Pipe-Bowl Size: The Diameter • Depth • Width • Smoke-Duration Dilemma
Exclusive to pipedia.org
Introduction
In the days before the Internet, opinion columns in newspapers were a hallmark of significant opinion. Today, there are fewer newspapers … the Internet’s websites with infinite capacity have replaced print. The Web is a world with close to a zero bar to publication, where anyone can post an opinion, and where opinion is often elevated above fact. Information on the Internet is not regulated for quality or accuracy. Everyone, of course, is entitled to an opinion, but I won’t repeat the old adage that begins “opinions are like…”
I recently noticed lots of traffic on the Web about pipe-bowl size, a topic that is, at least for me, relatively new in the lexicon of tobacco pipe terminology and studies. (To be clear, this narrative is not about pipe shapes or sizes, or pipe brands.) I decided to find out what now seems to be all the rage and why. Here are the results of my investigation into “pipe-bowl size.” If what follows appears to be a crusade for clarity and clarification—consistency is an unrealistic goal—it’s because it is. In general, people have a hard time differentiating among too many response options. Dealing with multiple viewpoints can feel like too much information to process, making it hard to discern the most relevant or accurate perspective. I will not judge which viewpoints are the most relevant or accurate. My goal is to get your attention. It’s my clarion call to voluntarily cease and desist contributing more to this topic, however well-meaning you are in wanting to share your knowledge. It’s not helpful. I am not challenging your First Amendment rights, but I sense that it’s hampering or hindering understanding.
It was easy for me to arrive at this recommendation after having counted all the contributors to websites who have offered counsel and advice. I am well aware that I am not an influencer—and I certainly don’t have a dog in this fight—but it’s become TMI, an excessive quantity of information and tending toward infobesity. I am not Chicken Little saying that the sky is falling … I am not an alarmist but, for the sake of reason and rationality, I am asking that you consider not adding to the already turbulent and unwieldy situation I find.
I discuss my conclusions and recommendations well before the summary, but had you invested much time studying this issue, you might probably arrive at the same conclusion and recommendation. I wanted you to have an advance warning, and I hope that what you read is convincing. Try to understand and appreciate why I’m on this soapbox.
Pipes Past
During Elizabethan times, pipe-bowl size really did matter. Clay pipe studies often discussed pipe-bowl size vis-a-vis date of manufacture, although clay tobacco pipe manufacture was an inexact science. I am aware of at least one article that addressed this issue: D. B. Whitehouse, “The Bore Diameter of Clay Tobacco Pipes Made at Bristol Between 1620 and 1850,” Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society, 1966. Pipes made by different manufacturers may have had different bowl forms, but the bowls were always diminutive, because the cost of tobacco was high. The smaller the clay pipe’s bowl, the earlier the date of manufacture. The cheaper the tobacco, the bigger the pipe bowl. The size of the bowl was also proportioned to the amount of tobacco that could be consumed in a single sitting. “…J. Summerfield Day, had suggested that the gradual transformation of the bowl size and shape—from small and narrow to large and rounded—might reflect the growing popularity and affordability of tobacco at Jamestown and provide a means of dating the levels in which certain bowl forms were found” (Charles E. Orser, Images of the Recent Past. Readings in Historical Archaeology, 1996, 469). “The coefficient of variation allows us to examine he metric variability of the pipes, even comparing dimensions that are very different in scale, such as thickness and bowl diameter” (Anna S. Agbe-Davies, Tobacco, Pipes, and Race in Colonial Virginia, 2016, 94).
In the Turkish chibouk “The pipe bowls and stems always remain of the size appropriated by etiquette to the use of the harem” (“Pipes and Tobacco, From The Adriatic and China,” The Leisure Hour, 1861, 231). Native American pipes? “The capacity of the pipe bowl varied in different localities and at different times; some would hold but a thimbleful of tobacco, while others would contain an ounce or more” (Annual Proceedings of the Lehigh County Historical Society, Allentown, Pennsylvania, 1924, 29).
In the lengthy history of opium pipe-smoking, there’s never been a need to discuss or debate bowl size. What mattered was the recess in the center of the bowl, a miniscule hole about the size of a large darning needle where the opium ball was vaporized. No matter the bowl maker, shape, or material, the hole was invariably about the size indicated in this example.
