LP9 Voluminous Smoke Experiment

[JDog]

Introduction
A BOTL Zirotti started a thread entitled “What other sticks give off the voluminous smoke like LPs?” and can be found at:
http://www.botl.org/community/forums/showthread.php/61843-What-other-sticks-give-off-the-voluminous-smoke-like-LPs?highlight=

Within the thread, I ended up posting an interview with Steve Saka, President of Drew Estate, as a quotation, essentially cutting and pasting that interview as found on OLH. Within that interview, something struck me as being extremely interesting. Saka listed the reasons why Liga cigars give off a ton of smoke, but attributed to how the filler is bunched as the “single biggest factor.” The interview can be found at the end of this post.

What I’m Reviewing
I posted this within Domestic Cigar Review section since I want to test Saka’s statement that the bunch technique is the “single biggest factor.” Instead of commenting on a cigar’s taste profile, burn characteristics, aroma, etc, I’ll be purely reviewing its smoke output.

The hypothesis of the bunch technique being the “single biggest factor” will be tested by eliminating the other factors that Saka attributed to Liga’s smoke output, like “Oils in the wrapper,” and “mojo to wet the leaves…” “[during] fermentation in the pilon” from the wrapper and binder leaf. I am going to try to isolate the filler from the binder and wrapper and qualitatively determine how much less smoke the cigar produces by simply asking people’s opinion. Unfortunately, I could not figure out a quantitative way to measure the smoke output differences.

Review Experiments
Experiment 1 – Remove the Connecticut Broadleaf Maduro wrapper from a Liga Privada No. 9 and replace it with an Ecuadorian Connecticut. Have a BOTL smoke the Ecuador Connecticut and an untouched LP9 of the same size and ask their opinion on smoke output differences.

The goal of experiment 1 is to determine the smoke output differences when the wrapper is replaced.

Experiment 2 – Remove the Connecticut Broadleaf Maduro wrapper from a Liga Privada No. 9 and replace it with an Ecuadorian Connecticut; remove the Brazilian Mata Fina binder and replace it with a Brazilian Arapiraca binder. Have a BOTL smoke the Ecuador Connecticut and an untouched LP9 of the same size and ask their opinion on smoke output differences.

The goal of experiment 2 is to determine the smoke output differences when the wrapper and binder are replaced, isolating the filler.

Experiment Preparation Photos and Basic Explanation

For the Experiment 1 cigar, the wrapper is removed from a LP 9. A small amount of water is spayed on the leaf half of an Ecuadorian Connecticut and trimmed using a chaveta. As he is rolling the new wrapper on the bunch, you can see how he stretches the wrapper leaf slightly. I didn’t take any photos of how he prepared and affixed the cap to the cigar.

For the Experiment 2 cigar, the wrapper and binder are removed from a LP 9, which can be seen in the photograph on the left. He put the new binder on the cigar and prior to putting on the wrapper, he places the bunch in a cigar mold for about 45 minutes. The process of putting on the wrapper is similar to the Experiment 1 cigar.

I would be remiss if I didn’t thank my buddy Dirick for his work in preparing these cigars. There are a few photos comparing the Experiment cigars to their true LP9 counterpart.

Reference

Steve Saka of Drew Estates on why the LP9 smokes so profusely while lit and resting. I asked this question in another forum and he answered. It's interesting...

Saka: I been meaning to answer this, even tried to but my computer locked up and I had to get a plane...

Q: Why do Liga Privadas and Undercrowns create so much smoke and stay burning?
There are more than a few things at play that result in why these cigars burn as they do.

1: Oil in the wrappers - in the case of all current LPs we utilize the thickest, most oily wrapper possible. We actually harvest and cure with the intent of the leaf being uber-oily which results in the tremendous production delays due to fermentation time required. Even our Otopan capa on the Undercrown is very thick when compared to other SAN leaves due to its intentional late harvest, longer cure and ferment times.

2: During fermentation in the pilon we introduce even more oils as a result of using a mojo to wet the leaves from water that has been steeped in tobacco stems. For our traditional cigars we ONLY utilize black tobacco and water.

3. Very well aged fillers are all we use in the LP blends.

4. We are very careful when blending to create not only recipes that taste good and smell delish, but to utilize materials that work well together. Combustion in our opinion is a cornerstone of achieving consistent flavor, so while wrapper x with binder y and filler z might taste great together, but if they don't burn well together there will come a time when they taste like something else. We want people to taste the blend the way we intended, therefore we must select materials that when combined create a scenario for consistent burn.

5. And probably the single biggest factor: How our liga pairs hand bunch our cigars.

There are 2 primary methods of hand bunching: Entubado and Estrujado

Entubado - aka Entubar, is a method where the filler tobacco is rolled into relatively tight tubes of tobacco and then laid into the bunch. This is the often called the "Cuban" method.

