Montecristo Sublime (2008 Edicion Limitada)

Montecristo Sublime (2008 Edicion Limitada)

MontecristoOrigin : Cuba
Format : Sublime (Double Robusto)
Size : 6.5 (164 mm) x 54
Released in : 2008
Box code : NOV 08
Hand-Made
Price : ~$575 for a box of 10 cigars
More info about purchasing Montecristo cigars...

If you are a dyed-in-the-wool Montecristo lover, you might want to stop reading right now. Yes, I am a huge fan of Montecristo, but this review will not be flattering, not in the least. You might want the children to leave the room on this one. In many communities in my country, we have a colloquial saying “You dance with the lady that brought you to the party”, which loosely translates to “You stick with ideas where you excel”. Montecristo would have done well to have heeded this idiom before foisting this product upon the cigar loving public. They tried to copy others by an attempt to make a “kinder and gentler” cigar. Failure. Absolute and total failure.

Appearance : ★★½☆☆
Packed in a single layer hinged box, you get the first impression that you are about to dive into a wonderful experience. Appearances are very deceiving in this case. They should have spent more money on the product, and left the fancy-pantsy box to a product worthy of such presentation. The product should be the steak, not the sizzle from the way it was cooked.

Construction : ½☆☆☆☆
Here is where the cursing will start, so you might want to make sure the kids ARE out of the room. Showing less class and panache than swigging a 1951 1961 Dom Perignon straight from the bottle, this cigar utterly failed in just about every facet of construction you could imagine.

Picture this---

You open up the box to randomly choose the first stick you are eagerly ready to consume, and the first thing you notice (ESPECIALLY of you are a hearty Monte fan) is lack of aroma. That’s right—AROMA. Even their “junior” cigarillo releases give you a welcoming waft of earthy aroma that Montecristo is famous for. Strike 1.

You then settle on that one flaccid aroma smoke, then the tip and light up. You then finish your light and dive into the “enjoyment” of the experience. After a few seemingly effortless draws, you notice you are not getting a serious billow of smoke, nor does the burn line even change brightness. You then look the end over to make sure the cigar was really lit — no problem there. Is the cigar wet? Nope. You then inspect the length of the cigar to make sure there were no punctures or wrapper flaws. Nope — none of those either. You go back to drawing on the stick and what do you see??? Yes—an ember emerges through the wrapper in a location almost 2/3 the way towards the foot of the cigar, and you have literally just lit the damn thing. Strike 2.

You think to yourself that you may have pulled that rare cigar that just does not make the grade, so you save judgement until you grab the 2nd stick, then the 3rd, and so on. ALL of the sticks burn with major and non-correctable patterns; and to add insult to injury, most of them had more voids than a kilo sized block of Swiss cheese. If I did not implicitly trust my tobacconist, I would dare to suggest the tobacco this smoke was assembled from MIGHT have had an infestation of tobacco beetles. Voids shaped like bean sprouts (IE a round head with meandering root-like body) were so common, I was relegated to the knowledge that I would run into numerous voids, and they would be encountered from foot to head. Strike 3.

Flavor : ★½☆☆☆ (1.25)
At least Montecristo tried to hit the mark with their taste profile. Thing is, I had to fight construction issues so severe that I really did not have a chance to relax and enjoy the taste. So much time trying to correct flaws and no time to actually pull a good draw left me absolutely underwhelmed. Yawn…

Enough said.

Value : ☆☆☆☆☆
At approximately $60US, this smoke was NOT worth the money paid. It is just not worth the risk, not even close. I have worked very hard for what financial resources I have managed to save over the years, and can afford to take risk - BUT - this offering carries the name Montecristo, and the average working stiff would leave the experience feeling ripped off. Thing is, they would be DEAD ON with their disappointment. Could you just imagine treating close friends to this Montecristo, and have them leave with not only a bitter taste in their mouth, but also a bad perception that this is how “good” is supposed to be?? Montecristo would have served themselves well if they had this line pulled, and used the ground up tobacco stock as cat litter. Many have entertained the notion that this IS what they did with the tobacco. They might just have a point.

Overall Rating : ★☆☆☆☆
Obviously perceptions are subjective, and what I think should only be used as an educational tool. Montecristo should be ashamed to have let this product stay on the market without recalling it. I feel that in the end, a business decision was made and on the market it stays.

Shame on you, Montecristo. Shame.
Sorry, my fellow cigar enthusiast, but you should avoid this one like the plague.

Update (Jan 31 2016): photos of the box, requested by commenters.

Montecristo Sublime

Montecristo Sublime

Montecristo Sublime

Montecristo Sublime

Montecristo Sublime

You might be interested in these articles too:

20 Comments on “Montecristo Sublime (2008 Edicion Limitada)”

  1. I haven’t smoked this cigar in years but I remember that I really enjoyed it not long after it came out. I actually ran out of them quite fast! :)

    Seems like they didn’t age well.

