To Take Ze Pipe Apart Or Not; That Is The Question

[skaukatt]

LL, I would caution against modifying the mortise. Seems excessive just to accomodate the passage of a cleaner. I take a less is more approach when reaching for the tools!

I never understood the "sacredness of originality" regarding such mods. Why? Because on the super-premium brands---Barbi, Rasmussen, Ivarsson, etc.---such details are always found. The only reason they aren't on less expensive pipes is the maker was trying to save a buck. If a ramp had been there new, in other words, you'd be pleased. But since it wasn't, the maker's laziness/shortcut should be... preserved?

Hm. :suspect:

LL, emphatically yes! If the so called, ramp had been there great, terrific, excellent foresight on the part of the maker. But as I said that's just me, right. It is my choice to put tool to briar or not. You don't need to understand the "sacredness of originality" as you put it, if you choose not to adhere to it. I would rather not mess with/modify a pipe because my position or feeling is that I want the pipe as original as possible (obviously tougher on estate pieces) but on my own, I control what happens to them. I adhere to the sacredness of originality doctrine. I know that many could not give a hoot - that's there prerogative, and mine, right?

I disagree with your assessment in the description of saying in "less expensive pipes" if you mean some of the Dunhill's or Charatan's or Castello's that don't pass a pipe cleaner due to the bend in the stem or shank (again, this opens up a totally different discussion that goes on ad infinitum). Those pipes are all on par with those that you mention. If by lesser expensive pipes you mean machine made or other hand mades of lesser quality or value, decided as a price point by the maker, then I will say that I don't know why the maker did not include such a feature on the mortise. To say with a blanket statement that, "The only reason they aren't on less expensive pipes is the maker was trying to save a buck" I don't believe is fully correct. Definitley in some instances but certainly not all.

Again, I, that is I do not modify my pipes. Someone else can do whatever they want, it is a matter of chioce. Call me anal retentive about it if you want but it is just my position on it as it applies to me.

Lou, NY

 

[skaukatt]

So, now we've taken the original discussion of taking apart a pipe or not and modified it into a discussion on, To Modify or Not To Modify - which also can go on ad infinitum.

Let's take Rick Newcombe, for eample. I highly respect and regard him, have read his book and met him in person a few times, and while I can see the value that is placed on widening the draft hole, as he likes, for me, I would not do it. That's just my position on the subject.

While I have come across a few pipes in my 175 + collection that have less than optional draft holes, it does not bother me to the extent that I would take measures to widen them. Mr. Newcombe, as stated in his book, does this regularly on purchase of a new pipe. But, that's him. That's what is so fantastic about our hobby. We all have different likes, dislikes, approaches, styles, methods, etc... that all work for us. They fall on both sides of the spectrum of aggressive and non aggressive and everywhere in between. Everybody falls within it somewhere and they are neither right or wrong.

Now, let's get back to the original premise of taking apart a pipe for cleaning or not.

Lou, NY

 

[LL]

I disagree with your assessment in the description of saying in "less expensive pipes" if you mean some of the Dunhill's or Charatan's or Castello's that don't pass a pipe cleaner due to the bend in the stem or shank ... Those pipes are all on par with those that you mention.

They most definitely are not. Some of the worst workmanship I've ever seen came out of the Castello and Charatan shops. (Dunhills aren't always great, but they are never horrifying.)

 

[LL]

Now, let's get back to the original premise of taking apart a pipe for cleaning or not.

Lou, NY

I'm pretty sure the BoB board can handle a bit of relevant digression.

 

[skaukatt]

I disagree with your assessment in the description of saying in "less expensive pipes" if you mean some of the Dunhill's or Charatan's or Castello's that don't pass a pipe cleaner due to the bend in the stem or shank ... Those pipes are all on par with those that you mention.

They most definitely are not. Some of the worst workmanship I've ever seen came out of the Castello and Charatan shops. (Dunhills aren't always great, but they are never horrifying.)

Again, we can agree to disagree. The Dunhill's I speak of are 1960's vintage and I disagree with your assessment on them and Castello. I would not argue 1980's to present runs of Dunhill's but prior to the 1970's I would have to disagree with you. To say that Castello falls into your category is also something I emphatically disagree with. The Charatan's are also of 1950's to 1960's era and I again disagree with your assessment. While every shop has its high and low points, claiming that the "worst" workmanship came out of these pipe factories is overstating it.

