence against anyone connected to the manufacture of Acid cigars so please let me know if you capture one of their people. That being said, I am stumbling over myself because this is going to have to be an, ummm, errrrr, ummmm, positive review.

Let's get on with it:

Appearance: The cigar has a nice and smooth natural wrapper. I had a small nick to the wrapper by the label and another small crack by the foot on one of the cigars but the other was perfect. On both of these the labels had some extra glue that was unattractive but didn't affect the cigar. No noticeable defects in appearance really. (8.5)

Taste: This is where I expected this review to go down hill but all things considered, it did not. The flavor tip is not overly flavored (a lesson those Acid bastards would do well to learn). On a dry pull there was no real tobacco taste but just a slight and mild honey type flavor. Not something I like in a cigar but certainly not offensive. As I lit up the smoke was exceptionally mild and the real flavor delivery was from the tip. The flavors that i did get from the tobacco were mildly earthy. There was a good amount of smoke.

The more I smoked, the less I tasted the flavor tip and the more I got of the tobacco. I would say that it developed well during the smoking. The more I smoked the more I thought the diminishing flavor tip complimented the emerging earthy smoke taste. By the end it was like drinking a decent brandy while smoking something like a Macanudo or mild Don Diego (only without the superfluous glass of brandy). I was pleasantly shocked at how decent these smoking experiences had become.

I struggle to give a flavored cigar high marks but this one is actually decent. I would readily give it to my wife or to my less manly friends who like such flavored items. I would absolutely, and by force if required, replace an Acid cigar that I see in someones mouth with this one any day. (7.8)

Construction: Another surprising aspect was that whoever makes this brand really knows what they are doing. I had a razor sharp burn down to below the label. The ash held for at least 1.5 inches. I have absolutely no construction complaints at all. (9.0)

I would not buy this cigar for myself but I would keep some around for the next herf that I host. This is just a good mild cigar with enough added flavor to be attractive to light weights.


Appearance: 8.5
Taste: 7.8
Construction: 9.0

TOTAL: 8.51

The Green Monkey

Apr 5, 2008
I don't have a whole lot to say about this one, which I'm sure will come as a surprise and/or relief to anyone that's been following my contributions to SJM's project so far. I thought that the flavor on the wrapping was by far the most dominating characteristic for the entire duration of this cigar.

Appearance/Initial Impressions: There were two big, nearly adjoining parallel veins on the light brown, slightly mottled wrapper. The tobacco at the foot was fairly light in color, and there was one lengthwise quadrant that seemed less dense than the other 3/4. There were two straight, parallel lines about 1/4" apart running down the entire length--I suspect it may have something to do with how it was boxed or otherwise stored at some point. It smells aggressively sweet, almost like someone is trying to overpower a less pleasant smell with a scented air freshener--like the bathroom of a dive bar, or the carpeted floor of a dingy bowling alley or something.

Taste: Clipped with the Xicar which yielded a pretty rough and unruly, dry-seeming cut. My lips were very sweet from the otherwise fairly bland prelight draw.

Lit it at 4:33 PM out on the patio July Fourth with a cold bottle of Presidente, my wife, and our dog who didn't spend the holiday at the e-vet's. My first impressions were again of how sweet my lips tasted. It was a sweetness that I'd best compare to the shiny, sugary coating of Kellogg's Corn Pops, but somehow it also tasted just a little bit like an extremely sweet fruit punch like the gallon jugs of red Hi-C. The faint tastes I get from the smoke itself are almost vegetable in nature, but they don't stick around long. The smoke might as well be air in my nose.

I haven't smoked a Swisher (or a White Owl--grape or otherwise) in many years, but I can't help but think of the sweet lips phenomenon associated with Swishers or with some crass, pungent brand of clove cigarettes (redundant?) you'd find in the purses of affective high school drama club kids.

Once I'm into the middle third at the 4:53 mark, the taste (other than my lips) is just plain absent. These are not good cigars for an absent-minded smoker, because they'd likely forget that they're even smoking a cigar. This stick is mainly a sugary-lips delivery vessel. I reach the midpoint of the cigar and am a loss for anything additional to write about it. A bit later, I inhaled it just to see whether I could have a response. The smoke tasted funny, like faint traces of gasoline vapors from afar. Without inhaling, the smoke still tastes like nothing. My lips still taste like candy.

During the final third, which I hit around 5:10, a slight taste developed, but I couldn't describe it as anything more than generic smoke with a mildly pungent character hiding in the background. I put it down at 5:26 with ~1.75" left for an elapsed time of 0:53.

