5,741
edits
Dunhill: Difference between revisions
→About After Patents Era
| Line 733: | Line 733: | ||
At the beginning of the 60th decade, the Italian government restricted the use of the Briar to Italian manufacturers and the Algerian briar became scarce (consequence of the Algerian War of Independence. 1954-1962), which forced Dunhill to use the somewhat harder Greek briar, as R. D. Fields said in [[The Art of Sandblasting]], "During the 1960s and ’70s Dunhill could not acquire the Algerian briar." Consequently, the company’s sandblast pipes were much shallower and less distinct. Perhaps, this factor also contributed to the construction of this concept of loss of quality. But as Dr. Hanna argues in his article, "briar from certain regions has different physical qualities, but this does not seem to be related to taste and smoking potential." Loring also mentions this briar change in his book: | At the beginning of the 60th decade, the Italian government restricted the use of the Briar to Italian manufacturers and the Algerian briar became scarce (consequence of the Algerian War of Independence. 1954-1962), which forced Dunhill to use the somewhat harder Greek briar, as R. D. Fields said in [[The Art of Sandblasting]], "During the 1960s and ’70s Dunhill could not acquire the Algerian briar." Consequently, the company’s sandblast pipes were much shallower and less distinct. Perhaps, this factor also contributed to the construction of this concept of loss of quality. But as Dr. Hanna argues in his article, "briar from certain regions has different physical qualities, but this does not seem to be related to taste and smoking potential." Loring also mentions this briar change in his book: | ||
<blockquote><q>Since the early 1960's Algerian briar has been largely unavailable to Dunhill and much harder briar ( | <blockquote><q>Since the early 1960's Algerian briar has been largely unavailable to Dunhill and much harder briar (primarily Grecian) has had to be used for the finish. As a consequence since the mid-1960s the Shell finish is generally found with a significantly shallower blast.</q> Loring, J. C., The Dunhill Briar Pipe, The Patent Years and After (self-published, Chicago, 1998).</blockquote> | ||
Any definitive conclusion may be unfair. The metrics used in defining the concept of "quality loss" may be related to misperceptions of changes or purely subjective values. Even the process of oil curing, that was considered determinant in quality, it seems - in the end, it not so decisive, as we can see in another consideration of Dr. Hanna: | Any definitive conclusion may be unfair. The metrics used in defining the concept of "quality loss" may be related to misperceptions of changes or purely subjective values. Even the process of oil curing, that was considered determinant in quality, it seems - in the end, it not so decisive, as we can see in another consideration of Dr. Hanna: | ||
<blockquote><q>Several Dunhill collectors have told me in no uncertain terms that the old patent Dunhills (before 1955) smoke decidedly better than the later models. So, which time frame owns the peculiar Dunhill character? This adds considerable ambiguity to the great taste of a Dunhill. Does oil curing make the difference? Probably not if Dunhill pipes have not been oil cured for perhaps 33 years, and Bill Taylor implies that after a while oil curing is not a factor anyway. Taylor, who oil cures his own Ashton pipes, has stated that the effects of oil curing can no longer be discerned in a pipe after 30 or so bowls of tobacco. In other words, after a sufficient cake has formed and the pipe is well broken-in, the influence of the bowl treatment or curing method becomes negligible. Now where, I ask, is that unique Dunhill character? The cake and the wood itself probably have more influence on taste than the curing method after many, many, smokes.</q> Dr. Fred Hanna - The Myth of Brand and Maker in Pipesmoking.</blockquote> | <blockquote><q>Several Dunhill collectors have told me in no uncertain terms that the old patent Dunhills (before 1955) smoke decidedly better than the later models. So, which time frame owns the peculiar Dunhill character? This adds considerable ambiguity to the great taste of a Dunhill. Does oil curing make the difference? Probably not if Dunhill pipes have not been oil cured for perhaps 33 years, and Bill Taylor implies that after a while oil curing is not a factor anyway. Taylor, who oil cures his own Ashton pipes, has stated that the effects of oil curing can no longer be discerned in a pipe after 30 or so bowls of tobacco. In other words, after a sufficient cake has formed and the pipe is well broken-in, the influence of the bowl treatment or curing method becomes negligible. Now where, I ask, is that unique Dunhill character? The cake and the wood itself probably have more influence on taste than the curing method after many, many, smokes.</q> Dr. Fred Hanna - The Myth of Brand and Maker in Pipesmoking.</blockquote> | ||
There are pipes from different periods that, due to the manufacturing process, present some minor irregularities, such as misaligned bowl drilling, white dot and funnel bore of stem - especially in the '90s. But that doesn't mean they weren't good pipes. Some criticism, it seems, are nostalgic. The brand continues to manufacture good pipes today, now called "Alfred Dunhill's - The White Spot". | |||
<blockquote><q>"I know many collectors who have told me personally that some of their Dunhills smoke great, while some do not smoke so well. I personally have owned a few Dunhills that were poor smokers and others that were fantastic."</q> Dr. Fred Hanna - The Myth of Brand and Maker in Pipesmoking.</blockquote> | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
== About Dunhill Today == <!--T:48--> | == About Dunhill Today == <!--T:48--> | ||