Lou, NY

 

[skaukatt]

Now, let's get back to the original premise of taking apart a pipe for cleaning or not.

Lou, NY

I'm pretty sure the BoB board can handle a bit of relevant digression.

Well, LL, I guess I cannot disagree with you on this one...

Lou, NY

 

[LL]

I disagree with your assessment in the description of saying in "less expensive pipes" if you mean some of the Dunhill's or Charatan's or Castello's that don't pass a pipe cleaner due to the bend in the stem or shank ... Those pipes are all on par with those that you mention.

They most definitely are not. Some of the worst workmanship I've ever seen came out of the Castello and Charatan shops. (Dunhills aren't always great, but they are never horrifying.)

Again, we can agree to disagree. The Dunhill's I speak of are 1960's vintage and I disagree with your assessment on them and Castello. I would not argue 1980's to present runs of Dunhill's but prior to the 1970's I would have to disagree with you. To say that Castello falls into your category is also something I emphatically disagree with. The Charatan's are also of 1950's to 1960's era and I again disagree with your assessment. While every shop has its high and low points, claiming that the "worst" workmanship came out of these pipe factories is overstating it.

The term "disagree" doesn't apply. While shape, size, and finish preferences are subjective, whether or not a pipe has had its shank drilled twice when the first stab missed the bowl completely (Castello), or the airway through the shank was so far off center that the wall of the mortise was grooved to half its depth (Charatan Supreme) isn't arguable. Nor is the acceptability of such nonsense regardless of price.

Overstating? On the contrary---what I said is quite literally true. I just call 'em the way they come across my bench. The price paid, or perceived prestige of the brand doesn't figure into it. And the airway instances described are something I have never seen on any other pipes.

 

[skaukatt]

I disagree with your assessment in the description of saying in "less expensive pipes" if you mean some of the Dunhill's or Charatan's or Castello's that don't pass a pipe cleaner due to the bend in the stem or shank ... Those pipes are all on par with those that you mention.

They most definitely are not. Some of the worst workmanship I've ever seen came out of the Castello and Charatan shops. (Dunhills aren't always great, but they are never horrifying.)

Again, we can agree to disagree. The Dunhill's I speak of are 1960's vintage and I disagree with your assessment on them and Castello. I would not argue 1980's to present runs of Dunhill's but prior to the 1970's I would have to disagree with you. To say that Castello falls into your category is also something I emphatically disagree with. The Charatan's are also of 1950's to 1960's era and I again disagree with your assessment. While every shop has its high and low points, claiming that the "worst" workmanship came out of these pipe factories is overstating it.

The term "disagree" doesn't apply. While shape, size, and finish preferences are subjective, whether or not a pipe has had its shank drilled twice when the first stab missed the bowl completely (Castello), or the airway through the shank was so far off center that the wall of the mortise was grooved to half its depth (Charatan Supreme) isn't arguable. Nor is the acceptability of such nonsense regardless of price.

Overstating? On the contrary---what I said is quite literally true. I just call 'em the way they come across my bench. The price paid, or perceived prestige of the brand doesn't figure into it. And the airway instances described are something I have never seen on any other pipes.

OK, then so there we have from an expert.

I humbly concede the disagreement, or did I misstate that? You should know that opinions vary. That is what we basically have here, a difference of opinion on approach to pipes. You being the expert, then, I guess there is nothing left for me to say.

It is posters like you that keep me from offering and sharing on these types of boards. With such posters it always ends in a flame of sorts if opinions do not coincide with the poster. They can't take an opinion that might differ from their own. Sad though, that the hobby suffers for such as these. So, then, you win, OK? Happy now? No more flames. Go ahead and modify all you want.

Lou, NY

 

[LL]

You're crackin' me up, Lou. :lol:

I think the problem you refer to---why you find forums argumentative at times---has far more to do with your prickliness when confronted by facts than anything else. (Few things get people exercised faster than having their wishful-thinking-based beliefs challenged by hard data.)

The MODIFY question that you cleverly circled back around to isn't what I'm referring to, of course---by all means, do what you like with your property... that most definitely is an opinion situation. It is your declaration that Castellos and Charatans are equal in craftsmanship to northern European high grades. That is absurd, as anyone who has inspected a statistically significant sample of each will readily attest.

