Guess who's the newest Peterson initiate?

[Rob_In_MO]

What's the record? Maybe we could break it with this one? Let's see, what could we add to this to keep it going? Maybe " does your Peterson "System" pipe smoke better with "ketchup 'bac or "old lady soap" 'bac ? This could be fun :tongue:

Well - Kyle was bombed with some of each, so this should be an easy test for him.

 

[monbla256]

Well - Kyle was bombed with some of each, so this should be an easy test for him.

Kyle doesn't do "easy" :twisted: :twisted:

 

[Storm_Crow]

Nice looking pipe Kyle. I actually just got my 1st Peterson as well, a D6 smooth churchwarden.

 

[DustyRoundup]

(Might as well shoot for 7 pages)

Hey Storm, how do you like that Pete Warden? I have been wanting one, but went with a Savinelli Warden to break out of my Pete addiction.

 

[Kyle Weiss]

I have a question: am I smoking this Peterson correctly?

I have noticed my Pete (the one discussed above) doing quite a swell job at keeping moisture from entering the stem, but this pipe does smoke a little wet more often than not. When I compare it to traditional pipes (mortise/tenon) that have never once given me a moisture problem, I'm concerned. I've probably had about 20 bowls through it so far.

Keep in mind, I dry my tobacco as needed before every bowl, and approach it like I would my other pipes, slow and steady, not smoking it like a fiend, etc.--but this Pete, with its "unsystem" quasi-system design, almost seems to condense moisture more than I think it should.

I know there's times when my cheaper pipes that don't quite fit correctly at the mortise/tenon (usually a gap) also smoke a little wetter, and I've read this lack of manufacturing tolerance can be the cause. Since Peterson pipes purposefully make a unique attempt at making these chambers that have a bit of space inside the shank, am I simply not used to it?

I find it odd. Suggestions? Comments? Thoughts?

 

[s.ireland]

Unfortunately I have always found the System pipes to create the problem that they are meant to solve.

What I mean is: they DO collect the moisture perfectly. However, they seem to cause more moisture at the same time. Any other pipe, like you said, would be considered faulty if it had a gap between the end of the tenon and mortise. If it didn't have a constant airflow. If there was anything along the draft hole that caused smoke to become "caught up" thus creating more moisture. People love the system pipes and that's great. I've actually owned four of them over the years. I guess I just got to a point where I realized that I wasn't actually having moisture issues while smoking thus eliminating the need for the moisture collecting reservoir. Just my opinion

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Hmmm. Interesting. I still love this pipe, it stuns me with beauty, but if I keep getting moisture issues, I may have to offer it up. I like interacting with my pipes in addition to collecting them--a pretty pipe ain't gonna do me much good if it's not delivering a quality smoke.

I still haven't ruled out possible techniques this particular pipe might be happy with, or that it is more sensitive to cold or ambient moisture--or that I'm smoking wetter than normal for whatever reason.

Some Embarcadero went in there today, and I dried the stuff to what I did yesterday in my Harris pipe, which gave me that heavenly experience I wrote about. It wasn't a bad smoke today, but it was moist and even sizzled in the Peterson bowl a little giving me some steam. Not expected. :scratch: I'm getting to a point where I think I'm used to some of of the pipes that have performed admirably, and why they do--we'll have to see.

 

[monbla256]

My experience with Peterson is with two Pre-Republic pipes, one a Deluxe System, the other a blasted Premier bulldog as well as two 999's one a blasted Donegal from '75 and a new Rosllare 999 bought last year. Then I have two Emeralds from the '80s, an 80s and a 606 pot. ALL of these pipes have smoked "wetter" than any of my other Brit or Danish or Italian pipes that I've bought over the years and I've learned that when I fill any Pete I have up, I need to have a few extra pipe cleaners handy than I do with many of my other pipes. I've decided it's just the way they are and enjoyed 'em as they are GOOD smoking pipes !! ( except for the d**n P-Lip which I've changed out on all mine that came with 'em :twisted: ) A side note: try ONLY English/Balkan mixes in 'em, they seem to like the dryer mixes as opposed to the moister straight Va's IMHO )

 

[Puff Daddy]

I've had to countersink several Peterson tenons, this solved the problem you experience. You can buy a simple countersink bit that will fit in a drill, just go slowly and round out the inside airway at the tenon. In this thread you'll see (7th post down) a pic and a link to Kurt Huhn photo essay on making stems. I had similar issues with several pipes, this solved it in most of them. I think it's just a step in the manufacturing process that Peterson skips, for whatever reason. They should be doing it.

http://www.pipemakersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3326

You can see the step in this ideo at the tail end, from 03:40 - 03:49

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xIaQnAoGlA

 

[Anonymous]

The system pipes were made to have stingers attached to the ends of the tenons. By design, the moisture remaining in the smoke condensed on these and dripped into the well.

