Sol Cubano Cuban Cabinet A – Cigar Review from In The Humidor

November 25, 2008 · Posted in Cigar Review 

Cigar Stats
Length: 9
Ring Gauge: 48
Tobaccos: Ecuador (wrapper, I think), Nicaragua, and Honduras
Price: $8.00

I was scouring the web earlier today looking for interesting stuff and I came across a blog I have never seen before called In The Humidor. It’s a great blog about, you guessed it, cigars. And what really piqued my interest was the fact that his most recent review is of a Sol Cubano, which I have had the opportunity to smoke a couple of recently.

I’ve got to say that while I do agree with his review I don’t agree with the rating, I think it is too charitable. Their system over there is to rate cigars on a five-star scale. He gave the Sol Cubano Cuban Cabinet A a 3, which roughly translates to 85-90 points using the 100-point scale, or, to put it another way, it’s a good cigar in his summation.

Even though I haven’t posted my rating yet I smoked one of these A’s recently and I gave it an 81 for my score. It is just a bland cigar that I could have lived without ever having smoked it. Alright! That’s enough of me blathering on lets get to the very thoughtful review from the guy over at In The Humidor:

You may recognize this marca of cigar if you have been a In The Humidor reader for a while. I did a review on the corona size of this cigar and was very disappointed. Well I decided to give another vitola a go and decided on the rather large “A” size. This vitola had a nice wrapper with little veins present. The construction appeared to be of decent quality. I don’t usually smoke cigars of this size so it was a tad awkward at first but it felt fine after the first 3rd.

The cigar itself is a nicaraguan and honduran filler with a Ecuadorian wrapper. The medium to full bodied flavor is of earth and a bit of sweetness. The cigar is not overpowering however, in fact it falls flat compared to other medium to full sticks. I found this cigar to be rather boring by the end of the second 3rd. The flavors never produced anything that grabbed me as it started to taste like air by the last 3rd. This big boy was going to hit the ashtray without getting nubbed.

Sol Cubano Cuban Cabinet “A” Cigar Review | In The Humidor – Cigar reviews and news, cigar ratings, cigar updates, new cigar reviews, cigar smokers.

This is a boring cigar and it probably isn’t worth your time or money. This all brings me to another issue that I want to discuss at some point in the future, which is you can’t always trust your cigar retailer because, after all, they are in the business of selling cigars to you and not in the business of telling you which cigars not to buy.

Comments

3 Responses to “Sol Cubano Cuban Cabinet A – Cigar Review from In The Humidor”

  1. InTheHumidor on November 26th, 2008 7:47 am

    Although I do agree that it is a boring and not worthy of my $6-$7 per cigar. It wasn’t horrible, I have had way worse cigars in my day. Hence my 3 star rating… if you look you will notice I usually smoke some pretty good cigars and they rank in the 4 stars mostly. Thanks for the plug by the way!

    Niko

  2. ROTHNH on September 4th, 2010 9:05 am

    Not sure how you use that voodoo math?

    “He gave the Sol Cubano Cuban Cabinet A a 3, which roughly translates to 85-90 points using the 100-point scale, or, to put it another way, it’s a good cigar in his summation.”

    A 3 on a scale of 5 is 60%, or 60 points on the 100 point scale.

    I hope your wife holds the checkbook. LMAO.

    That said, a 60% rating is about right — decent construction, but IMO, like all Oliva cigars in recent years (with the notable exception of the Serie V) this cigar is underwhelming — monotonous flavors with a lack of complexity.

  3. Travis Lindsay on September 4th, 2010 11:26 am

    Yeah, I completely agree with you on this one. As I say in my post I would have given this cigar 81 points or something like 1 or 1.5 stars. “Blah” is the best way to describe this cigar.

    And the V is the best Oliva around too. You are a smart man! :-)

Leave a Reply