P.S. Flames? Happy now? Oh, the drama... :roll:

 

[skaukatt]

You're crackin' me up, Lou. :lol:

I think the problem you refer to---why you find forum's argumentative at times---has far more to do with your prickliness when confronted by facts than anything else. (Nothing seems to get people exercised faster than having their wishful-thinking-based beliefs challenged by hard data.)

Glad I made you laugh, LL.

Thank you for offering your opinion, I can can accept that. Disagreements on the boards are welcome, it encourages debate. Some, however, have a hard time accepting the opinions of others so the debate morphs into something nasty. Anyone in the hobby that knows me will know that is not my style and now I am sorry I ever replied to this thread.

Wishful thinking based beliefs, now you've got me laughing. BTW, I was not defending Dunhill's, Charatan's, Castello's over the brands you mentioned, just disagreeing on your opinions about them - I am allowed to disagree, correct, or is this not allowed here? Neither did I ever challenge your "facts" - I just offered my opinion.

You won't exercise me from the board, LL, just from engaging in discussions that you are involved in.

Lou, NY

 

[Puff Daddy]

I almost hate to interject here, but in reading this back and forth I see a mistake in the argument. There is the concept of good drilling and proper airways and there is the term 'Craftsmanship'. If one man believes that good craftsmanship cannot be claimed if an airway is not perfect (or if a maker has not employed all possible and necessary techniques to make it so) and another feels that craftsmanship (and value) is represented by a myriad of factors including both empirical and subjective factors - and that a less than perfect execution of one of these factors does not remove the item from being worthy of the moniker - then the argument is one of semantics and not substance. It sounds to me like LL is merely saying that some "Fine Pipes" are not as fine as their reputation bears because mechanical flaws are too often present and Lou feels like some of his pipes that have these flaws are beautiful and fine things despite the flaws and of no less value to him because of them. I find that I agree with you both. I have had pipes that I loved very much but traded away because the airways were less than ideal, I have others that bear these same flaws that I cannot bear to trade away and love them anyhow, although I smoke them an awful lot less than those with very good airways.

It seems that many makers and carvers are finding that airway issues are of at least as much importance as pits and fills to todays collector and that engineering is getting better all the time. I have seen what LL can do to a less than ideal airway and also have experienced the Newcombe-like 'Open airway' theory put into practice and have to say that it makes a tremendous difference in making a beautiful pipe a wonderfully productive smoking instrument but I also understand that there are a lot of different methodologies employed in the packing and smoking of pipes and can understand how the opening of a pipe or the correcting of a less than ideal airway can be of no significance to some smokers. It makes a debate about 'Right' and 'Proper' and the definition of 'Craftsmanship' a very subjective and tenuous thing.

 

[skaukatt]

Puff,

Very professionally, intelligently and politely stated. Thank you for jumping in here. I never intended it to go this far and I normally, rather, almost always back off of such derisive chatter in favor of promoting the hobby rather than taring it down over a matter of opinion. I think anyone who knows me will tell you that.

Thanks, again,

Lou, NY

 

[Puff Daddy]

I'd hate to see anyone not throw out their opinions because they wanted to avoid a debate or even a mild scuffle. Reason? We can learn so much more in the broader sense by taking in a lot of opinions and observations by a lot of experienced pipe enthusiasts. The wealth of opinion and information helps us to form opinions of our own. More information, more to experiment with, better end results for the individuals. The mere fact that you and LL both threw some beliefs out on the table in a debate allowed us to ingest several tangible points. Hell, anytime a debate like this can get going and good will be maintained everybody wins because we have an opportunity to learn. LL knows how much I respect his insight and opinion, I'd like to invite you to jump in more often with yours too as it's based on a long span as a collector as well. These kind of threads are among the best on the boards. Don't hold back, it's good information and good entertainment

 

[skaukatt]

I'd hate to see anyone not throw out their opinions because they wanted to avoid a debate or even a mild scuffle. Reason? We can learn so much more in the broader sense by taking in a lot of opinions and observations by a lot of experienced pipe enthusiasts. The wealth of opinion and information helps us to form opinions of our own. More information, more to experiment with, better end results for the individuals. The mere fact that you and LL both threw some beliefs out on the table in a debate allowed us to ingest several tangible points. Hell, anytime a debate like this can get going and good will be maintained everybody wins because we have an opportunity to learn. LL knows how much I respect his insight and opinion, I'd like to invite you to jump in more often with yours too as it's based on a long span as a collector as well. These kind of threads are among the best on the boards. Don't hold back, it's good information and good entertainment

Point well taken, Puff.