Estrujado - is a method where the leaves are folded over onto themselves and laid into the bunch. This method is utilized in the DR and Central America.

FYI - there are Nicaraguan factories that roll entubado and Cuban factories that roll estrujado - so you really can't generalized as a country of origin thing.
Now from here on DOWN this is ALL MY OPINION ONLY and every cigar maker will have their own opinion about the below.
There are benefits and downsides to each of the two primary methodology of hand bunching techniques.

Entubado - tubing the filler allows for great air channels and draw (when done right - regretfully many Cuban factories suck at their technique) but can result in funny burn patterns if the fillers do not burn at near identical rates... for example every see a cigar with like a nail spike of tobacco sticking out that is burning slower than the rest of the cigar? This is a perfect example of a entubado rolled cigar with slow burning ligero... And once the tobaccos are not burning together relatively evenly, the blend no longer tastes right.

Estrujado - the folding of the leaf allows typically for a better burn because unlike the entubado method, the end result is each of the filler leaves have more surface area contact with their neighboring leaves in the bunch which allows for the quicker burning ones to help along the slower burning ones which ultimately creates a better burn and a more consistent tasting blend. The downside to estrujado is it a method that can be rush through and result in a uneven burning cigars because the bunchero got too many of the folds to one side, aka booking, plus just a little bit too much leaf and the draw deteriorates quickly.

Now when both methods are implemented properly both are capable of producing an exceptional handmade cigar, but in my opinion both methods have inherent strengths and weaknesses. So when we were developing the first Liga Privada cigars we began working on a new methodology of hand bunching cigars to take the best properties of both methods while minimizing the negatives.

Essentially it is style where we roll the fillers in entubado-style, but in very loose, wide tubes of leaf then fold those in estrujado style into the hand which contains a "base' leaf that acts almost like a second binder leaf, but is actually part of the filler blend. We then break off the tips of the long leaf bunch and backfill the body of the bunch to get even compression throughout its length.

I often refer to this as "lazy entubado", JD typically refers to it as Escuado.

This hybrid method of hand bunching cigars is extremely time consuming and requires even our very best buncheros an additional six months to learn. Plus they must have a great sense of feel because by utilizing the the backfill we are essentially giving them the ability to micro-adjust each and every bunch by touch.

The resulting cigars end up being densely packed yet exhibit an amazingly effortless draw while burning and will burn not only more evenly, but longer left resting than others.

Our unique Escudao method produces, in my opinion, the very best burning, drawing and consistent tasting cigars possible. No other factory employs our methodology, yet...
So there you have it, this is why our LPs and UCs produce that never ending cloud of sweet, sweet smoke and burn like a mofo, yet remain dense and delish.
I hope this answers everyone's question, now I gotta run and go rake leaves before it snows again!

BR,

Steve

Still Prez, Drew Estate

 

[JDog]

Introduction
Again instead of commenting on a cigar’s taste profile, burn characteristics, aroma, etc, we’ll be purely reviewing its smoke output. For Experiment 1 the Connecticut Broadleaf Maduro wrapper from a Liga Privada No. 9 was removed and replaced with an Ecuadorian Connecticut. I ended up smoking the Ecuador Connecticut Experiment 1 cigar and W.B. smoked the untouched LP9 of the same size.

Overall Smoke Output Opinions
We will communicate the smoke output as a relative percent difference against an untouched Liga Privada No. 9, which is the reference point. Therefore, if the Experiment 1 cigar produces a third less smoke output as an untouched Liga Privada No 9 then its output is approximately 33% less. The smoke output will be observed throughout the smoke experience but an opinion will be captured at the first, second, and final third.

Percent Difference Opinion	W.B.	JDog
First Third	20-25% less	20% less
Second Third	15-20% less	30% less
Final Third	20% less	20% less

Thoughts
The general consensus is the wrapper change resulted in approximately 20% less smoke output. W.B. observed that the untouched LP9 had oiliness to the wrapper that appeared just under the burn line. It had a “wet” appearance but not a “wet” texture to the touch. This oiliness burn phenomena was not present with the Experiment 1 cigar. Both of us noticed how the smoke seemed to dissipate more quickly with the Experiment 1 cigar and how the untouched LP 9’s smoke seemed thicker and rose higher to the ceiling. For Experiment 1, it’s our opinion that the oiliness between the wrappers probably contributed the most to the smoke output differences.

I can’t wait to light-up the Experiment 2 cigar.

 

[JDog]

Introduction
As stated earlier, we are only reviewing the cigar smoke output, not its taste profile, burn characteristics, aroma, etc. For the Experiment 2 cigar, the Connect Broadleaf Maduro wrapper is replaced with an Ecuadorian Connecticut, similar to the Experiment 1 cigar. But the Experiment 2 cigar also has a different binder: we removed the Brazilian Mata Fina binder and replace it with a Brazilian Arapiraca binder.

