I really like the gold labeled ones.
How do the 1916s compare ?

The 1916's rock. At least the Robusto's do. X

Thanks X,
You have helped me quite a few
times on this forum without even
knowing. So thanks again !

Anytime Billreif. X

Definately the 1916's, they are awesome, had the corona a couple of weeks ago and a robosto waiting to be smoked.

1959 or 1916.........

Depends on your taste.

I've had a couple of the 1916 coronas and think they are a fine example of a cameroon wrapped cigar, but I still think the 1959 Exodus Gold is the best cigar of the line, even preferable to the Signature.

What Steve said - the '16 is more similar to the Silver in my opinion but still unique and very comparable in quality and enjoyment - no humi should be without at least some '59s and '16s!

The 1916s are great.

What Steve*R said... I also like the silver band.

-------------------------
Torano1959 or 1916?
-------------------------

Yes, please

Have not tried the 1916 yet but I love the 1959's. The gold bands are great but the silvers. Wow a really great cigar for the money. I keep telling myself I am going to save the last few I have to see what they are like with a little age but nooo! Each time I look in the humi for something that will go great with a little Woodford Reseve on the rocks I find myself in the garage with another 59 silver and a smile on my face.

The first time I tried a Silver, I knew immediately that I liked the Gold's better ... the second time I tried a Silver, it'd aged about 90-120 days in my 'dor and was a much different cigar ...

I have had the chance to smoke a 1916 and thought it to be a truly outstanding smoke ... but am working on that 90 day thing again ... I'll get back to you and let you know if they improve as much as the Silvers did ... 'cause if the DO ... oh, my.