Things that make you go hmmm... Ebay "Dunnies"

[MisterE]

I'm going to hold off on commenting for the moment. I'm curious about what you Dunhill dudes think of these. Notice anything odd?


http://www.ebay.com/itm/1978-DUNHILL-4103-SHELL-MADE-IN-ENGLAND18-GR4-PIPE-/230886745408?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_210&hash=item35c1ec2540
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1973-DUNHILL-4105-SHELL-MADE-IN-ENGLAND13-PIPE-/230886739633?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_210&hash=item35c1ec0eb1
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1973-DUNHILL-5101-SHELL-MADE-IN-ENGLAND13-PIPE-/230886823754?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_210&hash=item35c1ed574a

 

[Puff Daddy]

The fact that they're stamped with Dunhill stamps over another makers stamp, or the fact that a french Canadian is admitting to owning English pipes? :lol:

 

[user 2031]

The fact that they're stamped with Dunhill stamps over another makers stamp, or the fact that a french Canadian is admitting to owning English pipes? :lol:

Wow! That sucks! The guy set the price low enough that someone will most likely do the buy it nows without taking time to notice that. I wonder what brand pipes these really are?

 

[monbla256]

The fact that they're stamped with Dunhill stamps over another makers stamp, or the fact that a french Canadian is admitting to owning English pipes? :lol:

A Canadian would own English pipes. A Canadienne would not :twisted: ( My family is from Quebec. My father was a Canadienne :twisted: )

As for the pipes, I would be suspect mainly 'cause of the finish of the blast on what were black stained pipes originally. I have two Shells that I bought new back in '73 and '74 and after smoking 40+ years the black has NOT worn off to where they look like that. JMHO

 

[DrumsAndBeer]

I still think the Rolex's in Encenada are a better deal. :lol:

 

[Rad Davis]

As for the pipes, I would be suspect mainly 'cause of the finish of the blast on what were black stained pipes originally. I have two Shells that I bought new back in '73 and '74 and after smoking 40+ years the black has NOT worn off to where they look like that. JMHO

Have you smoked yours long enough for another maker's stamp to appear under the Dunhill stampings? :lol:

It's interesting that he only shows a top shot, bottom shot and stem shots. No side shots.

Boo.

Rad

 

[MisterE]

^I know, no side shot makes it a little harder to know whether it's a Dublin , an Apple, or a Billiard. You only have the shape number to go on. If you don't know how the new bowlsize/stemshape/shapenumber system works, you'd just have to take his word for it.

Dunhills from the early 60s always catch my eye so I took a look. The original posting had these pipes all dated 10 years earlier. Seeing this, I wrote the seller and asked if he was sure about that as no legible date is visible. I also mentioned that the pipes looked restamped.

He wrote back swearing they were all original stamping.

I don't know why I pressed the point. I really had no interest whatsover other than to just call him on it. I replied that the numbering system as such didn't even exist until the '70s. I also attatched a photo of a '62 Shell Briar of mine just to drive the point home. I guess I just hate seeing something so obvioulsy suspect sold with a straight face.

He then swithched the dates on the description.

Good going, dude. :scratch:

To my eye they look to actually be stamped DUNHILL underneath and subsequently re-stamped with a different die. What's especially interesting is all three have the same letters offset (The ELL of "shell" is identical on all three). Also the dates are only a squiggly mark- but curiously the same squiggly mark is on all. I strongly suspect the same person restamped all three with the same die.

My BS-o-meter is ringing.

Again: caveat emptor :suspect:

 

[Briar Spirit]

Kinda puts one in mind of the 1980's fake Dunhill scam: http://loringpage.com/pipearticles/80s%20Fakes.htm

 

[Kyle Weiss]

If they're fakes, they're really bad ones. It wouldn't take much to fake a stamp and punch them (which is making me wonder why all of the fonts look identical, meaning the same stamp hit all of them)...but a pro would have sanded down the older stamp a little more at least. *sigh*

I think they're counterfeit. A Dunhill expert should point out all of the reasons why, if that's the case, or the reasons why they're real--and post them here...it'd help the unsuspecting.

8)

 

[MisterE]

Here's another....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1937-DUNHILL-SHELL-PATENT-417574-suffix17-MADE-IN-ENGLAND-PIPE-/230886885452?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_210&hash=item35c1ee484c

This is the smoothest blast I've ever seen on a Shell Briar.

