Upmann or Monte Half Corona?

[HShep]

I'm realizing two things-

1-  I like the corona size ring gauge.  A lot.  

2-  I like short smokes, especially on my commute to work.

I'm keeping an eye open for a half corona on the 24:24 and I'm wondering what brand I should buy.  I like creamier/nuttier cigars in the morning when I'd smoke something like this.
This sounds more like the Upmann than the Monte, but I figured the brain trust would have a better idea.

What do y'all think?

[Cubadust]

I'm a really big fan of the Upmann, it’s my go to cigar when I don't have enough time, or when the weather is against me. No that big on Monte so I can't comment on those. You can get both cream and nut in the Upmann and if you find the right box it's a damn tasty bunch of cigars. The TOS code from 16 have all been great this far.  

 

 

[irratebass]

Upmann all the way

*I'm very good looking, and great with rice.*

[backbone]

They are both good, but I prefer the Monte profile. 

I just wish they were priced the same.

The HUpmann tins are really handy!

[garbandz]

Upmann by a mile.

 

my favorite marca.

 

[prodigy]

My experience with Upman is that you are 90% likely to have a plugged smoke. I returned a box that was almost all plugged. Bought some 5 pack tins, same problem. Not sure if I am just really unlucky, or if it's a common problem. The ones that have been good, are very good, but I'm not buying anymore unless they are psp.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[Smallclub]

7 minutes ago, prodigy said:

My experience with Upman is that you are 90% likely to have a plugged smoke.
 

I am about to finish my 7th or 8th box of HUHC, and so far I have encountered ONE (1) plugged unsmokable cigar. Tight draws were not rare but were always acceptable.

Actually I have a problem with underfilled cigars that I've found in the most recent boxes — they burn too fast, too hot, and taste like cheap cigars…

[prodigy]

I am about to finish my 7th or 8th box of HUHC, and so far I have encountered ONE (1) plugged unsmokable cigar. Tight draws were not rare but were always acceptable.
Actually I have a problem with underfilled cigars that I've found in the most recent boxes — they burn too fast, too hot, and taste like cheap cigars…

Maybe I'll give them another shot. I had my first ever underfilled cigar a week ago, and it was an huhc.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[mkz]

Sounds like you need Upmanns.

Go for the tins if possible. So damn handy packaging!

[JZBdano]

I've been through a few boxes of HUHC with 1-3 years on them.  A couple years makes a big difference to me with these, or more likely it could be that the tobacco they were rolling in 2014 was better than what they had to work with in 2016.  I can't recall a plugged one but I have heard of it happening, but I wouldn't say it's common.   I haven't tried the MMC because I am satisfied with the HUHC and I don't see a reason to pay more to try the MMC.

[Phillys]

Upmann!!!

Great cigars when short on time.

 

[KnightsAnole]

I’m a big morning cigar guy and the HUHC is a staple pairing with my morning coffee. Like bacon with eggs.

[PaulP]

Upmann

 

[JC67]

Definitely Upmann

[grizzlee]

Upmann without a doubt. Recently acquired a box in prep for some shorter winter smokes and looks like I'll have to have another to make it through winter as it is now my go to quick smoke.

[RazorbackFan]

HUHC all the way. Can be had for >$100 for a box of 25 if found on sale. I’ve found no vice that gives me more bang for my four bucks than a regular production HUHC. 

[Smallclub]

6 hours ago, JZBdano said:

 or more likely it could be that the tobacco they were rolling in 2014 was better than what they had to work with in 2016. 

That's what I believe. My boxes from 2011 to 2014 were much better than the recent ones…

[garbandz]

my experience with '15 and '16 cigars is the same, the '13s and '14s are much better made, and are more flavorful.

I am nearly 50/50 good /bad among the '15 and '16 boxes I have tried and 5ers I have bought.

Glad I went wild buying '14s for the last two years..........

 

Concerning Upmanns, I have no memory of bad sticks among my Upmann boxes apart from one single HUHC that was underfilled,and a Connie 1 that was a bit tight.

[NSXCIGAR]

I think the HUHC has the edge even though the MCMC is very good. 

[gweilgi]

What everybody else said: Upmann every time.  They have the flavour, and I have never had any quality issues beyond the normal Cuban standard.

I will admit to keeping some Monte handy, but not for smoking myself: I find them ideal to gift to occasional smokers and newbies. 

[PapaDisco]

Friends don't let friends smoke halfies . . . just sayin'  

 

[busdriver]

On Friday, October 27, 2017 at 8:06 AM, HShep said:

 I like creamier/nuttier cigars 

You pretty much nailed Upmann right there. The HUHC pack a punch but are still upmann at the core.  I have not had any construction issues.  I want to love the Montes, but the box I have is overwhelming and they haven't settled down or mellowed out in the last year at all.  My sampling of the montes indicates that they are little powerhouses and while the huhc pack a punch they are much more enjoyable.

[canadianbeaver]

You do not have to wait for the 24:24. The cigars on the web store here are the same. Honestly.

All are inspected and you can see if they are in stock or not.

CB

[Romka]

+1 for HUHC

[WhiteMamba]

Upmann is my favorite like most here but I am also a fan of the Montie offering for the sake of diversity. As a side note I have found that a Churchill tube will easily fit two half coronas I like to keep one of each handy depending on the mood. also you can buy one tin of HUHC and just refill it from your box. I'm a cheep skate and the tins are a little more expensive.