With all the talk about Padron quality......3000 Maduro

[golfgar]

While I have never done a review before, I thought I should do one of the Padron 3000 Maduro given the discussion about the quality of the regular Padrons and Fuentes.  I happened into the cigar store in Clayton MO today, JR cigars, in an effort to buy some Opus X Angel's Share and decided to buy a few...3 to be exact....Padron 3000 Maduros to smoke and post something about.  I will say that I believe this is my first review and so I am not very good at this, therefore, please excuse this rather pedestrian effort to review a cigar and don't slam me too hard.6.
 
Padron 3000 Maduro
Price....$6.00 before sales tax so about $6.55 total
Purchased....JR cigar Clayton Missouri
Purchased today at about 14:00
Smoked today at about 17:30
Smoked indoors at my office temp 66F outside temp 10F
 
Pre-light....nothing particular noted about the pre-light fragrance or smell.  I inspected the cigar before cutting and noted a fairly prominent flaw in the wrapper.  The foot was not a particularly clean cut and the roll seemed firm enough.  Immediately after cutting a straight cut, I noted that the wrapper began to disengage at the head where the cut was made.  Easily fixed with some moisture.  I tried to show these things in the photos but since it was an i phone in the office the photography was not very good.
 
[sharedmedia=gallery:images:12318]
[sharedmedia=gallery:images:12319]
[sharedmedia=gallery:images:12320]
[sharedmedia=gallery:images:12321]
[sharedmedia=gallery:images:12317]
 
After lighting with a five burner Rocky Patel table lighter I took the first draw, it was like air going through a large straw.  It was a very open draw and therefore I was conscious about not smoking it too fast as I did not want to heat the tobacco too much.  Even though the cigar felt firm before lighting it seemed less dense after starting the smoking process.  The initial burn was fairly even.  Initially there were no exploding flavors in the mouth and there was a bitter flavor in the back,underside of the tongue.  There was no particular sweetness or nuttiness as I would normally note in a maduro wrapper.  Except for the normal tobacco flavors nothing else was really noted on the initial inch or so.  The ash was firm and stayed in place nicely.
 

[sharedmedia=gallery:images:12323]
[sharedmedia=gallery:images:12324]
[sharedmedia=gallery:images:12325]
 
The rest of the cigar saw only a slight intensification of flavor.  Normally I think of a good cigar as one which intensifies in flavor as it is smoked, to the point where they explode in the mouth with each puff.  My humble taste buds could not distinguish much other than a tobacco flavor and some slight vegital notes.  The bitterness never really diminished.  The flavor overall was rather non-descript, not unpleasant.  As the cigar got down toward the band it heated up fairly significantly and was not necessarily an attractive smoke at that point.  I tossed it out about 1/4 inch before the ember hit the band.  I bought 3 of these cigars and will update if there are any significant differences in the other ones.  I really tried to find some flavors to write about and could not, but maybe my taste buds are just plain shot.  
 
Worth six bucks......maybe if it is bought in Minnesota.  Would I buy more........maybe if I lived in Minnesota and I could buy it for six bucks.  
I might buy more, but will probably not seek out this cigar again but would not turn one down if offered.
 
My  $,02, wish I could have been more helpful but the cigar was rather middle of the road for me.
 
Construction 5/10
Flavor 5/10
Value 4/10
 

 

[thinde]

Good review, I have to agree with you on the flavor aspect you found. The Thousand Series has never done much for me, although they are better with a couple years on them. As for the price you should check out one of Jim's (Keystone Raider) sales, it make them much more attractive. I personally prefer an aged Penatela or Londres over the Thousand Series but to each there own.  

 

[bfreebern]

My favorite x000 series is the 6000.  Nice first review :thumbs:

 

[Brickhouse]

I enjoyed the review, well done. 

 

[bluue13]

Good first review!
 
Just interesting to note.  Its difficult to do an unbiased review after reading through the thread about Padron/Fuente quality.  Its almost like you (universal, not JUST you) would be expecting it to not be a good cigar.  Would've been interesting to see a blind review if it were possible.
 
Not saying your results would've been any different, its just interesting to note!

 

[BlindedByScience]

Good review, thanks for the write up.
 
It used to be a box of x000's would undergo pretty significant changes with about a year of humi time.  It would be interesting to see how sticks from this box would fare a few months from now.