Even without these, it's fairly simple to pull the stem and blow the condensate out into a kleenex and sop up what's condensed in the well with a q-tip.

Or, check to make sure the end of the tenon is threaded to accept one, get a replacement, and you're back on the road again.

With a regular pipe like your 80S, just tilt the stem down ; the moisture in it will bead up at the tip so you can blot it with a kleenex. Works better than pipe cleaners & cheaper by far.

:face:

 

[Puff Daddy]

Remember, Kyle's pipe is not a true system pipe, it just has a gap between the end of the tenon and the bottom of the mortise.

 

[Anonymous]

Yep. Good catch, PeeDee, That's why I added a bit to the end of it.

:face:
TAKES ME A WHILE BUT I GET THERE.

 

[Kyle Weiss]

I've "countersunk" a few of my cheaper pipes already, I'm familiar with the procedure. It's worked so far on them, but the reason why I was doing that was because I was sucking up moisture into the stem itself. I suppose it's more to reduce condensation surfaces rather than simply preventing moisture from going into the stem like a straw. :scratch: *shrug* I'm still game to give it a try, however, I might have to get a larger countersink than I have, because the tenon end of the stem on this is pretty hefty.

I've also tried not to remove the stem while the pipe is in use, nor while hot and/or moist, because this was counter to what was good for any pipe...but, if it's being suggested this is alright, I'll give it a go. When I clean it, I already use a twisted-up everclear-damp kleenex to get in there and get rid of any funk--well after the pipe has cooled and dried.

I like the suggestion of switching over to English/Balkan mixtures, because indeed I have been using this as a VA pipe. Though, I have dried the VAs plenty.

So, thanks for the thoughts, gents.

 

[Puff Daddy]

You can remove a system pipe stem while the pipe's hot because it's essentially a military mount, your pipe is not. I wouldn't do it.

I had to buy a rather large countersink bit too. The Pete 999's I own have some really thick tenons. $8 at home depot, better than selling the pipe.....

 

[Harlock999]

At the risk of offending the Peterson Nation, (which is legion, apparently), how do these often troublesome pipes manage to engender such fierce loyalty and affection?
Systems, fake systems, dipped bowls, and p-lips aside, with all the countersinking of tenons and swapping stems, it just seems like a lot of work to get a pipe to perform to one's liking.

 

[Ocelot55]

At the risk of offending the Peterson Nation, (which is legion, apparently), how do these do these often troublesome pipes manage to engender such fierce loyalty and affection?

Ha! This might be more appropriate as a new thread. As an owner of about 20 Petes, I can supply a pretty good answer. First, they are a relatively affordable mid grade pipe. Second, they look great aesthetically. That said, the smoking performance on most Petes is inconsistent. I have several Petes that I just can't seem to get a good smoke out of. Others are absolutely wonderful smokers. All in all, for a mid-grade pipe I'd say Petes are about where they should be as far as price and smoke-ability. Savinelli is about the same, although I would say that Savinellis on a whole smoke better, but the finish on them sucks. I can see sanding marks on some of mine.

 

[SPUD 15]

WOW MY HEAD IS SPINNING WHICH IS NOTHING NEW. I HAVE A FEW PETES ALL P LIP PIPES AND ENJOY ALL OF THEM BUT I HAVE TO THROW ANOTHER WRENCH INTO THE MIX. THERE ARE ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS IN THE PETERSONS LINE UP BUT I HAVE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THE S PLACED AFTER THE SHAPE# MENT THAT THE STEM WAS A SADDLE BIT, THE ABSENCE OF THE S AFTER THE SHAPE# MEANT THAT THE PIPE HAD A TAPERED BIT. I HAVE SEEN THIS TO BE ABOUT 95% TRUE WHAT EXPERIENCE DO ALL THE BROTHERS HAVE OUT THERE. THE ONE SHAPE THAT I HAVE ALWAYS SEEN WITH A SADDLE BIT WITHOUT THE S IS THE # 53 WHICH IS A LOVAT. KYLE GREAT LOOKING PIPE I AM SURE YOU WILL ENJOY IT FOR MANY, MANY , MANY YEARS. i HAVE ALWYS WANTED A 999, 999S, 80, 80S BUT HAVE NEVER BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO GRAB ONE. mike

 

[Anonymous]

The Peterson Parade has been marching along for 136 years now. There is a kind of romantic aspect to this that plays well to many pipe smokers' self-affiliation with bygone days and values.