What cotton candy is to the candy realm, this cigar is to the cigar world. Just a nearly disembodied, ephemeral sweetness. I do agree with punk_lawyer that this didn't have the same "I'm smoking Grandma's potpourri bowl" taste that more aggressively flavored cigars have, but I would tend to disagree that the smoke was flavored at all--the wrapper certainly had flavor, but little else did.

Construction: After the first 1/4" of smoking, there was a small split that developed between the two parallel lines. It didn't cause any major disruptions though. There was a very nice, consistent grey ash with a mechanically precise burn. I had an inch of ash after 13 minutes, for whatever that's worth.

I ashed after the first third at 4:53, and it neatly dropped off and left a short, squat ember cone behind.

Everything proceeded perfectly and without incident until just before I planned to put it down, when some uneven burning/canoeing developed. It wasn't severe enough or early enough for me to bother trying to fix it, but it was progressing a bit when I put it down at the 1.5"/2" mark.

Appearance: 7.5
Pretty middle of the road in appearance. Not flawless, not haggard.
Taste: 6.0 All it had going on was sweet lips. Just buy yourself a bag of candy if this is what you're interested in.
Construction: 9.0 This thing burned like a champ, despite the oddly nearly parallel veins, the oddly totally parallel folds/lines, and the rocky cut.

Total: 7.71 This seems artificially high to me due to its awesome construction--realistically, I'd put it in the 6.75 range. I really wouldn't recommend this cigar to anyone but the girliest of girls, the wimpiest of wimps, or the most sugar-fiendy of diabetics. I suppose that if you're in need of a good cigar to smoke immediately before makeout sessions, this might be the one for you.


Growing too fast.
Oct 6, 2007
I'll start by apologizing for my review (or non review) of this cigar. I grabbed it out the humi without reading anything on it, took it outside, punched the head, and went to test the draw. That's when it hit me. Extremely sweet taste filled my mouth. I have to say I pretty much gagged at that point. One, not expecting the sweetness really caught me off guard and two, ACK!!! NOT FOR ME! I did actually make an attempt to go ahead and light it and take several draws even with the pure sweet tip, however the smoke was extremely mild and this mixed with the sugariness...I just couldn't take it. I considered cutting a good chunk of the head off to maybe try and get past the sweet part, to see what flavors I could pick up in the smoke, but just couldn't do it. I put it down and went to try and get the taste out my mouth. I grabbed a Party Short out the humi and went to go smoke it to see if that would help with the lingering aroma, however the first quarter of the Party Short tasted like the P. Sila.

I will say the construction was very well, draw was a bit on the tight side.

Again, really sorry for the incomplete review. Hopefully the other reviewers had a much better experience and were able to communicate their thoughts to those that like these sweet tipped smokes.


Jan 13, 2008
Name: Professor Sila Double Robusto (Torpedo)
Size: 6 x 50
Wrapper: CON seed Natural
Binder: UNK
Filler: DR

I brought this cigar and a few others out to the golf course the other day. When I opened my 5ct., I apparently drew the short straw and ended up with this stick. I gotta smoke it at some point, so whatever.

Appearance) Very light in color. Firm but not too hard…well bunched. Easy clip with the Xikar and I find a huge stem. Try to pull it out but it’s in there quite a ways…eff it. Kind of reminds me of the Liga IV cigars I used to choke down in my early years. (6.0)

Taste) Pre-light sniff and taste…honey. Overpowering honey. I hope there’s tobacco flavor soon to come. Light up and it’s just dominating honey/sweet flavors. About an inch into it, the sweetness fades and I pick up a light wood taste. Not tobacco yet…just faint wood. I pick up less honey by exhaling through the nose, which is very easy. And it’s a very “spitty” cigar. I’m constantly spitting to try to get the sugar taste out of my mouth.
Half-way point the cigar is extremely airy. Most of the syrupiness has disappeared, but that means there’s really no taste. Not much to pay attention to.
Final third develops a caramel taste….not too intense, but noticeable. Still never pick up on a tobacco (Padron) taste. It finishes very mild and surprisingly clean. I thought I’d have that sugared taste in my mouth all day. (5.0) - I wish I could go lower...

Construction) Like others have said, this was put together pretty well. The burn was sharp that never ran and it held it’s ash past the 2 inch mark. It’s a shame to see construction like this on such a dog-turd. I can pull a $10 cigar from my humi that won’t burn or hold together near as well as this Professor Sila. What a waste. (8.5)

OVERALL: (6.5)

I think everyone can benefit from smoking one of these once in awhile. This was a “slap-in-the-face” reminder of why I enjoy a great tasting cigar. And why I don’t/won’t ever smoke these. But I’m sure my poser-smoker golf buddies would have loved this…just not for me.