Montecristo No.1 Vs Montecristo No.3

[JasnRach]

Hi All,

What is your opinion on the Montecristo No.1 and the No.3?

Additionally, if you had the chance to purchase just one, No.1 or No.3, which one would you choose and why?

[reliefdvm]

I was pleasantly surprised how much I liked the Monty 3. Unfortunately I have learned Not to buy any Monty blind. So I will jump on any more #3 that turn up on the 24 picks. I can't speak to the #1, but if they show up on the 24 I will grab a box as well.

[avaldes]

Well in theory the 4, 3 and 1 share the same ring gage, they just get progressively longer. In an ideal world that would mean that they taste the same and you just get more of each. But these are produced in very large numbers so they suffer from construction and consistency issues.

In other brands, the Lonsdale (#1) is more of a premium cigar as compared to the PC (#4). In my opinion because it is a longer cigar and requires larger and better quality raw ingredients. They also make fewer lonsdales compared to PC's or even coronas. So to me the #1's are a bit more consistent. But again, that is just my opinion to back up my observations.

PS- I don't smoke a lot of the "other" sizes of Montecristos. When I get a craving it is for M2's and A's. I smoke about 10 boxes of M2's per year but only pick up the other sizes every few years when I get a wild hare. So take my observations with a grain of salt.

[JohnS]

Yes, both these cigars share a ring gauge of 42/64ths of an inch, the same as the highly popular Montecristo No.4. Interestingly, their vitolas have become rare. The Montecristo No.1 is a cervantes at 165mm in length, in current regular production only the Romeo y Julieta Cedros de Luxe No.1 is similar whereas the Montecristo No.3 is a coronas at 142 mm in length, in current regular production only the Romeo y Julieta Cedros de Luxe No. 2 and Bolivar Tubo No. 1 is similar.

My brother-in-law purchased a box of Montecristo No.1's duty-free whilst in India for a friend's wedding a few years ago. I'm of the firm opinion he had no real idea what he was purchasing, other than the marca was Montecristo so it was okay. I've had some beautiful, outstanding creamy smokes out of this box, while others have been somewhat average (but we've all experienced this haven't we?). I've not seen the Montecristo No.1 offered on a 24:24 sale (or similar) in 2015.

The Montecristo No.3, on the other hand, was available on a 24:24 sale recently. As these aren't as popular sales-wise as the iconic Montecristo No.2 and No. 4, they can get overlooked. This means that sometimes boxes of No.3's can be outstanding, as Rob recently mentioned during the 24:24 sale in May 2015 when the No.3 was offered. Our own CaptainQuintero wrote something similar in his article on 'Overlooked Gems' for the June UK Cigar Scene Magazine on page.29:

http://www.joomag.com/magazine/uk-cigar-scene-magazine-june-issue-6/0725295001431346956?short

[RijkdeGooier]

Like both MC 3 and 1. Both are similar in taste profile to me.

@ Avaldes - 10 boxes of MC2 = 250 MC2 alone a year - wow that's a lot - roughly one each workday. How is your view on the development of the vitola over the years? I am a fan but nowhere near those numbers...

[Boosted]

I vote Monte 1 just because it was the first cuban cigar I had ever smoked, and it was love at first light!

Monte 1 and 3 can be overlooked. This last trip to the warehouse Rob found me a HQ Monte 1 from ROA JUN 11.

[avaldes]

What exactly do you mean by development? Do you mean has the flavor changed?

Personally I think they have been pretty consistently good since 2009, if you like the "current" flavor and I do. By that I mean, M2's to me have gone through a few flavor phases.

- Pre 96, old school Cuban tobacco flavors, much more earthy in general but with a "fine" flavor. Hard to describe well.

- 97-98, mild in general, this is when I remember the term "Monte Twang" first being thrown around, which I hate.

- 99-2000, anorexic in terms of strength. Partagas factory M2's tasted completely different than Upmann factory M2's.

- 2001-2002, stronger but had a funky kind of flavor and along with other Habanos had a very generic flavor. A lot of them had this wrapper that was kind of "striped" and not of uniform color.

- 2003-2008, much more distinct M2 flavors but still milder in general

- 2009-present, finally being made with more strength. More ligero across the board.

Again, this is just my personal experience, others may disagree. Before 96 I was in college and wasn't smoking. I really haven't sampled enough pre-95 M2's to speak intelligently. But every cigar I have smoked with a Cubatobacco stamp on the bottom of the box was off the hook good

This is kind of a microcosm of Habanos in general as I think the strains of tobacco changed at somewhat similar intervals.

[CaptainQuintero]

I love the #3, never had a great number of the #1 to compare them against.

Each of the cigars 1-5 have different blends though, to me the 1 is more subtle, the 5 a little tangy puncher, the 4 an unrefined mocha ride and the 3 having a little bit of each but all in balance.

I suppose the best way is to grab a couple of singles of each and do yourself a little taste test, sounds like fun too!

I really can't recommend the #3 enough though, even the fugly ones for me are usually great. Either it's a very forgiving blend or the cigar gods just shine on it

[Ryn165]

At the current time, I'd go with the No. 3. Monte 1's used to be a phenomenal smoke prior to the early 2000's; however, these were plagued with construction issues (hard draws and plugs) for years, and as such I completely gave up on them. Last time I smoked a No. 1 was circa 2004. Are recent years smokable?

[garbandz]

both are excellent,there is less pressure to produce these than the Monte 4,so perhaps they benefit from this.

I would pick the Monte 3 simply because I rarely have time for the Monte 1,although I have half a box or so in the humi.

I seldom have construction problems with either vitola..........

[garbandz]

Just finished a Monte 3 from '12..........excellent smoke,rich and very tasty.

Probably will get another box or two for the long run.The closest to these are a PSP box of Monte 4 I got from a wonderful vendor recently.

[ogus]

Excepting the Monte 4 of last year which was classic ROTT.

The 3 needed about a year rest but even then lost legs a little toward the end.

The 1 is pleasant but 2,4,5 have been the best for me (when high quality).

[sheppsea]

A Monte 3 was the first cigar I smoked whilst in Cuba, an excellent cigar

I have only ever had one No. 1 so am not really in a position to compare, but the one I did have (which had 10 years on it IIRC) was good, but not as good as the three

[luv2fly]

Always liked the M1. I love the size. That said, I will take any Monte I can get.

[JasnRach]

Thanks for all your opinions guys, best thing about here. Of course I will form my own opinion, but as of yet I have not had either, hence why I am asking all of you.

This month I think I will pick up a box of the 3's and get the 1's next month.

Cheers!

[Professor Twain]

Montecristo is my favorite marca. I've smoked a lot of Monte 1s, 3s, 4s, & 5s. Despite the widespread opinion that #4s are of mixed quality because a lot of them are produced, I have not encountered that. In my opinion, they all have identical flavor profiles of mocha/chocolate and cream. Dark wrappers, light wrappers, ugly wrappers, they're all good. All benefit from having 3-5 years of age. I also think they are all superior to the thicker ring gauge Montes, including #2s and Edmundos.

For me, it's all about my mood and circumstances and how long I have to smoke. If I've only got 45 minutes, it's a Monte 5. If I have two hours, it's a Monte 1. The 1s and 3s are more interesting in that they can develop over the course of the smoke.

If you like the Monte flavor profile I'd suggest you stock up on all of these... I buy a lot of 5s because the time frame fits my life. Since it's rare that I have the time to smoke the #1s I've done better in getting those to have real age.

Enjoy.