Engineering

Brothers of Briar

Help Support Brothers of Briar:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
alfredo_buscatti

alfredo_buscatti

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
2,217
Reaction score
0
Ferndown, Dunhill, Ashton. Three respected English pipemakers. But what's with the tiny draftholes? The lack of a chamfered tenon; as I understand it that is the place where flow is most compromised. No funneled tenons?

Money?
 
my 6 Dunhills, 1972-2011, all have pretty open draws. Ferndown pipes do have a smaller airway, which is just how Les likes it I guess.
 
alfredo_buscatti":my96wdbm said:
I've never seriously considered buying a Dunhill. Boring. Paying consistently big bucks to buy a name. Engineering is mediocre at best.
Click to expand...
which, again, since you've never owned one why are you commenting on their engineering?
 
You're right, I've neither owned nor smoked a Dunhill. I know you have and like them and I'm glad they work for you. But I have examined them. The American pipe renaissance incorporates these standards, as does the pipe Todd Harris made for me which smokes as well as a cob, my debatable standard; I do believe these artisans are on to something. I much prefer Todd's pipe to the many other pipes I've smoked; you may not.

Opinions, different tastes?
 
alfredo_buscatti":8gafd7vh said:
The American pipe renaissance
Click to expand...
oh boy.

If you don't like factory pipes don't smoke factory pipes. Discussions about pipes that you don't smoke and that have never been in your rotation? What is the point? Just taking pot shots at pipes you've convinced yourself to dislike with no hands-on experience to back it up? Not productive.

FWIW, the only English pipes I've ever owned with a restricted airway were Ferndowns. I liked them for a while, you get used to their smoking qualities, but ultimately as I became more enamored of English pipes and started buying older pipes from the 50s and 60s I didn't feel the Ferndowns compared favorably, and I got rid of the several I owned. Plus they're so freaking big. I do feel that my modern Dunhills are as good smokers as any pipes from the halcyon days of English pipe making that I own.
 
I've owned a half-dozen Ferndown REOs and two Ashtons, and it irritates me that they haven't smoked better. I particularly like REOs and have a pot and:

1. tiny draft
2. stem isn't comfortable, angles up from the button, no place to clench.
3. no chamfer
4. no funnel
5. heavy
6. big/clumsy

1-4 in my book shouldn't be. 5&6 can be good or bad. These pipes are sturdy.

I had another REO Dublin, a shape I've seen him make again, a group 5. It came fitted with the clunkiest bit I've ever seen. Sometimes I see a pipe with an unwieldy stem which seems nothing more than aesthetics. But you can't put aesthetics in your mouth; what art can save a stem fit for something other than a human? The Pease/DiPiazza pipes are like this, and although I admit they have a designer flash, I'd have to resort to a rubber bit. Now I've bought a pipe or two knowing I'd have to use a rubber bit.

But wait, pipes come with stems that are supposed to enable them to be held them in one's mouth. Isn't this circuitous?
 
Let's go back to basics here, and talk about theoretical ideals, and then move to whys and why-nots.

There are two basically accepted notions for engineering a pipe. One is the idea that the airway should be smooth and uniform, with basically no changes of volume (cross-sectional area if you prefer). The idea is that you reduce/minimize condensation by not offering any turbulence inducing zones, no restrictions. Get the smoke in one smooth tube from bowl to button.

This works. And pipes with ragged tenons or obstructive designs generally will gurgle and fuss.

You can up the anti on this idea a bit, and add a nice touch: as a gas moves faster, it exerts less pressure on the side walls of a tube containing it (this is why planes can fly). So you might build a pipe that has an airway that gets smaller and smaller with the idea being that as the smoke cools on its way out of the pipe (and is therefore more likely to condense) it should be moved faster and faster. So a tapering airway seems to work too.


Now, a funneled tenon on one hand is a condensation cause - it's not going to offer as smooth a tube as a perfectly fitting non-funneled unit. But very many pipes do not and cannot have perfect fitting tenon/mortise joints (bent pipes for example) in terms of smoke-hole lining up. So the funnel is a concession in that direction - and it does not seem to do any harm at all.


Personally, I build big airways that taper a lot. But as long as things are at open enough and built well enough, even a fairly small draught hole will work - I have an excellent smoking old Sasieni that is drilled just under 1/8".
 
I too have fallen into the "wide open" category for making my pipes. I've learned from some outstanding pipe makers, and that's what they do, and it works. I'm sure there's a point where you could be too wide and it would ruin things, but there are some standards that work well.

