Re: The differences in smoking of Pipe brands

[monbla256]

I found this interesting essay written by Fred Hanna and thought it might be of interest to some of the "newbies" as well as myself Some interesting stuff as to "the best pipes" and I realize it's "old hat" to the resident experts, but it still makes for some interesting reading

http://www.greatnorthernpipeclub.org/Myth.htm

 

[Blackhorse]

I agree with Hanna completely...having basket pipes that smoke better than many of the elite brand names I've owned and dumped. I think it's all about bowl geometry and airflow. Of course, that's not saying that there are some briars out there that I think last longer than others...or can add a nuance here or there.

One of the best smoking pipes I've ever had, and still own, is a Radice twin bore oil cured...and when clean as a whistle this little baby (an apple/brandy shape) is without peer. If it's not the twin bore, which does affect airflow...then it has to be the faux bamboo thing, which I love for some reason. It smokes flakes far better than it does finely textured blends.

There's been a lot written by good people about how a tapered bowl, like a Dublin, concentrates flavors down the bowl...and how and why a Prince is such a great flake smoker. I personally think that tall narrow bowls do better things with Burley blends than a standard design...but maybe that's just me. Just don't lay your hands on my MM Freehand and jar of Stormfront...what a combo those two are!

All in all it's very interesting reading and an interesting topic in general...one which we should all be far more versed in than we are as it plays such a major role in both smoking and in the selection of new briars, etc. Thanks for post it!

 

[Kyle Weiss]

That was a good read. It goes above and beyond stating (what I assume) most of us already know, but it has merit. The only thing I'd change is rather than "myth" I'd swap in the word "mislead," but that's just me. There's plenty of expensive pipes that smoke great and plenty of cheap pipes that smoke crappy, as well as the inverse to that notion.

I've always thought that what it comes down to is the same of any high-priced item in its respective field: pride equates the satisfaction for some, rather than the other way around for the rest. 8)

 

[Anonymous]

Any time there are too many variables to list, and too many potential inter-relations between them to even guess at, that guy's approach is one way to go. Except that, in Yak's eye view, it's utterly absurd. A parallel example of it :

“Feminist analysis begins with the principle that objective reality is a myth.”
      - Ann Scales, feminist legal scholar, in the Yale Law School Review.

Well, it might be a myth, but it's the myth we live in.

I'm not particularly interested in whether I can tell whether I'm smoking Embarcadero in the Parker or in the Loewe with my eyes closed -- for starters, because smoking a pipe with my eyes closed isn't something I have any interest in doing. That data byte is potentially interesting, but useless. Useless, because it doesn't help me orient myself in the world of "myth," in which my impressions might be hopelessly subjective but, at the same time, dependably consistent.

It's the consistency of the impressions that is the foundation of the choices made on the basis of them. This pipe, with this tobacco, prepared this way, results in this experience. Or, an experience within a given set of parameters.

On that basis, the Italian briar of Castello (census = 1) , Caminetto (3) and Cavicchi and (2) makes tobacco taste noticeably lighter and treble-ier than the Grecian briar of their old English rackmates (past and present) (summarising 40 off-&-on years' experience).

Whether ten other people agree on this isn't, on this end, an issue. If they do, it doesn't make my conclusion any more "valid," and if they don't, it doesn't make it "invalid."

But you know what ? When somebody else reports the same impression, it isn't surprising at all.

:face:

 

[Ocelot55]

It was an interesting article, and I think Fred is on to something, but his claim may be over exaggerated. As an amateur pipe maker, I would suggest that the air flow and volume of the air moving through the pipe and the smoker's personal preferences play a bigger role toward determining whether a pipe is an enjoyable smoke, rather than the briar. Don't get me wrong, briar DOES have a taste. I get first hand experience of this when I make a pipe. If I let the drill go too deep without clearing the chips it burns the briar. The smell/flavor of the smoke coming off that burnt briar does vary from block to block, and I even notice a slight taste difference between my oil cured Ashton pipes and other pipes with uncarbonized bowls, but only until they are broken in. After a pipe has been broken in, I doubt the briar provides much more than the occasional ghost of flavor, easily overpowered by other variables.

When I select a new pipe I need to pick it up; I need to draw air through the pipe, test the thickness of the bit, and look at the overall aesthetics. It has been my experience that my best smokers are the ones with the most open draw. That is the one variable that my good smoking basket pipes, artisan pipes, and high grade pipes all have in common, and if I abide by those criteria (and make sure to do a decent job packing my baccy) I am more often than not, rewarded with a great experience.

 

[Anonymous]

And the same holds (pardon my "subjectivity") true with tobacco.

Whether or not "everybody" tastes the same tastes with Embarcadero is arguable. Maybe one guy's "Izmir" taste is somebody else's "scrambled eggs."

