Organic Reserve Habano Pig (6″x60) 5 Pack
Original price was: $40.00.$24.99Current price is: $24.99.
Organic Reserve Habano Pig 6″ x 60
Bold, balanced, and completely clean organic cigars The Organic Reserve Habano 6×60 is the ultimate expression of patience and purity. Handcrafted over the course of three full years, this large-gauge premium cigar is made with 100% organic tobacco, free from chemicals, additives, or artificial treatments.
Instead of pesticides, the tobacco is deep-frozen post-curing to naturally eliminate beetle larvae—preserving the leaf’s integrity and ensuring a clean, pure smoke from start to finish.
Blend Highlights:
- Cap: Pig Tail
- Wrapper: Nicaraguan Habano 2000
- Filler Nicaraguan, Dominican, and a pinch of Peruvian leaf
- Binder: Nicaraguan
- Size: 6 x 60 Gordo
- Strength: Medium
- 4,000 Cigars Only – Second Small Batch 2026 Release
- Handmade in Estelí, Nicaragua
- Quantity of 5
Tasting Notes:
Expect deep notes of earthy cocoa, dark roasted coffee, and aged cedar, with a hint of natural sweetness from the Peruvian tobacco. The draw is smooth, the burn is steady, and the finish is long and satisfying—perfect for those who appreciate complexity without harshness.
In stock
| Title | Range | Discount |
|---|---|---|
| (QTY PRICE BREAKS - 5 PACKS) | 2 - 10 | 10% |
Organic Reserve Habano Pig (6″x60)
Why Smoke Organic Reserve Habano ?
- Fully organic & chemical-free
- Crafted over 4 years from seed to cigar
- Deep-frozen for natural pest protection
- Limited production – only 4,000 cigars in this second release
The Organic Reserve Habano 6×60 isn’t just a cigar—it’s a statement. A tribute to tradition. A return to how cigars were meant to be.
60 reviews for Organic Reserve Habano Pig (6″x60) 5 Pack
Only logged in customers who have purchased this product may leave a review.
Free Shipping $150 or More For U.S. States. Canada $72.99
Related products
Brandon Q. (verified owner) –
The draw on one of these was a touch looser than my preference. Slowing my puffs helped keep the toasted flavor from becoming too dry.
Jeff M. (verified owner) –
I expected pepper to build continuously in the larger shape. Instead, it tapered while a warm, bread-like note became more pronounced.
Carol V. (verified owner) –
The toasted aftertaste lasted longer for me than the pepper did. Exploring that in the bigger format before taking on more cigars was useful.
Alex Z. (verified owner) –
The dimensions of the 6 x 60 encouraged me to slow down. Toasted bread came to mind early, and pauses between puffs didn’t cause the cigar to go out.
Carlos Y. (verified owner) –
The pack’s third cigar gave me a distinctly nuttier finish than the first. Their construction felt similar, so the flavor difference was what I noticed.
Danielle C. (verified owner) –
I found the Habano’s aroma more delicate than the size suggested. Warm wood was obvious, with a brief floral edge while it rested.
Christina N. (verified owner) –
The first cigar’s wrapper stayed tidy as I moved past the band. The flavor became more wood-driven late, without a sudden rise in pepper.
Erin B. (verified owner) –
This felt like a cigar to give time to, rather than rush. Its finish cleared reasonably well without leaving a heavy aftertaste.
Natalie U. (verified owner) –
I sat down rather than trying to fit this one into a hurry. The opening was lively but not sharp, and the draw offered the slight resistance I prefer.
Carol C. (verified owner) –
I expected the size to deliver a blunt flavor, but the small nutty details were still there. They showed best when I slowed down.
Scott Y. (verified owner) –
My first 6 x 60 had a rounded aroma but a sharper woody taste. As it progressed, the taste softened into something more like toast.
Christina R. (verified owner) –
The flavor traveled from a spicy opening to a warmer, more rounded finish. An evenly lit foot helped the burn remain settled during the session.
Lauren H. (verified owner) –
The ash held across the wide foot until I tapped it into the tray. My flavor notes at that point were warm bread and dry wood.
Jeff P. (verified owner) –
Cedar took on a warm character by the middle and remained present afterward. With an even initial light, the burn kept a consistent pace.
Scott Q. (verified owner) –
This 6 x 60 had a softer texture than I expected from its appearance. The flavor remained fairly crisp and woody, which made an interesting contrast.
Robert U. (verified owner) –
One cigar’s burn line needed a couple of corrections. The toast-and-cedar flavor was enjoyable, but the wider format wasn’t entirely hands-off for me.
Joseph L. (verified owner) –
The broad foot produced a warm wood aroma even while resting. During the draw, a quieter toasted-grain note was easier for me to identify.
Kelly K. (verified owner) –
A savory, toasted character changed enough to hold my attention. The cigar stayed intact without much supervision, and the pack allowed another evening to explore it.
Peter F. (verified owner) –
Nuttiness became easier to find as the pepper receded. My sample felt evenly made, without a loose section or soft spot when I checked it.
Elizabeth U. (verified owner) –
I noticed how the pepper stayed at the edges rather than filling the whole flavor. The center of the taste was closer to dry almond.
Ashley D. (verified owner) –
I gave the wider format more attention during lighting than I usually do. That paid off in a steady burn and a clear toasted-nut flavor.
Christina V. (verified owner) –
A subtle cashew taste emerged as the initial spice backed off. The larger ring didn’t seem to hide that quieter part of the profile.
Nicole P. (verified owner) –
I compared the pack’s second cigar with my notes from the first. Both shifted from cedar toward something nuttier around the same point.
