I was talking to a co-worker about being able to distinguish a the difference between these 2 sticks, other than price. Now my palette is not as sophisticated as I am sure some here, but after having both, I find the UC begins ever so slightly bolder and spicier. I say that to follow-up with that to me, after close to the first third they taste virtually identical. I would have merely thought it was me, but he had the same impression. I love both sticks currently and maybe that will change after several more of each.

Have any of you formed a similar opinion or am I missing something? I know they are made by the same company at probably the same factory. Perhaps the tobacco is aged slightly longer in the LP9?

I know these have been around for a few years, so I apologize if I am 🐴.

2 totally different cigars.

If they taste the same to you stick with the UC,much cheaper🍺

The UC tastes like beeswax.

LP9 has lost the depth of flavor I thought it used to have and now it's an overpriced muted strong cigar. IMO

I like the UC.
They can be somewhat one-dimensional,,,,but it's a flavor I like.
Thing is for me, about 1 out of 3 is really good.
Inconsistent, but in a good way.
I have a good stash of them, purchased back when you get get them on the cheap......those days are over.....so I'll likely not be buying them again for a while....if ever.

Used to like the Undercrowns before I moved to milder smokes.

Never cared for the no 9, prefer the T52s.

But never thought they were similar.

I don't really care for either of them.

Not a big fan of DE in general, bout a brick of bait fish once, I smoked them, I liked that they were 4 x 40, but that's about it.

Bait fish seemed to have a high percentage of unraveling for me, guess I could have just got a bad brick. I even tried to make the cut as slim as I could.

Only LP I've tried was a No 9, didn't care for it especially at it's price point.

Z says they got worse, I tried mine a few months ago from a shpo, so maybe that's why I wasn't impressed.

+1 on that. was really surprised when I did a blind review of the LP9, I thought it was a yard gar.

the under crown were pretty good but lost a lot of that flavor I remember from them. I would agree with kingofthecove that they are one dimensional now, but I still like the flavor of it as well. if you can get them for a reasonable price I would pick up a few of the UC, as I prefer them over the LP9 as well but finding them for the right price isn't so easy any more but happens from time to time.

I think LP9's age fine, it's just that the newer ones aren't the same to me. To be fair my tastes have changed, but I still smoke strong cigars every once in awhile like Gurkhas and PDRs and Puros Indios.

Z rockin the chit!
you justa gangsta

I still haven't tried the LP. I tried a fiver of the UC and didn't like them at all.

Hmmmm

I like the UC and have some i break into when I'm in the mood for them. LP9 isn't a bad cigar it just isn't enough to move me for the price. There are much better cigars at that price level with higher quality tobacco if your looking for them.
I do keep a stock of Baitfish on hand too, that's the one DE that I really like.

They taste virtually the same, the LP9 is a bit smoother after it gets going to me. The biggest thing I pick out is sweet tobacco and creamy taste.

I have not tried any of the other DE offerings, but I see CBID selling alot of MUWAT and Baitfish. Dont know if these are the same. Anyone tried the Smoking Monk?

Baitfish IS a MUWAT. It's a 4x40 MUWAT.

Do a search for Smoking Monk. Someone recently smoked one.

I have a hard time with any suggestion that UC is remotely close to any other LP. I don't like San Andres wrappers. Smoke what you like....and form your own opinions about cigars. But sometimes my opinions are better than yours. 🙂 Well, maybe not sometimes.

IIRC, most of the filler is the same or very similar, maybe different primings though. The 9, 52, UC, MF4, L40, etc all have very similar blends. The wrappers are different, I can't remember about the binder.

I can't remember which lines it was, but I recall there was one where they flip-flopped the binder and wrapper, meaning if cigar 1 had high-priming binder from country A and mid-priming wrapper from country B, cigar 2 used upper mid / lower top-priming B for the wrapper and mid priming A for the binder? I forget if that was DE that did that for this cigar or it might have been something that someone else did.

Unless the No.9 has changed so much since I last smoked 3 of the 6"x52 in 2013 it has more body and flavor then the Undercrown, which for 5 bucks here at Cigar Bid is a very good maduro option.