Review Notes: This cigar was good, but didn't wow me. The construction was good, but it did need a couple of touch ups do to tunneling (I've noticed this with most Padillas). It was in the box for 4 months and I was expecting more out of it. The flavors were good, consisting of some spice and cedar. Overall, a solid, respectable smoke.

Review Notes: I rate by flavor. I think I rated 1932 before, but it remains top 10% in this year's ratings. xlnt DPG start, 1st 2nd and last 3rd all rate great in flavor, DPG style. Great is a 9+, to me means top 10% of 150 brands I've smoked.

Review Notes: I read a lot of great reviews of this stick, so I decided to give it a try. Don't get me wrong, it was very good, but I have my issues. I got a 5 pack from C bid (the new blend-- the newer ones have Padilla written in script and the old ones in print). The one that I smoked had a loose draw and was a little spongy (cutting ends on the tobacco?). The flavors were above average and had moderate complexity--yes some pepper, spice, cedar, but nothing that I would go crazy about. It did "coat my mouth, " which is a sign of a good cigar. I had to "dig" to get those flavors. It had a more than adequate flavor profile, though. Something tells me that they need a little bit more aging and they will be great. I will post again in about a year or so.

Review Notes: i had my eyes on these at the cigar store. they were sitting there for months and months because of the outrageous price, i think. today, i noticed mega plume on several. it was ready to be smoked! sheer perfection. if every cigar was this good, i'd never smoke another kind.

Review Notes: I loved the robusto, and saved this torpedo for quite some time. Now I find the flavor too harsh, the burn uneven, and the draw a bit too tight. What happened? I hope its just a dud, cause I have 2 more of these.