Give me the rundown on expensive cancer sticks.

March 3, 2009 10:28 PM

If you have smoked two or more of the following "premium" cigarettes, please compare and contrast them: Davidoff, Nat Sherman, Benson and Hedges. Thanks!

I have access to all the varieties of Davidoff, Nat Sherman, and Benson and Hedges (light, ultralight, mint, mcd, classic, etc etc). I'm curious if these brands are any good and as an extremely lightweight smoker, I'll never be able to work my way through enough of them to be satisfied that I have created an informed opinion. So help me out!

I like hearty cigarettes, as well as cigars and pipes. One of my favorites was Bohem cigarettes, which I found in Korea and which were 30% pipe tobacco, just to give you an idea of my tastes.

posted by anonymous to food & drink (19 answers total)

I never liked Davidoff, but B&H was always a good choice when I found them. My friends swear by Nat Shermans. They say "I know they are going to kill me, but they are so good." I do not any longer smoke, however.
posted by parmanparman at 10:32 PM on March 3, 2009

I've smoked Nat Shermans and Benson and Hedges. I remember what a Nat Sherman tastes like, I don't remember what a Benson and Hedges tastes like.

If you're a light smoker you should stop altogether. The only reason I still smoke is because I don't get much choice in the matter. Starting smoking was one of the dumbest decisions I've made.
posted by 517 at 10:41 PM on March 3, 2009

To head things off, I have been a "light" or "social" smoker for years (think in terms of months per pack instead of packs per day or week) and I don't see that increasing anytime soon. Thanks for the advice so far though.
posted by no1hatchling at 10:55 PM on March 3, 2009

In my opinion B&H are not in the same league as Nat Shermans. The MCD to me is the perfect hoity toity smoke but very strong for a novice smoker. I don't know about the Davidoff. I have to say that Linnee is unfortunately correct, unless you are a person who has demonstrated by long habit the ability to smoke very, very infrequently over the long term, if you find smoking cigarettes to be a pleasurable habit you'd be wisest to stop screwing around with them.
posted by nanojath at 10:58 PM on March 3, 2009

B&H are not premium cigarettes; you can buy them in the cigarette machines with other standard brands all over the place. (They also taste like shit, fwiw.)

I would go with the Nat Shermans, they have such a great range and i like the additive free cigarettes and the cork filters. Cork filters!
posted by DarlingBri at 11:24 PM on March 3, 2009

At least in my neck of the woods, Bensons are not considered premium, except by their marketing department. As I remember, I'm not fond of Davidoffs, but I've only had them very rarely; they're not sold here. Personally, I'm very (overly) fond of Nat Shermans, and I usually go with the MCDs or the Naturals. I used to bum Fantasias off a girlfriend who smoked them. They were tasty, lighter than the MCDs. Nat Sherman now has a king-size line, in the standard size pack. The only ones I've tried are the red New York Cuts, which were far too strong for my taste.

Given that, Nat's are quite pricey here, and my usual cigarettes are Kamel Reds: quite superior (IMHO) to the standard Camel/Marlboro range, but about four bucks cheaper than MCDs.

I am very, very slowly quitting.
posted by gam zeh yaavor at 12:02 AM on March 4, 2009

Bensons & Hedges are premium only in the sense that they're sometimes hard to find. They don't seem to carry them as often in convenience stores or supermarkets around here, and if they do, it's only ever the regulars or ultra-lights. That said, I would agree with the above posters that they are a crap cigarette. They're my SO's brand of choice, unfortunately, which means I end up having to smoke them when my cigarettes of choice run out (plain-Jane Camels, if you cared). It's probably psychosomatic, but I've always thought B&H's gave me headaches more often than normal.

Nat Shermans tend to be too dry for my tastes. Dunhills are good cigarettes, but they're a bit strong in flavor for my tastes; I don't think they're worth the premium, but YMMV.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 12:09 AM on March 4, 2009

Aside: Does anyone think there's a soul left in the western world who has not gotten the message that smoking is bad for you? I mean Jesus, the box says "This shit will kill you" and since everyone on MeFi can type, I think it's safe to assume everyone on MeFi can also read.

The question is not "I'm a moron; is s smoking a good way to remove my sperm from the gene pool?" but rather "Given these three options, which cigarette might I enjoy most on my way to an early grave?"

