Padilla 1932 and Ron Zacapa

wolfandwhisky · 05-23-2010, 09:24 AM

Not to trample on the thread, here is a link to a handful of prior Padilla 1932 reviews:
http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932
http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932
http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932
http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932
http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932
http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932

On to the post:

It was a nice, cool, overcast, somewhat humid evening in southern California.

Ron Zacapa Rum
Nose: Vanilla, creme, slight hint of ripe bananas, and a bit of orange zest. Almost like a plate of bananas foster, topped with a basic orange syrup.

Palate: The nose continues almost lock-step into the palate. The promise of complexity found in the rather strong nose is delivered upon, with each note playing a role. There is a very mild bittersweet note, bringing to mind a tart peach syrup, that leaves off for the finish.

Finish: The fruit dominates the finish, using the bittersweet background as a base. The cream and vanilla continue as well, but ultimately fade giving way to a medium-length, warm finish that wraps up with mild hints of caramel.

Padilla 1932
Construction: The dark corojo wrapper masks the appearance of a couple of sizable veins. There aren’t any soft spots, and the stick seems pretty even. It isn’t overly tight, and doesn’t carry a lot of weight.

Immediately upon lighting, there is a really large volume of white smoke. The volume is actually a bit surprising, enabling an almost unrealistically long exhale. The draw is effortless, likely a reflection of the sufficiently solid but not overly tight packing.

The burn is sufficiently straight, with no touch up required.

Initial Flavors: Without any advance notice of what to expect, the complexity of this cigar was a bit surprising. It took at least a good inch to start to tease out the various flavors. Notably, the initial profile is underpinned with an almond, almost hazelnut, flavor. There is a fair amount of creme, and certainly a rich leather note.

The pepper that would usually be picked up as a dominant note from a Nicauraguan puro, especially from a Pepin cigar, isn’t overly strong, and actually provides just enough of a hint to keep the cigar balanced.

While the flavors are moderately pronounced, the body isn’t initially strong, coming in more as a medium smoke.

Continuing Flavors: As the half way point comes and goes, those traditional Pepin Nicarauguan notes come more into view. Pepper, cedar, and a faint mocha really take over. The complexity somewhat fades in favor of this “new” combination. To be fair, the complexity doesn’t entirely regress, with a continued ribbon of cream lingering behind the more prominant flavors.

Still, while the flavors remained relatively pronounced, the body didn’t pick up to a point where it would be considered a strong cigar.

With Rum: May play well with others! Something about the cream notes in the cigar really enables the vanilla and fruit in the Zacapa to pop! The flavor becomes so bold it is almost a bit jolting, or at the least unexpected. The rum also seems to become a bit more syrupy, really bringing into focus a light brown sugar note.

The cigar benefits in the traditional Pepin style with a pick up in pepper when combined with the Zacapa. The cedar note also picks up in strength, and really enables the Padilla to keep its end up.

The key with this paring revolves around the cream influence in both the Zacapa and the Padilla. With that common ground, the alternate attributes of either really have a background to stand out against, providing almost a heuristic for potential pairings.

Ron Zacapa
Regret the Purchase: No, besides there were limited options in the hotel bar.
Buy Again: Under the circumstances, yes.
Buy a Bottle: Probably not – I enjoy other rums I’ve had a bit more.

Padilla 1932
Regret the Purchase: No, generous contest winnings from a BOTL
Buy Again: Possibly, would consider.
Buy a Box: Probably not – maybe a 5 pack.

05-23-2010, 09:24 AM	#1
wolfandwhisky Resident Whisky Addict Join Date: Mar 2010 First Name: Matt Location: Arizona Posts: 521 Trading: (4)	Padilla 1932 and Ron Zacapa Not to trample on the thread, here is a link to a handful of prior Padilla 1932 reviews: http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932 http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932 http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932 http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932 http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932 http://www.cigarasylum.com/vb/showth...t=padilla+1932 On to the post: It was a nice, cool, overcast, somewhat humid evening in southern California. Ron Zacapa Rum Nose: Vanilla, creme, slight hint of ripe bananas, and a bit of orange zest. Almost like a plate of bananas foster, topped with a basic orange syrup. Palate: The nose continues almost lock-step into the palate. The promise of complexity found in the rather strong nose is delivered upon, with each note playing a role. There is a very mild bittersweet note, bringing to mind a tart peach syrup, that leaves off for the finish. Finish: The fruit dominates the finish, using the bittersweet background as a base. The cream and vanilla continue as well, but ultimately fade giving way to a medium-length, warm finish that wraps up with mild hints of caramel. Padilla 1932 Construction: The dark corojo wrapper masks the appearance of a couple of sizable veins. There aren’t any soft spots, and the stick seems pretty even. It isn’t overly tight, and doesn’t carry a lot of weight. Immediately upon lighting, there is a really large volume of white smoke. The volume is actually a bit surprising, enabling an almost unrealistically long exhale. The draw is effortless, likely a reflection of the sufficiently solid but not overly tight packing. The burn is sufficiently straight, with no touch up required. Initial Flavors: Without any advance notice of what to expect, the complexity of this cigar was a bit surprising. It took at least a good inch to start to tease out the various flavors. Notably, the initial profile is underpinned with an almond, almost hazelnut, flavor. There is a fair amount of creme, and certainly a rich leather note. The pepper that would usually be picked up as a dominant note from a Nicauraguan puro, especially from a Pepin cigar, isn’t overly strong, and actually provides just enough of a hint to keep the cigar balanced. While the flavors are moderately pronounced, the body isn’t initially strong, coming in more as a medium smoke. Continuing Flavors: As the half way point comes and goes, those traditional Pepin Nicarauguan notes come more into view. Pepper, cedar, and a faint mocha really take over. The complexity somewhat fades in favor of this “new” combination. To be fair, the complexity doesn’t entirely regress, with a continued ribbon of cream lingering behind the more prominant flavors. Still, while the flavors remained relatively pronounced, the body didn’t pick up to a point where it would be considered a strong cigar. With Rum: May play well with others! Something about the cream notes in the cigar really enables the vanilla and fruit in the Zacapa to pop! The flavor becomes so bold it is almost a bit jolting, or at the least unexpected. The rum also seems to become a bit more syrupy, really bringing into focus a light brown sugar note. The cigar benefits in the traditional Pepin style with a pick up in pepper when combined with the Zacapa. The cedar note also picks up in strength, and really enables the Padilla to keep its end up. The key with this paring revolves around the cream influence in both the Zacapa and the Padilla. With that common ground, the alternate attributes of either really have a background to stand out against, providing almost a heuristic for potential pairings. Ron Zacapa Regret the Purchase: No, besides there were limited options in the hotel bar. Buy Again: Under the circumstances, yes. Buy a Bottle: Probably not – I enjoy other rums I’ve had a bit more. Padilla 1932 Regret the Purchase: No, generous contest winnings from a BOTL Buy Again: Possibly, would consider. Buy a Box: Probably not – maybe a 5 pack.