:-) We understand, Michael. We just enjoy smoking through You, Brother!:-)
[Reply]

Your thread has given me some insight on a few sticks I might have or might not have bought...keep em coming!!!
[Reply]

How did I miss this therad? I like it.

Keep 'em coming :-)
[Reply]

:-)

I have two more to add for todays, but I'll load up the pics later. Gotta take care of some business around the house.
[Reply]

looking forward to it! :-)
[Reply]

5-30-09

My choice for Sat morning was an easy one...yet another Tampa Sweetheart #500 Maduro.

Image

Every time I toast one up and take the first draw, I am amazed. How in the heck something so cheap can be such a great smoke. I keep thinking I may have been very lucky with the bundle I bought, because these guys have all been very consistant in quality. They have all looked the same, had the same perfect draw, performed and tasted solid all the way to the nub, same great finish.

Picture with my new Z-plus insert i bought for my old Zippo.

Image

Image

Image

Image

...
[Reply]

At a time, I believe it said at Tampa Sweetheart's website that the Sweethearts were rolled with the identical tobacco as the hemingway series. Get yourself the maddies, and you have yourself the vaunted difficult-to-find hemingway maduro at a tiny fraction of the price.
I have smoked dozens of each, and quite frankly, I can tell no appreciable difference between one and the other (tampa sweetheart maduros or hemingway maduros). The Sweethearts just need a bit of time to dry out and get ahold of themselves.
I love the sweethearts. I'm gonna go smoke a 500 right now that's about a year old. :-)
[Reply]

... 5-30-09 cont.

Afternoon smoke, 1926 PAM.

Image

This was actually a misstake. When i left the house I thought it was going to be a great smoke for a Saturday work day smoke. Unfortunately for the PAM, it was not a good idea. You see, the morning cigar was almost perfect, and aalot cheaper. As much as I love the PAM's, I never should have smoked one back to back with my new found $2 wonder. Perhaps it was because the 26's are so much milder than the 64's. ( I am sure the 64 Pam would have stood up alot better flavor wise) I have smoked the camaroon wrapped 26 before, but this was my first time with a maduro 26.

Image

Very smooth cigar indeed. But nowhere near as flavorful or strong as the 64 maduro. I actually think my morning cigar gave me more enjoyment...except i did have alot of fun trying to make big ash with the PAM.

Image

Image

Image

Michael
[Reply]

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaang. Nice afternoon smoke bro! :-)
[Reply]

Nice photos brother and a great thread idea. I smoke most of my sticks on the job too, helps stir up a few conversations when other cigar smokers spot the smoke signals from your truck. Hope you keep it up, really enjoy the mini reviews and photos. :-)
[Reply]

Thanks...I was hell bent on buying a Pardon 1926 Anniversary but after reading your review, I will go with the 1964 maduro instead. Thanks!!
[Reply]

I think I may try a bundle of those tampa sweethearts #500 if when they have them in stock again. thanks for the review.
[Reply]

Yeah, you reminded me that I need to buy a bundle of those TSM's too.
[Reply]

Dont get me wrong...the 26 is a great cigar. I personally prefer the 64 because it is a stronger cigar and very smooth. I have an 80th 26 that I paid too much for...I have a feeling it will come up short. I really do not think that the 3000 and 7000 fall to short of the annies.

Everyone has different tastes, a great cigar for me could be the next guys worst.
[Reply]

I sit in a office all day and have 15 min breaks so no way for a workday smoke unfortunately
[Reply]

Interesting. I usually prefer Maddies, but I like the Nat Padron 1926 better!:-)
[Reply]

I burned that TS 500 Maduro today. It was excellent.
Thanks for reminding me, brother. :-)
[Reply]

I smoked a TS 50 that someone gifted me over a year ago and loved it. Bundle city here I come.
[Reply]

Don't you worry sir. I took care of it for you! :-)
[Reply]

I will have to get my hands on some of the TS's also and thanks for all the great pictures.
[Reply]