Alex V. (verified owner) –
I found the pack useful for separating first impressions from recurring traits. The dry cedar finish appeared in each of the three I’ve tried.
Marty O. (verified owner) –
A bit of pepper at the finish kept the profile from becoming overly mellow. There also wasn’t much tending to do once I had it lit.
Christine Z. (verified owner) –
I noticed small differences in the first inch between two cigars. Past that point, both settled into a similar bread-and-cedar combination.
Richard L. (verified owner) –
The thickness took some adjusting to, though I liked the format once I settled in. Its flavor was consistent rather than dramatically changeable, and the draw eased shortly after lighting.
Jason N. (verified owner) –
My lasting impression of these was a clear cedar taste with a soft texture around it. The wider format felt less forceful than it looked.
Amber N. (verified owner) –
The width took a little getting used to, yet the draw never felt demanding. Pepper remained a background note behind the warm, nutty center.
Scott E. (verified owner) –
The opening had a faint grassy quality that disappeared fairly quickly. What followed was mostly cedar, with a little toasted sweetness underneath.
Nick Y. (verified owner) –
Giving this an unhurried, seated session made sense to me. At that slower pace, a delicate nuttiness became much easier to distinguish.
Tim C. (verified owner) –
The larger shape felt less cumbersome after a few minutes. My main impression was savory toast with a little creaminess underneath.
George H. (verified owner) –
The wood-and-spice profile was straightforward in a way I liked. I wanted more development over the session, though, and stopped at a four-star rating.
Greg Y. (verified owner) –
I kept my drink plain for the second Habano to compare the flavor. The lightly sweet grain note was easier to detect without coffee beside it.
Marty W. (verified owner) –
The longer session made it possible to follow an almost cereal-like note underneath the cedar. It stayed quiet but never completely disappeared.
Danielle R. (verified owner) –
The five-pack let me return to the larger Habano without relying on a single session. A roasted-cashew impression became clearer on my second try.
Scott H. (verified owner) –
The wrapper didn’t flake at my cut on the one I tried. The finish was dry but had a faint toasted sweetness that kept returning.
Samantha W. (verified owner) –
The final stretch of my first cigar was drier than I prefer. I liked the earlier toasted-nut flavor enough to give the pack another try.
Holly Q. (verified owner) –
Lighting the foot evenly set up a steady burn. Pepper remained easy to notice, but other parts of the flavor still had space to register.
Brandon G. (verified owner) –
Two evenings with the pack gave me slightly different impressions. The first was breadier; the second had a more recognizable almond finish.
Amber C. (verified owner) –
Taking my time brought a slightly nuttier finish into focus. I preferred to be seated for this one rather than treating it as a quick smoke.
Joseph N. (verified owner) –
Toast, wood, and a faint nuttiness were the clearest flavors for me. The pack left enough to revisit those impressions on a separate evening.
Lauren D. (verified owner) –
A little creaminess appeared in the middle without replacing the wood flavor. The contrast was more noticeable on the second cigar from the pack.
Julie G. (verified owner) –
I got along with the wider ring gauge better than anticipated. After the opening settled, the flavor rounded out. The draw never made me work hard for smoke.
Victoria K. (verified owner) –
The first two from the five-pack had similar draws. One showed more cedar, while the other had a warmer bread-crust note through the middle.
Russ I. (verified owner) –
A small creamy edge accompanied a clearly defined cedar taste. The remaining cigars meant I could check that impression again on another evening.
Jeff F. (verified owner) –
The Habano 6 x 60 started with dry wood and a little pepper. As it settled, the smoke felt creamier without turning particularly sweet.
Greg T. (verified owner) –
I found the middle smoother than the opening and left the lighter alone because the burn line never wandered enough to concern me.
Danielle E. (verified owner) –
The taste favored wood and toast over a dark, sweet profile. Drawing smoke remained comfortable instead of becoming a struggle at any point.
Marty T. (verified owner) –
The 6 x 60 felt evenly filled along its length. Mine drew with a little resistance and produced a soft aroma of warm cedar.
Michelle K. (verified owner) –
There was a gentle toasted quality underneath the pepper right from the start. It became the main flavor as the session progressed.
Victoria M. (verified owner) –
I’d keep this size for a time when I could settle in properly. The draw became easier after the first few pulls, while the flavor stayed on a fairly even course.
Eric K. (verified owner) –
I found the bigger ring more comfortable with a shallower cut. The controlled airflow made the warm bread-like finish easier to notice.
Allison J. (verified owner) –
Toasted bread was my immediate association. The wrapper then held up for the duration of the smoke, without losing its integrity.
Dean S. (verified owner) –
The flavor was more savory than sweet, which generally suits me. It felt firm but not overpacked, and this quantity let me judge the larger format before going further.
Samantha X. (verified owner) –
I made time for the substantial feel of the 6 x 60. What I tasted leaned toward wood and toast, not the darker sweetness I might otherwise have expected.
Richard U. (verified owner) –
I noticed more creaminess in the smoke than in the actual taste. The flavor stayed dry and nutty, which kept the distinction interesting.
Dan W. (verified owner) –
A slower rhythm let me pick out the subtle nutty side. The pack gave me a chance to assess the bigger format before deciding on a larger quantity.
Joseph R. (verified owner) –
The bigger format moved through its changes at an easy pace. A faint floral aroma appeared briefly before the cedar became dominant again.
Adam A. (verified owner) –
Airflow was tighter than I like during the opening, though it improved afterward. The finish stayed fairly clean; I’d reserve this size for an unhurried session, with four stars overall.