  2. Where did you buy the cigars from? Are you in the US,CA,EU? Just wondering since I have One in the humidor but all other reviews I see have been quite the opposite of yours. I’m not judging just wondering if you got a authentic 08/MC/SU. I’ll smoke mine in the next few weeks and let you know. Thanks for the review!

  3. This is a ridiculous review, if only to incite some negative attention. 1 star for this cigar? You must be joking. I have smoked several recently and have several boxes (no I didn’t pay ‘premium’ prices, about USD30 per stick)

    Your review does not seem very objective, and almost biased to a point where you have something against this cigar. Might I even dare to say you smoked a fake!

    1 star? or 6 stars? Nah, but this is a decent cigar, certainly not the crap you say it is. Ah well, to each his own.

  4. http://www.cigarinspector.com/montecristo/montecristo-sublime-2008-limited-edition

    Remarkable, as in this review its marked as candidate cigar of the year, perhaps you smoked a fake

  5. El Humo De Los Dioses says:

    Well Chuckie…If you had bothered to read the review completely, you would have seen that I am an ardent fan of Montecristos. Ah well, reading comprehension.

    I did this review because not 1 cigar was a failure in this box of 10, ALL OF THEM WERE. ALL….OF…THEM.. Whether they gopher-hole burned (as in review), canoe burned or were so horrible in the construction flaws, every last smoke was not able to be enjoyed to any degree. These were AGED, not last year’s release.

    I tend to agree with “Inspector” above, my thought is they didnt survive the aging process.

    I guess the stellar review I just did for the MC Gran Reserva ( in process of being published) must be equally biased in your mind. I call them like I see them. I have no sacred cows. If it’s a cigar house I love and the product is crap… I’m going to say it’s crap.

    They weren’t fakes, which makes it all that much worse. I pissed away $600US for a box of 10 aged cigars and got scarcely1.5 cigars worth of enjoyment from them. If that isn’t a 1 of 10… I don’t know what is.

  6. Interesting. I have smoked various Cubano Montes over the years and have never experienced anything like you did in your review. My experience parallels the others who have commented. I’m not saying you didn’t get a bad box, I’m just glad I’ve had my own opportunities to try various Montes and have just the opposite results prior to reading the review. Otherwise I might never have tried any.

  7. I for one appreciate a reviewer who gives an honest review, be it bad or good. I read CA and its a love fest for every cigar ever made. I’m not even sure why they have ratings 70-79 or below 70 cause I’ve never seen a cigar get less than an 80. Those reviewers smoke a hell of a lot more cigars than I do and I probably hit a below 70 rating every 2 out of 10 new sticks I try.

  8. Wow are you going to take heat for this review. With that said, I appreciate an honest assessment of any cigar in its current aging process. Personally, I have 4 boxes of Sublimes and have NEVER enjoyed one in hopes of saving them for my years to come. This review, if nothing else, is one reason to finally light one up for my own assessment. I hope (actually pray) you had an isolated bad box.

  9. El Humo De Los Dioses says:

    Everyone’s feedback deserves a response, so let me take the time to address every ones’ questions.

    Morgan—I am in the US. There were 3 characters of the code that didn’t get published. The entire code was 6EA Nov08. I wouldn’t go out and consume the only one you have simply because of my bad experience. I have no way of proving how these cigars were kept by my tobacconist. He could have had them in his temperature controlled room, but had the box opened which would tend to dry them out and expose them to other influences. He could have gotten them from one of his other stores that may not have stored them with the care he does. Who knows?? I tried to review the product as if I were just someone off the street that came into the store and laid down some serious cash for what I thought would be a stellar box of smokes. If you have stored them with care, and bought them way back when they were released so you KNOW how they were aged, you probably will not have a problem.

    John H.— Montecristos have held a somewhat permanent place in my humidor for as long as I can remember. I LOVE Montecristos for their consistent taste profiles and this was the first one I can remember that not only did the first stick have a problem, but ALL of them did. My experiences have paralleled yours, which saddened me so much with this one. I submitted this review right after Thanksgiving, and thought long and hard before doing so. Give a Romeo Y Julietas an off review, and some will react with “Meh”. Give a Monte the same review, and you might as well have committed heresy.

    Marcus— I’ll say to you what I said to Morgan. If you’ve taken care of these boxes personally, you’ll know when you try one. I SINCERELY hope that your efforts in aging those 4 boxes resulted in diametrically opposite results than I had. I REALLY do. I hated having to poo-poo these smokes, knowing full well I would catch hell for it, but I would rather speak my mind and be proven wrong, than keep my mouth shut and find that others suffered the same fate as I. The former would let me sleep well at night, the latter would not.

  10. Great review…and that’s what makes a great ‘reviewer’…HONESTY! I’ve smoked plenty of Cuban EL’s over the years and ran into a few “1’s”, it happens, people think Cuban cigars are perfect, not even close. I would have really enjoyed seeing some pictures of the “carnage” because its hard for us “Habanophiles”to believe that such a premium product would get such improper care when rolled, pictures would have made it more believable…maybe they were stored improperly? Anyways, thanks for your honesty and next time maybe a little dry boxing will help ;)

  11. Agree with Inspector; my experiences with the Monte Sublime have been terrific, but it has been a few years since I smoked one (been saving the few I have left). Honestly, if I could find more boxes at a reasonable price, I would go deep.