But recent threads show that, when we get pretty fine with it, those (supposedly) "hopelessly subjective" tastes are congruent. They overlap in the same areas. Emphatically.

So we have the kind of baseline consistency in our "subjectivity" that the replicability-obsessed dialectical materialist reductionalists find, in the end, hopelessly elusive. We're not supposed to, but we do. Nor is that attributable (with a straight face) to "suggestion." If it were, some manufacturer who knew how could get a buzz going about one of his "cast of thousands" offerings and watch it go viral.

But if the magic's not "in there," all those subjective pipe guys aren't going to imagine that it is.

"The good stuff," in both pipes and tobaccos, has the reputation it does for not-no-reason. Which is not to say that there aren't overlooked masterpieces (how many people smoke GLP stuff that came out 10 years ago ? All the attention's focused on his new ones). Or that there aren't blue collar and basket pipes that out-taste and out-perform a lot of expensive ones. (High end Charatans could be oftentimes so badly drilled they're actually un-smokable. But Charatan made fine pipes, overall. The stinkers don't invalidate the accomplishments).

:face:
INTRANSIGENTLY "SUBJECTIVE"

 

[Anonymous]

FWIW (assuming anything), there are nine pipes here that smoke Virginia flakes (until recently, FVF). Of them, one (an old Stanwell shape chart model with a small fill marked "Made in Denmark") has a coated chamber. It provides a nice smoke (as do they all, or they wouldn't be on the team). But the flavor of the tobacco smoked (nothing but FVF for 3-4 years) in it's as if it's up against a glass ceiling. That last 10% (? or 5% ? or 1% ?) where really good, really well-seasoned briar dances with what's been in it for, like, forever just isn't there.

Without any doubt, a carefully made modern pipe of select briar with expert engineering will be a good-smoking pipe, coating or no coating. But that same pipe, coating removed, ripened by years of competent use, will be a different story. As in, a new Martin is a nice guitar. A 1930-something Martin is a phenomenal guitar.

That's "why" the old timers populate the racks here.

:face:

 

[Zeno Marx]

The guy in the article sure has a strong opinion. No doubt about that. An opinion piece. Nothing more. I thought I'd state my obvious since they felt the need to bloviate theirs. objectivity. Eh. In this context, messy and overrated. I agree with Yak.

 

[KevinM]

Okay, I didn't read it to the very end, but I don't think it covered an important predisposition variable -- $$$. If a piper pays, say, $500 for his Dunhill, he is going to be strongly inclined to find in it positive smoking qualities. He is not going to welcome the thought that he could have bought 100 MM Legends for the same price. And well he shouldn't.

What he paid for was brand, exclusivity, prestige. materials, quality and workmanship. He bought a "high end" pipe. Even the nomenclature tilts the smoking field. If he reports that his pipe delivers wisps of creme brulet in its backnote, it's hardly surprising and, truth to tell, probably a harmless indulgence.

Come downmarket a bit, and you'll find that. say, Stanwell and Sav offer the same styles at differnt price levels. How come? It's not because some are better smokers. Itt's because of the briar, the presence/absence of aesthetic defects, and the addition of various design embellishments.

Will the least expensive match the most expensive in smoking satisfaction?
If there were a way to prove that, I'd say, "Sure, why not?" (Just check the bore and bowl before you buy the cheapee.)

Which doesn't mean the most expensive is a poor choice. In five years you won't miss the extra money and will still enjoy the flame grain.

 

[Sasquatch]

As a seeker of perfect smokes and therefore of perfect smokers, I tend to think that the the engineering side is downplayed too much in Fred's article. (We've had a few chats about it, and we don't feel vastly differently in reality.)

Two Savinellis may or may not smoke identically, but I'll tell you what - the stem on that 400 dollar "Autograph" is totally different in feel than the average savinelli stem. Much more pleasant and much thinner. Better.

And that's what you tend to get when you are paying more - better shaping, more comfortable stem, and hopefully, correct engineering inside.

The idea that a pipe will smoke well because it's old or new or big or small..... doesn't play for me. Pipes smoke good when they are designed well, and built to tight tolerances from good materials.

 

[Anonymous]

Pipes smoke good when they are designed well, and built to tight tolerances from good materials.

As a blanket statement, that's probably as close to an accurate generalisation as anybody could make.

The kicker is that some pipes are just magical, despite arguable shortcomings in design and tolerances. You have to know and use them within their limitations, but the same is true of playing a Stradivari violin. Overdraw a pipe with a narrow airway and it will go wet & hot on you ; play a Strad too vigorously and it will sound like you're torturing an animal. There's a zone you have to stay within.

I've had, and passed along, pipes that fit your criteria ("names," at that) but were just pipes. To someone else, maybe they're dreams come true. I enjoy others that fail one of your criteria but somehow or other transcend that in use.

