Cigar Specifications
Brand / Line:
La Gloria Cubana (D.R.)
Cigar Name:
Torpedo No. 1
Shape:
Torpedo
Country of Origin:
Dominican Republic
Size:
54 x 6.5
Wrapper:
Ecuador
Status:
Active
0 Recent Reviews
None yetNo recent reviews yet — be the first!
18 Archival Reviews
Show ↓📜 Archival Review
June 24, 2008
"My favorite cigar"
I'm still looking for a better cigar: Silky wrapper, even burn, smells great even before you light it.
📜 Archival Review
September 9, 2007
"Flavorful bargain"
Tough to beat for a bargain. Great flavor, and after slightly tough light evens out nicely. Flaky ash is my only gripe.
📜 Archival Review
June 18, 2006
"Mas Mejor de El Figurado!!!"
Wow! I have gone through dozens of boxes of nearly every LGC and this was a perfect 10 tonight!!!! Medium/full body with lots of white smoke and a 21/2 inch ash. I normally go for the maduro in the LGC DR line, pulled out this one. I savored every inch of this smoke. Sweet, woodsy, and full of character. The draw was perfect. This same cigar cigar could have knocked out all the $20$30 sticks out there. Go get yourself some!
📜 Archival Review
November 12, 2004
"Hmm"
The sister to the Maduro this cigar does not have the same complexity or flavor of the Maduro. It is a milder smoke without the cocoa and spice flavors of the Maduro. This smoke burns consistantly throughout and is enjoyable but does not stand up against richer cigars. But then this is a personal taste.
📜 Archival Review
November 9, 2004
"awesome"
Like Tony say's they're GRRRrrrrrreat!
📜 Archival Review
May 6, 2004
"Consistently great cigar"
One of the best in my book. Same full-flavored taste as most Glorias, but smoother and a little sweeter. Burns excellently for a torpedo and usually has a nice, grayish-white ash. And you can't get a better torpedo for the $6.00-8.00 that these usually go for.
📜 Archival Review
April 27, 2004
"Excellent full strength cigar!"
I was looking for a domestic and less pricey substitute for my cuban Monty #2's and decided to try one of these. Construction and appearance was first rate; it felt tight but once cut the draw was perfect. FULL Flavor in spades. Cool smoke, great spicy flavor, very satisfying. Had the strength of 2 cuban montes, and some of the same indescribable flavors as well! Your nicotine receptors will be very happy. Definitely a "sit-down" cigar. At half the cost of a cuban Monte #2, I'm adding this to my humidor stable. Highly reccommended!
📜 Archival Review
April 5, 2004
"good smoke"
Good solid cigar. Better than average La Gloria with smooth rich tosty flavor. Good draw and ok burn.
📜 Archival Review
June 17, 2003
"my favorite"
First, I will say that I love torpedo cigars. This one was the best experience I have ever had. Exceptional flavor and one of the most beautifully constructed cigars I have ever had.
📜 Archival Review
June 14, 2002
"Torpedo"
A little milder than the Churchill, and not as savory, but stands up to a lover of fuller bodied sticks. Slightly sweet, burnt caramel and just enough spice. A downright pleasurable smoke. Always draws nice.
📜 Archival Review
April 7, 2000
I think this cigar (as with most of it's brothers and sisters) when aged properly are among the elite smokes in the world.
📜 Archival Review
August 20, 1999
A normally reliable, but unspectacular, smoke. Bitter-tasting smokes happen more often than they should from this well-respected cigar maker.
📜 Archival Review
April 29, 1999
I've likened smoking a La Gloria Cubana to getting hit in the chest with a bag of wet cement. I find them overpoweringly strong, with little, if anything, else to recommend them. Smoking this beast was no different. The smoke was acrid, the flavor was
📜 Archival Review
March 29, 1999
Solid as a rock, a bit spicy for my taste.
📜 Archival Review
October 22, 1998
good tasting cigar, nice
body, good after taste. have
smoke 2 now and both
developed runners
body, good after taste. have
smoke 2 now and both
developed runners
📜 Archival Review
September 23, 1998
This is a 3 year old Torpedo that I have been keeping an eye on. These were purchased in Florida. Not many left! I would say they need to be aged at least 1 year for the real beauty and strength of this cigar to surface.
📜 Archival Review
September 21, 1998
This didn't fit the bill tonight. Stored for over a tear, and still a touch harsh. They just haven't been the same since they started making them in the D.C.
📜 Archival Review
February 6, 1998
Like getting hit in the chest with a very large bag of wet cement. Overpoweringly full-bodied, with not much else to commend about it. Unimpressive flavor, earthy aftertaste (like having gargled with topsoil). The aroma of the smoke was pretty good. I
Add Your Review
Share your experience with this cigar. All reviews are moderated before appearing on the site.