Nub (4 /4.5 x 55/60) 0 0%

Corona (5.5/6 x 42/45) 36 31.58%

Panatela (5.5/6.5 x 34/38) 1 0.88%

Lonsdale (6/6.5 x 42/44) 5 4.39%

Churchill (6.5/7 x 46/48) 3 2.63%

Robusto (4.5/5 x 48/50) 46 40.35%

Toro (6/6.5 x 48/50) 13 11.40%

Presidente (7/8.5 x 52/60) 0 0%

Gigante/Gordo (>= 6 x >=60) 3 2.63%

Torpedo (5.5/6.5 x 46/52) 7 6.14%

:-) I voted corona, Rob. Don't mind the drunken idiot joke posts!
[Reply]

Oh no... I was rather enjoying the Banter... No harm no foul, and I have a new size I need to try... :-)
[Reply]

bump...
[Reply]

bump....
[Reply]

Mostly robusto for me due to the heat of AZ or simply time. If I have the time I will pick up a toro and with things cooling of around here I will get more of them in.
[Reply]

Most of the time I smoke churchills, but I also smoke a large number in a size that I didn't see on the list. The double corona at 7 X 50.
[Reply]

I went Robusto due to time flavor, and price it works best for me
[Reply]

PC
[Reply]

Coronas for me, but RG is the big thing for me. Anything over 50 takes a backseat.
[Reply]

I tend to go with a Toro size for most of my cigars. I don't smoke a lot and when I do I like to spend a good long relaxing time with it.
[Reply]

Why do you ask?

Seems to assume that most BOTL here would be willing to be pigeonholed for no apparent reason. I do understand that many generally prefer over/under a certain RG. But so much can go into choosing a cigar size - I don't see the reason for collecting the data here. Its just that differening RG's can change a cigar so dramatically -- finding the sweet spot for me for any particular blend is kind of fun. Factor in that time available to smoke will often influence chosen length.
The day I decide that I should stick with Robs, for examaple, is the day my caring about flavor and complexity dies a little bit.
[Reply]

Dave, I think it is more a casual curiosity about what folks like than it is about "collecting data"
:-)
[Reply]

:-)
[Reply]

You're, of course, right, Peter. I may be on the rag a bit today...just getting a little impatient with some of the (somewhat mindless?) drivel here (even the OP seemed to acknowledge that he was more interested in kicking out a thread in 5 minutes than trying to include important choices) -- I'll go back to working at ignoring threads I don't 'enjoy'. I did think that I had points to make about restricting oneself to a certain size, but could have chosen better way to make them.
[Reply]

No problem, Dave.

We all, at times, post mindless drivel. Hopefully, it is the exception and not the rule.
[Reply]

Speak for yourself, Buzzy. :-)
[Reply]

See that, Dave.
I rest my case.
[Reply]

FTW!
[Reply]

There's my exception for this thread, Buzzy! :-)
[Reply]

Hey, I resemble that remark. Wait.... :-)
[Reply]