An untoward thought : airway improvements often dramatically improve old pipes. But in some cases, in practice, this doesn't matter. Because above and beyond quantifiable characteristics is taste. (re. which the Martin guitar rap).

re. Savineli :

Hundred dollar pipes with twenty-five cent stems

:face:

 

[Sasquatch]

"The kicker is that some pipes are just magical, despite arguable shortcomings in design and tolerances"


Yup. And as a guy who designs and sells pipes, this is both the biggest piss-off and the ultimate goal.

 

[KevinM]

I have several Savs that started out on the "Autograph" fast track, but later in the game tripped over some quality standard so I got 'em at a discount. The better stems do make quite a difference. And these started out as a great block o' briar. And they have "hand made" stamped on them. So they're "almost Autographs," I'd say, and they treat me very well. I've found that the position and cutting of the entry to the airway at the bottom of the bowl is a strong clue to the craftsmanship of the carver and one that is readily visible to the buyer.

 

[Wet Dottle]

This is an old subject, it's beating (pounding) on a dead (decomposnig) horse. I think that it is brought up regularly because people like to be controversial. If you think about it, however, there is nothing of major substance there: the fact is that people that buy expensive pipes don't do it because they expect the pipes to smoke better than their cheaper counterparts. They do it because they're looking for other things, such as perfect drilling (not for the sake of having a better smoke, but for the sake of perfection), meticulous finishing, particular shapes, quality of mouthpiece, because they like certain makers, exclusivity, because they just like to collect (without ever smoking them), etc. There's probably a myriad of different reasons.

Having said that, for me a good smoke is not limited to how a pipe smokes. It has to do with a number of other reasons, some of them very subjective. Many of my criteria have to do with quality of construction and eliminate most of the factory pipes made today. It is all in my head and has little to do with how the smoke tastes, but it determins how cheap I'm willing to go (or not to go).

 

[SpeedyPete]

What does the "engineering" of a pipe entails please?

 

[Rad Davis]

What does the "engineering" of a pipe entails please?

I prefer the term "craftsmanship" rather than "engineering". There's really no engineering involved.

It refers to the precise fit and finish of the stem and shank, slot and button shape, and to the drilling of the pipe so that all the holes are in their proper places, i.e., the smoke hole enters the bowl dead center and on the bottom; the smoke hole exits the mortise dead center, so the pipe passes a cleaner with little effort.

Rad

 

[Sasquatch]

Sissy ******** answer, from someone who makes straight pipes.


There are lots of ways to control the "engineering" side. Rad's right, what we're after is lining everything up, but the point of it is that we are trying to design a pipe which will not encourage condensation as the smoke flows from bowl to button. There are a number of theories about the best way to accomplish this, and you can brush up on your fluid dynamics to develop your own.

A pipe with a 1/8" draft hole and a roughly shaped tenon will smoke completely different than a pipe with a 3/16" draft hole and a properly treated tenon. There's a hundred little finesses and relations inside the pipe, and Rad is full of crap if he's pretending to ignore them.

 

[Zeno Marx]

What does the "engineering" of a pipe entails please?

That's the ten cent term for "take pride in what you're doing and pay attention to the details". That's my interpretation of it anyway, and it isn't a knock on the term. Shoddy quality, from entry level product to the bells and whistles top of the line product, drives me nuts. Obvious thing to say, right? Well, I'm more amazed with the people I meet who don't seem to care about quality than I am at the frustration I get from the lack of quality itself, and I meet a lot people who simply do not care about quality on any level. "buy it. use it. whatever."

 

[Sasquatch]

What has amazed me is what various makers/brands seem to find acceptable both in "engineering" and in "aesthetics" - managing to make pipe that are poorly shaped and/or crappy smokers. I understand needing to make a buck, but going through my pipes, I find fewer and fewer that meet my standards. What's funniest of all is that my best smoker is a Peterson system pipe. I hate that!

 

[Rad Davis]

Sissy ******** answer, from someone who makes straight pipes.


There are lots of ways to control the "engineering" side. Rad's right, what we're after is lining everything up, but the point of it is that we are trying to design a pipe which will not encourage condensation as the smoke flows from bowl to button. There are a number of theories about the best way to accomplish this, and you can brush up on your fluid dynamics to develop your own.

A pipe with a 1/8" draft hole and a roughly shaped tenon will smoke completely different than a pipe with a 3/16" draft hole and a properly treated tenon. There's a hundred little finesses and relations inside the pipe, and Rad is full of crap if he's pretending to ignore them.

Ok, so the Squatch is getting all esoteric on us. It still ain't engineering. It's craftsmanship. And what's this ******** about "fluid dynamics"? :twisted:

I know absolutely nothing about fluid dynamics, except that trout like to hang at the edge of back eddies in a stream, but I can still make a decent pipe. :lol:

Rad