W.B. smoked the Experiment 2 cigar that has Ecuador Connecticut wrapper with Arapiraca binder. I smoked the untouched LP9.

Overall Smoke Output Opinions
We will communicate the smoke output as a relative percent difference against an untouched Liga Privada No. 9, which is the reference point. Therefore, if the Experiment 2 cigar produces a third less smoke output as an untouched Liga Privada No 9 then its output is approximately 33% less. The smoke output will be observed throughout the smoke experience but an opinion will be captured at the first, second, and final third.

W.B. and I both recorded our smoke output observations on separate pieces of paper and purposely didn’t mention our observations until we turned in the results after we finished our respective cigar. This was done to eliminate any form of bias that can possibility occur if we shared our opinions while we smoked.

Percent Difference Opinion	W.B.	JDog
First Third	40% less	50% less
Second Third	20-30% less	30-40% less
Final Third	30% less	30% less

Thoughts
The general consensus is the wrapper and binder change resulted in approximately 30% less smoke output. We attempted to test the hypothesis that the bunch technique is the “single biggest factor” to why a Liga Privada No 9 generates a lot of smoke by replacing the wrapper and binder to isolate the filler. Our experiment suggests that the bunch technique may be the “single biggest factor.”

Admittedly, we didn’t compare the Experiment 2 cigar smoke output to any other cigar. What does it mean when people say the Liga Privada No. 9 generates a lot of smoke? We’re naturally comparing it to something. For example, we could have compared the Experiment 1 and 2 cigars’ smoke output to a cigar that generates a more normal level of smoke, in addition to the comparison to an untouched Liga Privada No. 9. Hindsight is always 20/20; if I had a mulligan or redo, I would have certainly tried to introduce a third cigar (normal level of smoke output) to illustrate how much more or less smoke the Experiment cigars generate when compared to it. That said we believe the Experiment 2 cigar still generated a lot of smoke.

The experiment isn’t definitive… But it was a lot of fun! Thank you for taking the time to read and for the comments.

PLEASE NOTE: I still have an Experiment and untouched No. 9 cigar. If anyone is interested in performing this experiment yourself, please PM me. There are 2 requirements: 1) you need to meet-up with a fellow BOTL to smoke the cigars and 2) post your conclusions within the thread. Pictures would be nice, but are not necessary.

 

[Ecks]

Sounds exciting. Looking forward to discovered answers!

 

[njstone]

VERY cool experiment, Jdog! Can't wait to see the results.

 

[daniyal]

I'm more interested to see you re-wrap the cigars.

 

[SDShark]

Awesome experiment!

 

[javajunkie]

that is crazy, man, and good on you for coming up with that! i will be keeping my eyes peeled for the results.

 

[Tobacco Giant]

This should be really cool. And you could double the experiment to see how much the wrapper affects the flavor of the cigar (an age old debate).

Really cool, J, thanks for posting and I'll be following!

 

[USCG Cigar Newb]

Wow impressed and cant wait to see the results. Ha, I dont think that I could have brought myself to use my LP 9s for an experiment.

 

[javajunkie]

actually, anyone interested in how opus would fare with CBL? o)

while we are doing crazy things... FOR SCIENCE!

 

[Alwayslit]

Nice!!

 

[StogieNinja]

actually, anyone interested in how opus would fare with CBL? o)

while we are doing crazy things... FOR SCIENCE!

I'm VERY interested in that!

 

[Nemo]

actually, anyone interested in how opus would fare with CBL? o)

while we are doing crazy things... FOR SCIENCE!

I love science!! Please don't tempt me.... I don't know, scratch that, I definitely couldn't do that to a LP, much less an Opus.

 

[Tobacco Giant]

actually, anyone interested in how opus would fare with CBL? o)

while we are doing crazy things... FOR SCIENCE!

You sir, just blew my mind!

If I was at all confident in my ability to remove and re-roll the wrappers, I would try it. Unfortunately, I'm not at all confident.

 

[CO Smokes]

actually, anyone interested in how opus would fare with CBL? o)

while we are doing crazy things... FOR SCIENCE!

Forgive my ignorance but isn't that pretty much an Añejo? Either way sounds tasty as hell...

 

[zirotti]

Wow, amazing work my friend.

 

[Fourtotheflush]

I'm impressed with the way you think sometimes!

Other times though

 

[Red Raider]

Thus is really cool and the fact that you are testing smoke output rather than flavor is interesting, as it removes some of the subjectivity....like taste...

very interested to see how this turns out.

 

[EngenZerO]

interesting! can't wait to see what you find out!