5,741
edits
Dunhill: Difference between revisions
→About New and Old Pipes
| Line 797: | Line 797: | ||
<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> | <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> | ||
<blockquote><q>According to David Webb, the Dunhill pipe did have a problem in the mid-1970's, not so much with quality as with the outward signs of quality. Those in charge of policy at the time decided that the "shell" must be totally black and shiny - a blue-black stain was used, eliminating any reddish highlights. At the same time, the "bruyere" finish was lightened from its original plum color. These two changes have dampened the pipe's reputation and may be the cause for some criticism I have heard; but, even with these pipes, the underlying quality is still there. Since that time, of course, there has been a return to the original "bruyere" finish, and the new "deep shell" has reached our shores in limited quantity | <blockquote><q>According to David Webb, the Dunhill pipe did have a problem in the mid-1970's, not so much with quality as with the outward signs of quality. Those in charge of policy at the time decided that the "shell" must be totally black and shiny - a blue-black stain was used, eliminating any reddish highlights. At the same time, the "bruyere" finish was lightened from its original plum color. These two changes have dampened the pipe's reputation and may be the cause for some criticism I have heard; but, even with these pipes, the underlying quality is still there. Since that time, of course, there has been a return to the original "bruyere" finish, and the new "deep shell" has reached our shores in limited quantity<ref name=rdf>R.D. Fields. (1983), Pipe Smoker - Fall '83. The Dunhill Pipe: a comparison of then and now. [https://pipedia.org/wiki/A_Tail_of_Two_Briars/en A Tail of Two Briars].</ref></blockquote> | ||
The metrics used in defining the concept of "quality loss" seems to be related to misperceptions of changes and aesthetics subjective values. In these circumstances, any definitive conclusion may be premature and unfair. Even the process of oil curing, that was considered determinant in quality, in the end, it not so decisive, as we can see in another consideration of Dr | The metrics used in defining the concept of "quality loss" seems to be related to misperceptions of changes and aesthetics subjective values. In these circumstances, any definitive conclusion may be premature and unfair. Even the process of oil curing, that was considered determinant in quality, 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. <ref name=hanna>Hanna, Fred. (2002), The Myth of Brand and Maker in Pipesmoking. Retrieved 19 March 2020 from [http://www.greatnorthernpipeclub.org/Myth.htm The Great Northern Pipe Club].</ref></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. <ref name=hanna>Hanna, Fred. (2002), The Myth of Brand and Maker in Pipesmoking. Retrieved 19 March 2020 from [http://www.greatnorthernpipeclub.org/Myth.htm The Great Northern Pipe Club].</ref></blockquote> | ||
| Line 809: | Line 809: | ||
<blockquote><q>I will say that I have smoked hundreds of Dunhill's - from all time periods and have found that the smoking qualities are great - no matter what the date of manufacture. I have the largest standard Production Roots from the 1970's - magnums from the early 2000's - just bought a 2019 Ring Grain Magnum - and have many great Magnums from the 1920's - 1930. So the 1968 date is meaningless.</q> Esserman<ref name=rich>Esserman, Richard. (2019). About Dunhill - Facebook Talks.</ref>.</blockquote> | <blockquote><q>I will say that I have smoked hundreds of Dunhill's - from all time periods and have found that the smoking qualities are great - no matter what the date of manufacture. I have the largest standard Production Roots from the 1970's - magnums from the early 2000's - just bought a 2019 Ring Grain Magnum - and have many great Magnums from the 1920's - 1930. So the 1968 date is meaningless.</q> Esserman<ref name=rich>Esserman, Richard. (2019). About Dunhill - Facebook Talks.</ref>.</blockquote> | ||
<blockquote><q>In order to discern quality in a pipe, one has to look at only a few things (of course much of the real judgment is in the smoking): the turned and bored bowl; the shank bore; the tenon/ferrule connection; the lip of the mouthpiece; the look and feel of the finish. Dunhill, I submit, has as high a standard of quality as it has ever had. This does not mean that every Dunhill released for sale, today, is a perfect pipe, for some are not! What it does mean is that the percentage of imperfect Dunhills is no greater today than, say, 1924. I have discovered two imperfect pipes in my 1920-1927 collection. </q> The Dunhill Pipe: a comparison of then and now | <blockquote><q>In order to discern quality in a pipe, one has to look at only a few things (of course much of the real judgment is in the smoking): the turned and bored bowl; the shank bore; the tenon/ferrule connection; the lip of the mouthpiece; the look and feel of the finish. Dunhill, I submit, has as high a standard of quality as it has ever had. This does not mean that every Dunhill released for sale, today, is a perfect pipe, for some are not! What it does mean is that the percentage of imperfect Dunhills is no greater today than, say, 1924. I have discovered two imperfect pipes in my 1920-1927 collection. </q> R.D. Fields. <ref name=rdf>R.D. Fields. (1983), Pipe Smoker - Fall '83. The Dunhill Pipe: a comparison of then and now. [https://pipedia.org/wiki/A_Tail_of_Two_Briars/en A Tail of Two Briars].</ref></blockquote> | ||
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div> | <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div> | ||