Cigar Weekly

The Por Larrañaga is an historic line of cigars that were first produced in Cuba in 1834.  In Kipling's famous poem "The Betrothed," he writes of the "...peace in a Larrañaga."  The H2000 version of the Por Larrañaga cigars uses a blend of Dominican, Brazilian and Nicaraguan tobacco for filler.  The binder is Cubanito.  The wrapper is Dominican grown Habana 2000.

Consolidated's Tabacalera de Garcia factory in La Romana, Dominican Republic manufactures the Por Larrañaga.

The Por Larrañaga H2000 cigars come in seven sizes:

Pre-Smoke Comments

Barton Buettner (barton): This was a tan-brown, toro sized cigar. The natural wrapper looked pretty good, with a fair amount of veining and a light sheen of oil. The cap was well made and smooth. It appeared almost like a Cuban triple-cap but a little rougher. It was quite firm to the touch with no soft spots. The pre-light aroma was good. If I had to guess on origin, I would say Honduran. The draw was firm but not too tight. The burn was roughly even, requiring just a couple of adjustments.

Bob Willrett (bobwill): A reddish brown wrapper with a nice sheen. Some light veins, nice smooth cap, and a good firm bunch on both samples. Just a tad bumpy, but all in all, a very nice looking cigar.

Charlie Brown (bigdaddy): Cigar #132 was a Toro sized cigar with a medium brown somewhat veiny wrapper. I was a little rustic looking but the cap seemed to be smooth and well done. It had a slight ammonia pre-light aroma. It had a medium-firm feel. The pre-light draw was perfect.

Daniel Burk (BigFatty): Very nice construction. Smooth, silky milk chocolately wrapper with an autumn-leafy color. It did not unravel or tear after cutting the cap, but it was a little loosely bunched.

Douglas F. Richards Jr (dfrjr30): cigar #132 was a toro size. the appearance of this cigar look well constructed. the cigar was brown in color and quite bumpy.

Glen R. Stewart (gstewart): The cigar measured 52 X 5 3/4. Both had an uneven roll, one was much worse than the other. Both had a bulge in the middle, one was vary noticeable. The one with the larger bulge also had a tight squeeze by the cap to bring it back to the correct ring gauge. The wrapper was dark brown and end caps had a square look to them rather than a round over. The texture was a little course and the cigar was firm.

Mark Kilinski (markk): Wow - these are some fat smokes! I don't smoke many 50 ring cigars so I went to my neighbor's house to look for comparison sample. What I found was that these sticks make the LGC Wavell and the Chateau Fuente look like "girlie-man" cigars. Gorgeous red-brown wrappers. Smooth, finely veined, silky, and elastic looking. They'd look at home on a top-of-the-line Havana. Caps were finely finished. No soft or hard spots. A righteous looking stick that appeared to be very well made.

Smoke Comments

Barton Buettner (barton): I was a little disappointed with the flavor on this cigar. It started off quite mild with some hints of nuttiness and floral flavors. It continued this way through the first half of the cigar. I kept hoping the flavor would come on in the second half of this smoke. But as I got in to the second half the strength increased to over power the slight flavors that this cigar did have. As I neared the end the flavor became some what bitter and acrid.

Bob Willrett (bobwill): Flavor and strength kicked into full swing before I could put my torch down. I would call it a medium to full bodied cigar with a nice earthy flavor that grew and developed as we went along. About halfway through, both samples developed some minor burn problems, but nothing to serious. The more I smoked this stick the more I liked it. Rich and earthy is the best way I can describe it.

Charlie Brown (bigdaddy): Upon lighting the draw was absolutely perfect for me. It produced large quantities of smoke. The flavor was weak from the start and didn't change much throughout. There was a slight bitterness from the start and it increased greatly towards the last third of the cigar. It also had a somewhat metallic flavor. The burn was pretty even the entire length. It also had a medium firm light gray ash.

Daniel Burk (BigFatty): It was very hard to distinguish what type of wrapper this cigar had. There were no high-points or distinctive flavors to this cigar. It had a mild taste with slight vegetal, earthy flavor hints. It gave off lots of smoke and the ash was almost 2 inches long at one time, and the burn was pretty good.

Douglas F. Richards Jr (dfrjr30): while smoking this cigar, the ash did stay on for about one inch. about 1/3 of the way down the wrapper did start to unravel. it was also very hard to get any kind of flavor from this cigar. what little flavor it did produce was on the earthy flavor.

Glen R. Stewart (gstewart): The cigar gave plenty of smoke on the pallet but was one-dimensional. It had the taste of wood and dry leather for the first 3/4 of the cigar. After that it started to go bitter and stayed that way.

Mark Kilinski (markk): The head clipped off nicely and a test draw was typical of a robusto. Both samples burned beautifully; firm ash; light gray/white; nice flat coal. There was more than enough smoke-per-toke. Lighting up where things started going astray. The aroma was fleeting - almost non-existent. The flavor was extremely mild and airy. The finish, like the aroma, was barely there. I found myself puffing madly, trying to eek out some flavor - but it never happened.

Summary Comments

Barton Buettner (barton): My overall impression of this cigar was that it was a fairly well made, probably Honduran cigar. It reminded me of a Hoyo de Monterrey, only milder. The construction was good, but the flavor was very under whelming. I ask myself when evaluating a cigar, "Would you buy a box of them?". Umm, uh, no. I don't think that I could even recommend this to someone who prefers mild cigars, as I could think of a quite a few mild smokes I would prefer over this one.

Bob Willrett (bobwill): Going into this review I was bound and determined to find some reason(s) not to like this cigar. Other than the minor burn problem, I couldn't. This is a flavor packed treat that I would recommend to my best herfing buddies. If you like earthy, medium to full strength smokes, then give these a try. I know a box or two of these will find a way into my humidor. I just hope they fall into my price range.

Charlie Brown (bigdaddy): Overall this was a much milder smoke than I am normally used to, however the mildness wasn't what made me dislike this smoke it was the lack of flavor. The construction wasn't bad at all and it wasn't a really unpleasant smoke, it was just lackluster with no redeeming flavor qualities.

Daniel Burk (BigFatty): This was a fairly elegantly constructed cigar, but was a little soft or loosely wrapped. It never revealed its true identity and was fairly mild and unobtrusive. I think this would be a good smoke for a beginning cigar smoker. Nice texture and great ash. A little better than "ho-hum" overall.

Douglas F. Richards Jr (dfrjr30): the cigar did not produce any harsh or bitter taste, which did make it somewhat pleasant. overall I would smoke this cigar if it was gifted, but I don't think I would go out of my way to buy this cigar.

Glen R. Stewart (gstewart): I thought this cigar ended short and wasn't really to my liking. If it didn't get so bitter at the end I might have considered trying it again.

Mark Kilinski (markk): Overall, I'd say this is a very well made smoke that, unfortunately, suffers from a serious lack of flavor. What little flavor there was, had a leafy/mossy background that tasted a little "off" to me. I might recommend these to beginners or occasional smokers if they didn't cost too much.

Scores

Review Results
Final Score: 30.2 out of 50

3 1/2 Stars -- Above Average