The Particulars

The Review

This review for the CAO Escaparate (TAM.095) - Toro (6 x 52) is based on the journal entry dated 2025-09-09

Appearance & Construction (0-3):  Good (3)

Yep, it’s a Maduro. Dark? Check. Oily? Check. Toothy? OH HOLY HELL, THIS COULD BE BRITISH ROYALTY… SPOTTA TEA GUV’NAH??? So yeah, it’s got a massive amount of big tooth all over the place. 😅 Because of that, I’m fully expecting to see some big oil crystals in the ash, and I’ll be highly disappointed if I don’t! There are a couple of thicker veins running through it, but nothing major, and the seams are tight with a clean triple cap. The band isn’t overly attractive, but CAO almost never has good-looking labels. It’s perfectly on-brand. Without the label, I’d honestly think it was a Drew Estate Liga Privada with that funky Connecticut tooth.

Draw (0-3) & Burn (0-4):  Poor (1) / Good (3)

The draw is tight even though the cigar itself feels a little squishy. It’s tight enough that I’m contemplating grabbing the draw tool, but I’ll give it a moment to see if it loosens up. It does loosen, but it remains on the tighter side of acceptable. The burn starts dead-even, so we’ll see how this goes! The ash is a light gray that ultimately masks the oil crystals, as I really had to strain to see them in the ash. It creates big bands between the striations, but the wrapper and binder layers of the ash are noticeably fragile. It’s petaling and splitting barely an inch in, so I’ll be watching it closely to safely roll it off before it unexpectedly drops in my lap. And with that, I’ll note that the burn line lost that dead-even start and is now flopping between wavy and decently even, depending on which side of the cigar you look at. Note that this is a very slow-burning cigar, too; Toros usually don’t take me 2+ hours.

Flavor Profile (0-5):  Good (3)

CAO’s description of the cigar mentions that it’s a very sweet Maduro, and they’re right. Sweetness is the first flavor to hit, and it’s a distinct mix of syrup and dark fruit. They call it “cherry cola.” Sure, I guess that’s technically accurate, but flat soda isn’t the most appealing flavor description because it completely lacks the brightness I associate with a carbonated beverage. And I’m not fancy enough to identify regular cherry vs. black cherry vs. raisin vs. plum, etc… You get one step above “sweet” with my descriptions. 😅 But then the baking spice, cinnamon, cedar, and breadiness come in. This is starting on the lighter side of medium, but it’s not bad at all.

Heading into the second third, I’m not getting a lot else. Breadiness, charred wood, some meatiness, and lots of sweetness and baking spice. There are hints of your typical coffee, leather, and earth, but they remain extremely mild. There’s just enough pepper hitting now that I’m getting a sweet, smoked hickory note that really dominates my palate. There are some light floral notes that are surprising, but that’s about it. It’s decent, it’s pleasing, it’s sweet, but it’s not exactly setting my hair on fire. Granted, I shave my head so I’d be completely safe if it was 😅, but I’m getting a little complacent with this smoke. This specific profile carries straight through to the end with absolutely no other changes.

Overall Experience (0-5):  Good (3)

So this is right on the cusp… Anything below a 7 I generally would not recommend, but it was the draw that really dragged this one down more than anything. It’s still borderline, and I’m left with the feeling that it’ll be very palate-dependent as to how much you might actually enjoy it. For me, it fell just short of being a great flavor profile. With it being such a slow-smoking cigar, I was genuinely getting a hair bored at times because it lacked the transitions or the dynamic profile needed to keep me fully engaged. That being said, it definitely has good balance and nice baseline flavors, and it could be a great mindless, relaxing smoke.

The biggest issue is that it’s just good and doesn’t really stand out from the pack. Maybe it was more novel 30 years ago, but I honestly don’t know what the state of the industry was back then. Given how many amazing cigars there are on the market right now, it falls a little flat by comparison. But, given its general rarity and overall affordability, I do think it’s worth checking out just to try a classic CAO blend and take a step back in time—even if the here and now is the absolute golden age of New World blends.

Postscript

2026-03-06:  Smoking this one again, the original review holds firm on the blend (save for a few bitter notes), while this second sample had a good draw and burned quite nicely. Yet, I still feel like I’m tolerating this cigar more than truly enjoying it. On paper, it feels like it should hit all the right notes, but it just misses the mark for me. It’s not bad by any measure, but it’s not right, either. It’s kind of like going to Cold Stone Creamery and selecting mix-ins that are great on their own, but just don’t jive together when mashed up. This might entirely come down to palate and preference, but for having a beautiful Maduro Connecticut Broadleaf wrapper that inherently sets expectations high, it falls short for me.

Overall Score and Individual Journal Entries

While the review is based off one instance of journaling this cigar; there’s a number of reasons you can have different experiences smoking the same cigar multiple times. A blend can evolve with age (for better or worse), palates evolves, preferences change, and sometimes you just get a bad example!  This section captures the ratings from each journal entry and the related journal photo.  Below you’ll find an aggregate score based on every time the cigar has been journaled. Unless it was a gift or on-off smoke, this section will be updated every time I journal this cigar!

The Flavor Wheel

With every cigar I journal, I capture simple ratings of the basic flavor categories that I experience.  These are more generalized than what you would see in a review, but a distinct profile can still be built out.  When multiple instances of the same cigar have been journaled, the scores are averaged out in an attempt to build a reliable flavor profile based on my palate.

The values entered for the strength of each flavor range from 0 to 3.

• 0:   No flavor detected
• 1:   Mild flavor
• 2:   Medium flavor
• 3:   Strong flavor

Note: desktop / large screens will see a flavor wheel while mobile / small screens will see a bar chart.

With every cigar I journal, I capture simple ratings of the basic flavor categories that I experience.  These are more generalized than what you would see in a review, but a distinct profile can still be built out.  When multiple instances of the same cigar have been journaled, the scores are averaged out in an attempt to build a reliable flavor profile based on my palate.

The values entered for the strength of each flavor range from 0 to 3.

• 0:   No flavor detected
• 1:   Mild flavor
• 2:   Medium flavor
• 3:   Strong flavor

Note: desktop / large screens will see a flavor wheel while mobile / small screens will see a bar chart.