Another aspect of them -- seemingly ineradicable no matter how much time passes -- is the blue collar-slash-underdog association they've been stuck with. Back when Comoys, Barlings, Sasienis (et al.) were "upstairs," Petersons were "downstairs." This resonates with many here in the US (and elsewhere) who would be much more comfortable in bluejeans, hanging out with friends at the corner local than dressed to the nines in a drawingroom.

Sure they've had their rough patches. So have the football teams many follow, without that negatively impacting people's loyalty to and enjoyment of them. That's part of it.

Ultimately, IMHO, it's the taste of them. Dip-stain correction and the airway problems that affect some smokers with some shapes aside, they just taste good. Even new out of the box. From what I've been able to gather and piece together, they've been made of Spanish briar rather than the Grecian of the "Dublin-&-London" ones made in England. At one time, at least, many if not most were bought as pre-turned & graded stummels from their Spanish affiliate. One very well-known pipe aesthete positively detests the way they taste, being of the opinion that they take so long to smoke in that they're not worth the investment in time and effort they take. This is, needless to say, a minority position in the pipe world, seeing as Spanish-sourced briar is being well-received by contemporary upscale carvers here.

There has never been fewer than a handful of them here -- mostly straights or 80Ss, and they've never failed to deliver quality smokes with Virginia flakes. Nearly all have been older estates (pre-1980), and those that have been gifted away over the years have consistently been "hits."

:face:

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Besides the namesake and those that swoon over them, I bought this pipe simply based on shape and looks. In that area, I didn't go wrong. I had no idea what I was in for, quasi-system pipe or not. If I get another Pete I'd rather get one with a traditional, non-system (or non quasi-system, as in this case) stem/shank. It's common practice for me now to check pipes at the shank/stem to make sure they aren'tmade as filter pipes, I guess I just gotta inspect everything I'm interested in a little closer.

I'm sure Peterson pipes smoke just fine, and they do indeed look wonderful. I'm just not sure if I like these wide, moisture collecting (inducing?) chambers, system or unsystem. It seems I have better luck with traditional setups.

As for this Pete, I'll give it a countersink/chamfered treatment on the stem, and see if that helps.

The other company I've seen that makes great-looking bulldogs is Caminetto. Harder to find, but good lookin' stuff.

 

[monbla256]

At the risk of offending the Peterson Nation, (which is legion, apparently), how do these do these often troublesome pipes manage to engender such fierce loyalty and affection?

Ha! This might be more appropriate as a new thread. As an owner of about 20 Petes, I can supply a pretty good answer. First, they are a relatively affordable mid grade pipe. Second, they look great aesthetically. That said, the smoking performance on most Petes is inconsistent. I have several Petes that I just can't seem to get a good smoke out of. Others are absolutely wonderful smokers. All in all, for a mid-grade pipe I'd say Petes are about where they should be as far as price and smoke-ability. Savinelli is about the same, although I would say that Savinellis on a whole smoke better, but the finish on them sucks. I can see sanding marks on some of mine.

I think a lot of the Peterson "mystique" is it's longevity and history and the looks of the traditional System bent as much as it is the pipes actual smoking properties. And once someone has spent hard earned $s for something, it's not easy to say you might have made a mistake. That said, my experience with them is really based on much older pipes than the current production and the best smoking Petes I have are my oldest which were Pre-Republic pipes bought in 1946 by my father, and then several I bought new back in the early '70s. These were all medium grade Petes and it wasn't till 2 years ago that I bought 2 new ones that were what could be called bottom level high grades. The "dryest" smoking ones I own are the oldest and these two new ones though as I've said they all have tended to be "wetter" smokers than many of my other pipes. I feel it's just the way Pete's are, not a fault. Every "brand" of pipe I own has it's own particular traits, smoking wise and none are exactly as others though within the "brand" they do share these traits. I have several Dunhill's I've bought new over the years and frankly, it's taken up to a decade each for them to come into line so to speak. My BBBs smoked better from the start than these Dunhills! But now I would NOT get rid of ANY of them as they are GREAT pipes. And I still contend that a lot of this has to do with the type of blend/mixture smoked and how each person smokes it. JMHO