I can't really add to what Sas said. I think he summed it up well.
 
I have two Dunhills, an '03, and an '06. When puffed on, both have just a hint of resistance in the draw, which actually feels just right.
 
The blog entry states that the chamber is in the shank but then goes on to give its dimensions, as if this were a traditionally chambered pipe housed in the bowl. Which is it? The article is very exciting but doesn't say just what a reverse calabash designed pipe is.
 
I don't prefer a wide open draft hole (ala new Castello's), but they smoke well enough otherwise, I put up with it. But, I much prefer the draft on my Upshalls and Ashtons, which by my taste and packing method are just right. You can make almost any draft hole work, packing to the pipe is the secret. I spend more time packing the Castello's very tightly than I do my Uphsalls or Ashtons. I have two Ferndowns and have to be careful not to pack too tightly. Packed correctly, both are excellent smoking pipes. I suppose their style wins me over some as well as the smoking experience. I've only owned one Dunhll (2002) and would put that draft hole on par with my Upshalls. That one was sold because I didn't like a straight pipe, not because of the way it smoked.
 
Sasquatch":ohhtimp7 said:
Let's go back to basics here, and talk about theoretical ideals, and then move to whys and why-nots.

There are two basically accepted notions for engineering a pipe. One is the idea that the airway should be smooth and uniform, with basically no changes of volume (cross-sectional area if you prefer). The idea is that you reduce/minimize condensation by not offering any turbulence inducing zones, no restrictions. Get the smoke in one smooth tube from bowl to button.

This works. And pipes with ragged tenons or obstructive designs generally will gurgle and fuss.

You can up the anti on this idea a bit, and add a nice touch: as a gas moves faster, it exerts less pressure on the side walls of a tube containing it (this is why planes can fly). So you might build a pipe that has an airway that gets smaller and smaller with the idea being that as the smoke cools on its way out of the pipe (and is therefore more likely to condense) it should be moved faster and faster. So a tapering airway seems to work too.


Now, a funneled tenon on one hand is a condensation cause - it's not going to offer as smooth a tube as a perfectly fitting non-funneled unit. But very many pipes do not and cannot have perfect fitting tenon/mortise joints (bent pipes for example) in terms of smoke-hole lining up. So the funnel is a concession in that direction - and it does not seem to do any harm at all.


Personally, I build big airways that taper a lot. But as long as things are at open enough and built well enough, even a fairly small draught hole will work - I have an excellent smoking old Sasieni that is drilled just under 1/8".
Click to expand...
Thank you for such a succinct explanation. Ed
 
The reverse calabash is like a Peterson system pipe in a way - there's a large chamber in the shank of the pipe where the smoke can sit and cool and swirl around. It's taken to an extreme, and the chamber sizes range up near 50cc on some of these things. Almost everyone who has smoked one has been surprised and impressed at how they smoke.

So this, in a sense, is the opposite end of the engineering spectrum - let's design a pipe that cools the smoke, knocks condensate out, and sends more user-friendly stuff out the stem. This is the Peterson system idea, and it works too. The trouble is that sometimes it works so good you get moisture sitting around on the end of the tenon and it gurgles.

The reverse calabash offers so much space that there isn't a focused condensing point, I suppose.


As to bit and button-work, this is where you really start to see an improvement in what a guy might call high grade pipes - most carvers take great care with their button work, but the extra time = extra money on the price point too. A pipe that retails for 200 bucks is never going to have the same stem as a pipe that retails for 600.
 
Harlock999":xq1g71o6 said:
I have two Dunhills, an '03, and an '06. When puffed on, both have just a hint of resistance in the draw, which actually feels just right.
Click to expand...
Dunnies have an excellent smooth draw, don't they?
 
Sas : that is where I'd imagine that a military bit would be ideal -- same as with a Peterson. Pull it out, sop up the juice, replace and continue. I wonder why they don't do that ?

:face:
 
I own a Dunhill bent rhodesian and i can say the airway is wide open and pipe has a smooth draft.
Then i own two Ferndown, a canadian and a bulldog, the drafthole on the canadian is smaller and the draft not so smooth, the drafthole on the bulldog is surprisingly wide open and consequently, for me, it is an easier smoke.
To be honest i need to say that, if properly packed and smoked, the canadian is a great smoker too, just my personal preference is for the wide open airways, in fact my favourite smoke is a Castello 55 with a huge drafthole.



 
Top