    Perhaps you should trade for a single from someone who feels they have an excellent box?

    That said, I have no doubt that your experiences have been horrible. What a shame. Thank you for your intriguing review!

  12. It’s rather amazing that a number of people here think this is an ‘HONEST’ review because it’s a 1 star rated. LOL. Yes, reviews are subjective, yes not all ELs are good. Many in fact are crap/shit, and Habanos is out to make all those extra bucks by marketing fancy names, labels and whatnots.

    But with the level of sarcasm in your review, seeks to discredit this cigar in every way possible, just doesn’t make your review very readable or believable. I’m surprised CI would publish these kinds of ‘honest’ reviews.

    (of course everyone feels upset and angry getting cheated in one way or another, 600$ for a box of dogpile, I would be upset too)

  13. If my commehts have been abrasive, I apologize. That being said, I want to know why you got so angry about this stick.

    In the interest of science, would you be willing to share the serial number and/or the box code? At least the box codes if your serial numbers have been sheared off (like grey market resellers might have done).

    If your box code was ‘6EA Nov08’ I find it unusual to see a ‘6EA’ but I wish to clarify this further. Thanks

  14. El Humo De Los Dioses says:

    Chuck– I will do you one better. I can supply you close up digital photos of not only the box, but also the tax stamps and any other identifying characteristics of the box.

    Point of privilege here– The “1” rating was devised by adding all the scores and dividing by the number of judgement criteria. In this case, the review gleaned a total of 5.5 stars divided by 5 criteria, giving a total rating of approximately 1.1 stars. I rounded downwards.

    If you wish to do this back-channel, please contact “Inspector” above and my email addy can be provided. I buy all my Cubanos from 1 source, and know all about the shifty/shadys out there. Been there, done that–have a closet full of t-shirts. If this has become a source that can no longer be trusted, I surely need to know.

    What really set me off was the abundance of “voids ” in the smokes. Upon opening the box, there was no tell-tale signs of beetle infestation, as all the sticks were visually pristine, including the heads. No signs of burrowing, nothing. Only when you lit up did you come across voids, ESPECIALLY if the stick canoe-burned ( IE burned 1-2 inches down one side whilst the other remained pristine, which causes the lit end of the cigar to bow to one side like the shape of the front of a canoe). You’d see a pellet sized rounded “head” to the void, followed by what could be described as a “root”.

    Gopher hole burning just added frosting to the cupcake. You light up, and all the sudden you feel a burning sensation between your fingers and see the ember of the light trying to poke out the side of the cigar not very far from the ring. That’s a whole cigar that gets wasted, as there is no way in hell you can correct it without sucking the crap out of the light, thus making the smoke “hot” and bitter.

    Imagine the grade school science projects your teacher had you do in germinating bean sprouts. When they first burst forth, you saw a rounded head, with a long “root’ pointing towards the water source of your cup. Juxtapose that to this cigar, but miniaturize the size and you’ll now know what I would run across an average of 4-6 times PER CIGAR.

  15. El Humo De Los Dioses says:

    Check that… 5.5 total stars and 4 criteria… making it 1.375 stars.

  16. sorry to hear that you did not enjoy this cigar. my experience, right from the release in Havana, has always been extremely positive. If those criticising the review have any reasonable degree of experience with Cuban cigars then surely they will be aware that there is often, unfortunately, significant variation. my suggestion to the reviewer would be that you certainly should not give up on this smoke. a good one will make the effort very rewarding. if you can, try and source one from a different box, which has been well stored.
    my main problem with the review is that dom perignon never made a 1951.

  17. The post has been updated with pictures of the box, supplied by El Humo de Los Dioses.

  18. Not doubting your cigars nor your source, just adding fodder for the conversation. Your photos look good to me.

    My box has a EMA – Sep ’08 code and a seal id of IS803908. My cigars are fantastic.

  19. Michael Andolini says:

    To write the complete truth – have had a couple of these recently & they are wonderfull smokes indeed.

    Not on the very top of my list, but would make top 10 or even top 8 right behind: Boli Libertadores (same vitola btw, cheaper, yet better), Trini Vigía (new kid on the block yet top notch even from the box … trying to age them but not easy!), Boli RCs & Boli BFs, Trini Reyes … & Monte Esp. n. 2 … so … hmm, yes, top 8, easy!

  20. Bespoke Dandy says:

    Either this was a fake or sold and/or stored in terrible conditions. Your description defies belief as every cigar that I’ve smoked (now more than 100) from multiple sources has never been less than a 95/100. The only other conceivable possibility is that your palate is/was damaged.

Leave your mini review or comment...

Free cigars, fresh content

Join our 6,000+ subscribers and get access to exclusive cigar giveaways and all of our best articles!