FWIW, I love the Nat Sherman Fantasias - yes, the iPod colours are nifty, but I love the way the box opens. What a great box. Altoids have nothing on this box for crafting.
posted by DarlingBri at 12:28 AM on March 4, 2009 [3 favorites]

I've smoked them all. B&H are premium ciggies in the US in the way that Levis are premium jeans in the UK. I remember getting a whitey off one, once. They're a bit rough. Davidoffs are smooth and forgiving; Nats (MCDs) are smooth-ish but not forgiving as far as nicotine goes. They're not bashful about being cigarettes.

I like hearty cigarettes, as well as cigars and pipes

Cigaretellos and Havana Opels. Do the Dale Pendell thing, smoke one in a cigarette holder, and you'll get a full-on sense of how powerful, compelling and rotten a drug nicotine is.
posted by holgate at 12:38 AM on March 4, 2009

Definitely Nat Shermans, from someone who's been a very part-time smoker (about 3-4 cigarettes/month; if I smoke more than that I start getting headaches) for about 18 years.
posted by zachawry at 3:21 AM on March 4, 2009

Nat Shermans. All of their various cigarettes are delicious. My favorites are the Fantasias, simply because of the colors. I'm a big, hairy, ill-dressed geek... and it was always so much fun to pull out a cigarette in high-saturation blue or green. A little bit of an affectation, and I got razzed for it occasionally... but, totally worth it.

Benson and Hedges aren't even kind of in the same class. They're like Vegemite... "premium" and exotic because they're imported, but they taste like shit.

I've not had Davidoffs.

[In other news... I should stop smoking.]
posted by Netzapper at 4:06 AM on March 4, 2009

B+H's are not that great. Definitely not premium. Kind of gross, really.

Nat Shermans are pretty fantastic. Davidoffs are also pretty great. My favorite premium, though, is Dunhill. But of the three you specified, the Sherman's probably your best bet.
posted by General Malaise at 6:12 AM on March 4, 2009

Thanks to all who answered my question with their honest opinions!
posted by no1hatchling at 6:20 AM on March 4, 2009

Although I love this commercial, B&H is not a premium cigarette.

Davidoffs are okay, but nothing special--Davidoff is an all-purpose luxury brand these days, and, while the cigar backstory is good, a Davidoff cigarette isn't much nicer than a pair of Porsche sunglasses.

That leaves the Shermans. My favorites are Havana Ovals.
posted by box at 6:44 AM on March 4, 2009

Dunhill, for all their advertising, are not in the same class as the Nat Shermans.

Shermans are great, and special. It's been ages since I've had one, I've tried, but can not find them anywhere in Europe. (Anyone who knows where, please drop me a line).
posted by Goofyy at 7:18 AM on March 4, 2009

Nat Sherman Classics are amazing, hearty taste, always good. Davidoff's are similar in price to the Shermans, but they are a larger, longer cigarette. Davidoff's taste very good as well, but they are IIRC a bit more "nutty" to my taste.

I think I may go out and buy some classics today...
posted by schyler523 at 7:18 AM on March 4, 2009

I, too, am what you are calling a "light" smoker. I average about two cigarettes a week. I've had Nat Shermans and Benson & Hedges, as well as Dunhills and a couple other brands you might think of as premiums. I agree with everybody telling you that B&H aren't premium. I liked the Dunhills okay, but they ended up drying out so I guess I didn't like them that much.

The Nat Shermans I remember as being pretty nice, but my brand used to be unfiltered Lucky Strikes (again, people: 2 cigarettes a week) so the strength and flavor probably wasn't as striking to me as it would be to your average Marlboro lights smoker.

By the way, once Luckies started getting almost impossible to find (I think they taste different now, too) I mostly switched to American Spirit Periques. Perique is this strong, wet, aged pipe tobacco and they're mixed 1:5 perique to regular tobacco. They're pretty good; I would recommend to somebody looking for a stronger-tasting cigarette. Except of course that I wouldn't recommend smoking to anybody.
posted by penduluum at 8:11 AM on March 4, 2009

Natural American Spirits is the only brand that manufactures both cigarettes made with 100% certified organic tobacco as well as cigarettes made with 100% additive-free natural tobacco.

They're no safer than any other cigarettes, but they taste great.
posted by torquemaniac at 9:22 AM on March 4, 2009

I'm chafing at the limits of this question since none of them are that good imo. Nat Sherman's are the best of the bunch though.

I always preferred Export A's or Gauloise (or the current replacement Merci) when I wanted something hearty. Camel makes a bunch of more expensive brands that are delicious too.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 2:39 PM on March 4, 2009