 

[golfgar]

Good first review!
 
Just interesting to note.  Its difficult to do an unbiased review after reading through the thread about Padron/Fuente quality.  Its almost like you (universal, not JUST you) would be expecting it to not be a good cigar.  Would've been interesting to see a blind review if it were possible.
 
Not saying your results would've been any different, its just interesting to note!

Thank you.  Not sure I tried to do an unbiased review.  I think there were some positive comments about Padron/Fuente as well as some negative.  I take some umbrage at the comment that I (as part of universal I) would be expecting a poor showing, when in fact I was expecting quite the opposite....to pen something better about the cigar than I did.  Anyone who writes a review about a cigar he or she has purchased has outside influences, whether it is word of mouth, other reviews, the marketing prose provided by the vendor or producer, or posts on a forum.  While I don't view your questioning of my motives and results as a personal affront, I do not believe there would have been much of a difference in the result if conducted under different circumstances.  Again, it is only my opinion, given the circumstances.  I suppose, it is therefore your opinion, that there were undue influences contributing to the opinion I espoused, which resulted in above review.  Again, it is only my $.02 and should be considered as such.
 

Good review, thanks for the write up.
 
It used to be a box of x000's would undergo pretty significant changes with about a year of humi time.  It would be interesting to see how sticks from this box would fare a few months from now.

 
 
As I said in the other thread, I recently, really enjoyed a Padron Churchill which had some time in the humidor and will let the remaining couple sit a while at BBS's suggestion and report back later. 

 

[bluue13]

 

Good first review!
 
Just interesting to note.  Its difficult to do an unbiased review after reading through the thread about Padron/Fuente quality.  Its almost like you (universal, not JUST you) would be expecting it to not be a good cigar.  Would've been interesting to see a blind review if it were possible.
 
Not saying your results would've been any different, its just interesting to note!

Thank you.  Not sure I tried to do an unbiased review.  I think there were some positive comments about Padron/Fuente as well as some negative.  I take some umbrage at the comment that I (as part of universal I) would be expecting a poor showing, when in fact I was expecting quite the opposite....to pen something better about the cigar than I did.  Anyone who writes a review about a cigar he or she has purchased has outside influences, whether it is word of mouth, other reviews, the marketing prose provided by the vendor or producer, or posts on a forum.  While I don't view your questioning of my motives and results as a personal affront, I do not believe there would have been much of a difference in the result if conducted under different circumstances.  Again, it is only my opinion, given the circumstances.  I suppose, it is therefore your opinion, that there were undue influences contributing to the opinion I espoused, which resulted in above review.  Again, it is only my $.02 and should be considered as such.
 

 
I don't think I was so much accusing you of expecting bad results, perhaps I worded that incorrectly.  I think we always hope for and expect GOOD results when we review a stick.  I just meant without even intentionally thinking negatively or trying to expect bad results our brains get swayed certain ways when we have read information about any product.
 
Much in the way we can read tons of hype about a cigar and then be disappointed when it is so-so because we were expecting our minds to be blown.
 
Again just expressing some general thoughts about it, not attempting to criticize your review, so apologies if it came across that way!  But I think we both pretty clearly wrote how we were just expressing our opinions.   I actually think it was a good idea to do the review, based on the thread.  I just think it would've been interesting in general to even have seen a blind review of the same stick by anyone, just to see how the results would've differed or even been the same.
 
Anyway, I probably just over explained myself so carry on!  As I said the review was a good one! 

 

[CMontoya79]

Great review, IMHO Fuente overall > Padron, though I feel a great 1964 torpedo Maduro is hard to beat. Haven't had one in a couple years though. I have had xxxx line and meh, was underwhelmed. A kind BOTL sent me an aged padron panatela and that was great. But overall I've not been disappointed with Fuentes regular or high end stuff, aged, or ROTT. Padron better catch up again, though I'm certain that they have people who will buy them no matter what. Like has been said... Smoke what you like, like what you smoke, life is to short to waste on crappy smokes.

Just my .02

Peace

C

 

[madurotrout]

Thanks for your input and contribution golfgar.

 

[jsm11]

Good Review IMO...
 
Different strokes for different folks :thumbs:

 

[madurotrout]

Good Review IMO...
 
Different strokes for different folks :thumbs:

LOL! I think I have a nice 3000 Maddie with a little age on it to burn for jsm11 this evening...