Stogie Reviews: Rocky Patel Connecticut Robusto
30 Apr 2007
I’ve made no secret of the fact that I’m not a huge fan of cigars with Connecticut Shade wrappers. I usually find them to have heavy chemical and nicotine flavors.
For instance, in spite of a whopping 91 rating from Cigar Insider, I gave the Cusano 18 Double Connecticut a substandard two out of five stogies, and said that “the stick tasted more like it was engineered in a beaker than grown from soil.â€
On the other hand, I’ve also made no secret of my soft spot for Rocky Patel stogies. They usually live up to the much-deserved hype, and the Vintage 1992 is one of my all-time favorites.
So I wondered how I would like a cigar with a Connecticut Shade wrapper that’s manufactured by Rocky. I picked up a Rocky Patel Connecticut Robusto for about $4 to find out.
This is a light and smooth ochre-colored stogie with Nicaraguan and Dominican filler tobaccos. At five inches with a 50 ring gauge, it sports the classic Robusto size.
Upon lighting, my Connecticut Shade fears were immediately realized. An unpleasant chemical aftertaste overshadowed the creamy grass and hay flavors during the first few puffs.
Fortunately, that unsavory finish faded into the middle of the cigar, and that’s really when this smoke was most enjoyable. The aftertaste came back to haunt me after I smoked past the band (which, on this cigar, I wouldn’t recommend).
Like most Rockys, the physical properties of the Connecticut are admirable. An even burn and a clear draw produced a firm, gray ash.
From what I’ve heard, many people like this stogie as an early morning smoke. With mild flavors and good construction, it’s easy to see why. If you like Connecticut Shade cigars, this is probably right up your alley.
But I’m still not convinced. Call me crazy, but I want to enjoy – not dread – the aftertaste of my smokes. All things considered, I can’t give the Rocky Patel Connecticut Robusto a rating any better than three out of five stogies.
[To read more StogieGuys.com cigar reviews, please click here.]
Tags: cigars
Patrick Ashby
Co-Founder & Editor in Chief
Patrick Semmens
Co-Founder & Publisher
George Edmonson
Tampa Bureau Chief
How does this compare to the RP Vintage 1999?
In my experience, while the Vintage 1999 also has a Connecticut Shade wrapper and Nicaraguan and Dominican filler tobaccos, it doesn't have that chemical aftertaste I've grown to despise.
In the $6-10 range, the Vintage 1999s are more expensive, but I think they're also much better smokes.
Patrick –
Do you find that aging cigars with Connecticut Shade wrappers for 6 months or even a year has any effect on that aftertaste?
George,
That's an excellent question. Give me six months to a year and I'll get back to you.
Actually, in all seriousness, the Cusano 18 Double Connecticut I reviewed in November had been in my humidor for quite some time.
This cigar, however, was fairly new. I have a few more, and I'll wait quite awhile before trying another.
If anybody else out there has some good info on this question, please feel free to chime in.
Hey bro, I seriously think there is something wrong with YOUR taste buds, because there are a TON of die-hard connecticut cigar smokers out here in cigar land and we don't seem to be picking up anything chemically. Maybe it's time for you to go get a check-up 🙂
I've tried one and this was more pleasant than the barrel aged I've tried. I've also tried RP vintage 1990 and this one is as good. It burns evenly and long and has a very enjoyable flavor. I tasted spice and earth at the beginning and then a creamy taste at the middle and end. I would buy a box of these without thinking twice.
I never had this connecticut RP. I have tried the Vintage 1999 Connecticut Robusto. Good smoke but I had some construction issues. I got a real creamy flavor throughout but no real strength. My full review: http://wp.me/pSZbU-f2