 

[monbla256]

Here's another....

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1937-DUNHILL-SHELL-PATENT-417574-suffix17-MADE-IN-ENGLAND-PIPE-/230886885452?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_210&hash=item35c1ee484c

This is the smoothest blast I've ever seen on a Shell Briar.

I'm not a Dunnie expert by any means but I do now own several, all one owner ( me, my father) bought new and several things just don't look "right" as have been pointed out here. Besides the questionable stamping, none of these are stamped as my two shells I bought new in '73/'74, but the angles, clarity of views of the pipes in the pics does not really allow one to accuratly assess their authencicity nor their condition. From what I've seen I would move on and look elsewhere for my "used" Dunnie

 

[sisyphus]

I was looking at the 73. I thought the 4 digit shape codes came a little later, so that looked fishy right off the bat.

 

[desertpiper]

Did you also notice it looks like there's two different stems being shown.

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Judging from the guy's username, I think it's also possible he's a junk scrounger like some of us are (i.e., me) and he's trying to cash in on a find. It's possible it's not his doing, that happens a lot. He probably keeps an eye on stuff that's worthwhile and knows just enough to buy and react to names on things (or form factors people like) and buys them on the cheap, hoping to win the flea market lottery. Fair game, but that's the risk one takes.

It could be those were fudged years ago, and have been circulating like that for a long time.

Guys selling coins have this happen all the time. There are countless fakes of certain coinage that the unsuspecting seller bought one, then tried to recoup his money back on ePrey. Of course, he will practically get blamed for being the guy who minted the fake, and is often removed from eBay permanently for passing off known fakes. *shrug* Only the seller really knows what happened.

Crazy world out there, especially when the pitchforks, torches and ropes come out. Blind justice, I guess. :lol: Caveat emptor, indeed.

8)

 

[IndySmoker]

The Cumberland actually looks ligit (to my untrained eye) the underlined 24 = 1994. I have a bulldog cumberland with 5 digit number dated 22 (1982) I don't know when they went from 5 digits to 4.
But I could be wrong.

 

[Rad Davis]

I sent him a message on Ebay:

HI,

This pipe has a smooth finish, yet SHELL indicates a sand blast finish on Dunhill pipes. Do you have any more information on this particular pipe or any more pics?

Thanks.

This was his response:

beautiful pipe except the beak with teeth on one side above

I take this to mean that there are tooth marks on the top side of the stem. I don't think English is his first language, but he didn't answer either question I asked. He's apparently from Quebec, and a lot of his auction language is French.

Whether he knows anything about the pipes being suspect is anyone's guess.

Rad

 

[Kyle Weiss]

The pipe might have been smoked by a prehistoric, bird-like creature. In that case, totally worth the price. Points for Quebecois observation, if anything.

8)

 

[MisterE]

The Cumberland actually looks ligit (to my untrained eye) the underlined 24 = 1994. I have a bulldog cumberland with 5 digit number dated 22 (1982) I don't know when they went from 5 digits to 4.
But I could be wrong.

eg, 4103

4=bowl group size
1=stem style, in this case tapered
03= shape, in this case a billiard

There can be five digits on some pipes. 32011, for example. The first four are the size/stem/shape. The last digit, I believe, indicates a slight variation from the standard design. Perhaps a slightly shorter bowl, etc.

 

[monbla256]

The Cumberland actually looks ligit (to my untrained eye) the underlined 24 = 1994. I have a bulldog cumberland with 5 digit number dated 22 (1982) I don't know when they went from 5 digits to 4.
But I could be wrong.

He claims these are pipes made BEFORE the Cumberland model came into production ! Can't have a Cumberland produced in the '70s from what I understand since I don't believe this model was produced till the '90s :twisted:

 

[IndySmoker]

From what I understand about the Cumberlands they started in 1980 or 82 and Dunhill introduced 5 digits. The fifth number was if the stem was bent (straight pipe bent stem makes sense right)
But everything I can find online pretty much stops in the late 80s. Also read that in the 90s they dropped the last number and put a line under the number then started all over with the 20s, 1990=underlined 20
But eeeeeeh they'll let anyone right a pipe blog these days
:lol!: