Well, you can't taste nic... so I don't know. I would assume that strength refers to nic. I would also assume that the context of this thread is about flavor not nic content...
[Reply]

I had to check to make sure, but I had always called greenish wrappers double claros, and I guess that's the same as candela previously?

The wrapper is dried quickly with the use of heat, for whatever reason.

I find them a little sweet in flavor and enjoy the Graycliff double claro occasionally, although I wouldn't be in fits if my humidor was void of any light green cigars.
[Reply]

You're probably right... I thought I remembered reading that they made a candela version ONLY for Red. Wouldn't be the first time I "misremembered." :-)
[Reply]

I am not a fan of the Candela wrapper. If you look at catalogs from the boom years, probably 1 in two ads featured candela wrapped smokes. Ligero and oscuro were practically unadvertised 10 years ago. Some like em, just not my cup of tea. :-)
[Reply]

if this is true, how the hell do i get my hands on one :-)

as for the body/flavor/whatever debate, i usually consider body to be the amount of nic in a cigar, and flavor to be, well, the strength of the flavor of the cigar. example - i consider diablos to be mild-medium in body, but full in flavor, that is theres a lot of flavor coming at you but you dont end woozy at all. perhaps this is just my interpretation

stearns
[Reply]

Truth be told, the B&M's full flavored are a little more full than internet Fulls. I guess some are more Full of it than others.:-)
[Reply]

Me likey candela wrapper, at least on the much older cigars I've gotten my hands on that had it. I have yet to smoke a modern candela.
[Reply]

I have never had a candela I have enjoyed all the way through. Some start out great then go downhill, some start out bad then become okay. They are just not for me.
[Reply]

Are you sure? I thought that was just a... "legend." :-)
[Reply]