Thanks, again,

Lou, NY

 

[Ol'Dawg]

You have to take into account that LL sees the worst, otherwise they wouldn't have sent them to be fixed/repaired. This may or may not tend to sway his opinion/preception of various brands.

Jim

 

[Anonymous]

Still, if the kinds of serious flaws LL is referring to were visible on the outsides (rather than hidden in the interiors), there would be no argument.

If a Lexus or a BMW had to be disassembled and re-manufactured to get it to perform the way it was supposed to (something like Harleys were at one point) they wouldn't be regarded as good cars in the first place.

IOW : adjust the image to reflect the substance.

:face:

 

[LL]

Ol' Dawg brings up a point that I've often wondered about, but by definition can never know.

As for Lou's insistence that this discussion is about conflicting opinions, I don't see that at all. The modify-or-not issue, yes. That's a pretty pure example, in fact. But a shop's attention to quality and detail is quite a different thing. Off center chambers, stepped chambers, multiple airway drillings, off center airway drillings, skewed shank/stem axial alignment, and "lopsided" stems (where the material through the bite zone is noticeably thicker on one side than the other), are NOT subjective. They either exist or not. Opinion is irrelevant. And on the best northern European brands you never see those things, while with Castellos and Charatans (and a number of other reputedly premium brands) you frequently do.

How else can "craftsmanship" be defined besides the human effort that bridges the gap between what Nature produces and the finished product on a shelf?

For what it's worth (lest anyone think I'm playing favorites), I have many Dunhills and a number of Charatans and Cassies, but not a single uber-grade Danish/German/etc. pipe. Why? Because I don't like them. Why? Because they are too perfect. "Smokable art" leaves me cold. I like scattered overflowing ashtrays, use wooden matches, and habitually leave pipes lying about everywhere. I also like knowing a pipe can be easily refinished, repaired, re-stemmed, and modified if desired. In short, I think of pipes as interactive---almost living---symbiotic objects with a personality that I share my space with. Danish/German/etc uber grades, on the other hand, are like laboratory-grown, DNA-perfected-in-vitro supermodels. Damn nice to look at, but that you can't enjoy sex with because you're worried about mussing their hair or smearing their lipstick.

 

[LL]

Still, if the kinds of serious flaws LL is referring to were visible on the outsides (rather than hidden in the interiors), there would be no argument.

If a Lexus or a BMW had to be disassembled and re-manufactured to get it to perform the way it was supposed to (something like Harleys were at one point) they wouldn't be regarded as good cars in the first place.

What the hell is going on here? :shock: That makes two posts in a row where Yak and I have agreed about something. :affraid: :lol: :lol:

 

[skaukatt]

Well, if it is as Puff says, LL, we created a good debate, exchange of ideas and opinions and good fodder for discussion - all which make for a good board.

Can we at least agree on that?

Lou, NY

 

[LL]

Well, if it is as Puff says, LL, we created a good debate, exchange of ideas and opinions and good fodder for discussion - all which make for a good board.

Can we at least agree on that?

Good board? Definitely. Jason and Dock make a good team, and keep this place balanced really well between ASP chaos and SF formality.

Created a good debate, and exchanged ideas and opinions that created good discussion fodder? Not really. The original whether-to-disassemble-or-not is a good (if small) subject, but we didn't talk about that. You merely referred to a pipe that didn't allow a cleaner to pass as having no "alternative" solution, I suggested one, and in the course of what followed you said Castellos, Charatans, and Dunhills were made with the same care/precision/craftsmanship as Barbis, Rasmussens, and Ivarssons.

Nothing to debate or exchange ideas and opinions about, there. Put 'em on a track and race 'em. Set 'em off and see which makes the louder bang. See who can lift the heaviest barbell. Objective things are easily measured.

Unless you hold with some creative interpretation along the lines of imperfection/imprecision/sloppiness "imbue the pipe with the soul of the carver" better, so a sloppy pipe IS better made (I've met a few), the measurements speak for themselves.