Comments on: Ask The Readers: Does our definition of Full Bodied need an overhaul?

By: Hammerhead

Hammerhead — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 00:38:25 +0000

Full bodied, light bodied, medium bodied,….doesn’t much matter to me and ALL of my smoking buddies. If the stick has a sharp ‘pepper’ bite with that dirty cigar taste, it gets snubbed immediatly and chalked up to lesson learned. Too many people get ‘bite’ and full bodied mixed up.

By: Stogie Guys Friday Sampler CLXI

Stogie Guys Friday Sampler CLXI — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:56:31 +0000

[...] Cigar Inspector inspects a H. Upmann Magnum 48. Keepers of the Flame smokes a Casa Farnandez. Stogie Review asks if we need to update our definition of [...]

By: Ern1911

Ern1911 — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:53:40 +0000

Whenever I have always been confused by others reviews when they mix up taste/complexity and strength together. When I review a cigar I try to separate the taste/complexity and strength as different ratings. As a novice this I feel is a more accurate way of describing a cigar, especially to a beginner or novice who is still discovering taste and might not want the power of cigar because they are not used to it. For me I like the strength/power of cigar anytime, I love the headiness I get from a cigar, that’s half the enjoyment.

By: Cyncris

Cyncris — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:19:38 +0000

TLDR version below

It seems like it would make much more sense to come up with stats much like new cars have to go through with crash tests. If each manufacturer would send 5-20 cigars of each new type that they plan to produce to a central place (or a network of places using the same scale) then we could develope tests. Maybe something like these:

Test 1: Cut the end of the cigar and use a draw tester ( much like the one that CAO has in thier DVD). Then average the numbers possibly throwing out the lowest and highest. – I am sure that many of us have tried a new cigar and it was either like drawing air through a straw or it was like sucking a frozen milkshake through a straw. Neither are pleasurable and if that stat was available, we would all find our individual sweet spot.

Test 2: Pull a specific amount of air through a lit cigar into a chamber and then measure the density of the smoke – There is nothing I hate more than smoking a cigar that puts off nearly no smoke. This was my experience with the Cain. While the cigar hits hard (I was a bit woozy afterwards) there was not near the quantity of exhaled smoke as I expected. This is probably due to the ligero, but it still ruined the cigar for me.

Test 3: Have the cigar put in a machine that would rotate it and simulate a person smoking. Record if it had to be relit and how many times, record how long it took to get to a particular point (say 1 1/4 inches from the cut end) , also record if it ran and to what degree (measurement) – Having a machine do this would get rid of the human factor and would show just results of the cigar not the person and time that it was smoked.

Test 4: Nicotine hit. There are tests out there to measure the amount of nicotine in a particular air sample. The same time that test 2 is being run, this one could be run.

Test 5: Finally a subjective test! Flavor. Have it be a 1 through 10 scale where 1 is bland (I tasted nothing, this was purely smoke) to 10 where You tasted flavor in every draw, the flavors were very noticable and easily distinguished. It would also help if that scale had well known cigars placed on it for reference. That way we would have a trueing point for each person that read that review.

Test 6: I do not have a good name for it other than power or strength. This should probably also be on a 10 or 100 point scale with other well known cigars on it for reference points. There are some smokes that you could accidentally inhale a little and it would be barely noticable. There are others that can nearly make you forfeit your lunch if any hits your lungs. I am sure that nicotine plays a role in that, but I don’t think that is the only factor. Depending on what time of day it is and what I have had to eat, determines the type of cigar that I want to smoke.

TLDR(Too long, didn’t read) version
Yes, I think the definitions should change.
Flavor should be from bland to flavorful and it should be a 10 or 100 point scale with with specific cigars listed as refernce points
Strength should be from weak to strong on a 10 or 100 point scale with specific cigars listed as reference points
Leave “bodied” out of the comparison since my subjective view of full bodied could be a 60 ring guage while medium could be a box press

By: Vince

Vince — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:46:09 +0000

I think body is supposed to describe the weight and mouthfeel of the smoke. I notice that many times it is used to describe full flavored cigars. There are full flavored cigars with light body (smoke) and there are dense smokes with medium strength flavor. Of course, as many others have said, this is all relative to the smoker and subject to perception.

By: John Brooke - The Weekly Cigar

John Brooke - The Weekly Cigar — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:07:02 +0000

I think body and strength are kind of subjective terms. I feel one person’s full strength cigar can be another person’s mild-to-medium.

By: schedel

schedel — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:46:13 +0000

My opinion about the Edge, and El Cobre is that they are medium bodied cigars. While the Edge is medium bodied, I think it happens to be full-flavored. I think there is a common mix-up in the cigar world between a cigar being full-bodied and full-flavored. The Cain is full bodied and full flavored, but not overly powerful, and the Lx2 falls into the same category for me. I think you should leave it as it is and just distinguish any personal differences since the strength of a cigar is totally objective. The only overly powerful cigar I have every had was the LFD Cheroot, which made me woozy for about 30 minutes the first time I had it.

But I think JB has it pretty well written out there.