Cigar Details: EGM Ninfa
Review Format: Blind
- Vitola: Ninfa
- Length: 7.16″
- Ring Gauge: 34
- Country of Origin: Dominican Republic
- Wrapper: Dominican Republic
- Binder: Dominican Republic
- Filler: Dominican Republic
- Factory: ABAM
- Blender: Undisclosed
- Price: $19.99
- Release Date: February 2026
- Source: Developing Palates
Pre-light Experience
Seth: The EGM Ninfa is a nice cigar in hand. The lancero is finished with a nice colored wrapper that sports some Claro and Colorado aspects. It is silky in texture, and it has a dark golden hay color. The aromas on the cigar are very light, delivering some cedar, hay and soft barnyard notes.
John: The EGM Ninfa has a Colorado color wrapper and appears to be a Ninfa vitola. I weighed the cigar at 8.6 grams and measured the humidity at 62.3% using the HumidiMeter Pro. Aromas from the wrapper included hay, wood, and some underlying earth tones. Since the foot is very small, I was only able to pick out tobacco and hay.
Jiunn: The EGM Ninfa shape in itself (panatela ish) is intriguing as there are very few cigars out there that is a smaller ring gauge than a lancero. Wrapper looks of high quality providing an oily and even Colorado claro. Veins are well pressed, seams tight, bunch and roll even and the head is well wrapped and capped. Pre-light aromas given pungent fresh cut cedar and barnyard.
First Third
Seth: The first third of 1593 begins with soft cedar, hay and dry earth notes. There are some cream aspects, and it is just under medium in strength and body.
John: The first third gets going with a curious combination of baking spices, burning cardboard and a vegetal note, followed by a burning paper or almost wet cardboard note through the finish. The baking spices intensify to medium-full strength through the retrohale and dominate the profile through to the finish, eventually becoming a lingering black pepper on the post draw. As the first third continues, chocolate tries to establish itself on the retrohale, pushing through the intensity of the spices. The baking spices begin to ease up as the cigar reaches roughly the 20-minute mark, allowing some bread notes to push into the retrohale. The black pepper is still sitting heavily on my tongue and palate. Through the bottom half of the first third, the bread has anchored itself securely in the center of the retrohale.
Jiunn: The initial profile is sharp and harsh with burnt cedar wood, toasted bread and highly sharp minerals. Roughly an inch in, there’s less of a bite, as natural creaminess joins in. Retrohaling gives even sharper minerals. The finish coats the tongue with harsh cedar wood and campfire. Strength is medium-full and body is medium.
Second Third
Seth: The second third is a continuation of the first third. It’s just lacking for a cigar of this nature. There is no complexity, depth, and it appears transitioning. Just under medium in strength and body.
John: The cigar moves into the second third with sweet tobacco, bread and that paper note leading off. Black pepper continues to linger on the palate through the post draw. As the cigar progresses towards the halfway point of the second third, light earth joins the middle of the profile. At the halfway point, mildly dry wood joins the finish.
Jiunn: The second third’s flavors are much improved as there is far less offensive harshness and bitterness. The profile picks up a tasty oiliness that pairs well with the dried red pepper spice and cream. But the existing harshness is still on the finish, which is long and lingering for all the wrong reasons. Strength is creeping towards full, while body remains medium.
Final Third
Seth: The final third is the same as the second. Not bad, but a cigar like this needs more.
John: Bread and sweet tobacco combine to take the cigar into the last third, with the mild paper note coming through the finish. The baking spices continue to come through on the retrohale and are joined by some wood accents. By the halfway point, the spices have intensified again to medium strength and are lingering into the post draw between puffs.
Jiunn: The only change within the final third is the strength going full blown max, giving me a head rush and a little sweat (body still medium). Flavor-wise, it’s still the same oily nature with dried red pepper spice and cream, with the awful harsh long finish.
Burn
Seth: The burn was good from beginning to end.
John: The burn went out immediately, less than an inch into the review, requiring a re-light. The burn continued straight before going out again as it moved into the second third, requiring another re-light. The cigar went out again near the end of the second third, requiring a third re-light. Now I will remark here that smoking a Ninfa, like other thin ring gauge cigars, does take a particular technique. It’s not unreasonable that I could be at fault for one of the re-lights.
Jiunn: Burn performance was excellent as the burn was even, tight ashes, cool burning temperatures and ample smoke production.
Draw
Seth: The draw was perfect from start to finish.
John: The draw measured 90 inches of water on the Cigar Medics draw tester. Subjectively, it was between two and two-and-a-half notches into the resistant spectrum, making it resistant. At some point during the first third, the draw opened to between one and one-and-a-half notches into the resistant spectrum, improving the draw to Very Good.
Jiunn: The draw was overall OK but a couple notches tight. No impact on flavor delivery though.
Overall
Seth: The EGM Ninfa is lacking lancero. It’s not bad, but it’s very disappointing and lacking for a lancero of this nature. Any seasoned cigar smoker would say this cigar is missing flavors. If you are going to have a lancero that is on the lighter side, you need a lot of complexities and transitioning. Otherwise it’s just a really long cigarette.
John: Blind Cigar #1593 turned out to be a surprisingly interesting cigar despite some fairly unusual flavor characteristics right out of the gate. The first third was easily the most distinctive, with baking spices, burning paper, cardboard and vegetal notes creating a profile that was difficult to categorize but never completely boring. The baking spices quickly became the dominant component, eventually shifting into a strong black pepper that lingered heavily on the palate. Once the spices eased back, the emergence of bread and chocolate gave the profile some needed balance and helped move it away from the more abrasive opening. The second third was more approachable, with sweet tobacco and bread taking over from the more aggressive spice profile. The lingering paper note remained, but light earth and dry wood gradually added some additional depth. The final third continued to lean on sweet tobacco and bread, while the baking spices made another push and eventually returned to medium strength on the post draw. Construction was the biggest weakness of the cigar. The draw began extremely tight at 90 inches of water before opening considerably during the first third, ultimately becoming much more manageable. The burn was more problematic, with three separate re-lights required during the smoking experience. Despite those issues, the EGM Ninfa managed to maintain enough flavor interest to earn a Good overall rating. The combination of unusual paper and cardboard notes with strong baking spices, black pepper, bread and sweet tobacco made this a cigar that was more memorable than its construction issues might otherwise suggest. Total smoking time was 2 hours and 28 minutes.
Jiunn: This The EGM Ninfa was like a little Chihuahua dog that’s seemingly harmless but has a nasty little bite to it. A rustic and harsh profile with balls out full strength to add some salt to the wound. I will not smoke more of these for the sake of my health.
Seth | John | Jiunn | ||
| Good | Pre Light | Good | Pre Light | Good |
| Average | First Third | Good | First Third | Subpar |
| Subpar | Second Third | Good | Second Third | Average |
| Subpar | Final Third | Average | Final Third | Average |
| Good | Burn | Poor | Burn | Amazing |
| Amazing | Draw | Very Good | Draw | Good |
| Subpar | Overall | Good | Overall | Average |

















Leave a Reply