The bowl of the Japanese tobacco pipe, the kiseru, is almost always no more than a quarter inch in diameter and depth.
Today, bowl size is another matter altogether, and it is not influenced by the cost of pipe tobacco. To the best of my knowledge, there was no published commentary on pipe-bowl size of the briars from Saint-Claude or those produced later in the century in Great Britain and the United States. I don’t remember ever reading much about briar-bowl size in a pipe book or in a periodical. Thanks to the Internet, I found this rare—and probably the only—remarks from that era. Considering the date of publication, I assume that the author meant briar, but used the words “porous wood.”
We do not talk about it much; but we feel it very deeply, and we often think of it. …He says that in order that he may not depress you; he is really thinking about the smoker’s great sorrow—that it is impossible on this fair earth of ours, with all the subtle resources of a complex civilization, to produce one perfect pipe. Natural laws do not permit of it. It is of no use to rebel against them. We can only fold our hands and endure. And for the want of a perfect pipe, our smoke is but a shadow of what it might be. In the first place, the ordinary pipe has not a sufficiently large bowl. To the superficialist, that may seem easy of remedy, ‘Then,’ he says, ‘make a pipe with a larger bowl.’ If we did that, the smoke passing through the tobacco would render the latter part of the pipe foul and fetid. Even with the bowl of an ordinary size, the last of the pipeful is not so good as its commencement. The larger bowl would also make the pipe too heavy; a pipe-bowl must be of thick porous wood or clay. Besides, the prolonged smoking would render the bowl too hot. A pipe that would give a man a sufficiency of smoke, of regular and invariable sweetness and coolness, would be perfect; there is not, and there never can be, such a pipe. No one can make the ideal pipe, but it is possible to imagine it. It smokes for two hours without re-filling, and it is good all the time. …The ideal pipe would not look clever or perplex people in any way. But it is of no use talking about it. We shall probably go on smoking as well as we can, and as much as we can; and even at the best, how far we shall be from perfection? (“The Idler’s Club. Subject for Discussion. Nothing in Particular,” The Idler Magazine. An Illustrated Weekly, Vol. IV, August 1893, to January 1894, 110).
Here’s a snippet from the early 20th century: “Smokers are gradually learning that the small bowl (unless in the very best of pipes) means a hot smoke and a wasteful repetition of re-filling. Good, plain, ample bowls are the best sellers; and dealers find far less trouble with flaws than they do with this matter of size” (“Laying in New Stocks,” United States Tobacco Journal, July 31, 1909, 12).
Sidney Ram, a Chicago pipe maker, was the first—and I think the only—20th century author who recognized the importance of the pipe bowl. “The bowl, be it barely larger than a thimble or approaching the size of a teacup, should be chosen in accordance with your own wishes and yours alone. So long as it is made of good briar almost any size will do, just so the walls are not egg-shell thin. The middle and lower portions of the bowl should have walls three-eighths of an inch thick or thicker. The upper part of the bowl may be thinner of you wish” (Sidney P. Ram, How to Get More Fun Out of Smoking, 1941, n. p.). From “Pipe Lines” (Pipe Lovers, May 1948, 134): “The theory seems to be that a small cut, or stringy, ribbon type tobacco smokes to best advantage in a small bowl, whereas the larger cube or plug cut types should be smoked only in a large bowl.”
“The difference in the Italian market and American domestic market is that the Italians take a smaller merchandise, smaller bowls, smaller pipe altogether, while the American market takes the largest bowls in the world in regard to smoking. The bowls are all larger and heavier, takes more tobacco” (United States Customs Court Reports, Volume 31. Cases Adjudged in The United States Customs Court, July–December 1953, 478).
This Government report contains awkwardly described, general information on pipe sizes. Just imagine similar gibberish if it had also included a discussion on pipe-bowl sizes.
“With respect to the small sized pipes, attention should be called to the fact that the so-called standard sized pipes include a wide range of sizes and the dividing line between standard and smaller sized pipes is not clearly defined or definable. 1/Probably the bulk of both the imports and domestic production of pipes that are regarded as smaller than ‘standard’ size are distinctly smaller than the average size of those regarded as within the standard range. Nevertheless many of the pipes regarded as of smaller than standard sizes are nearer in size to the smaller pipes within the standard range than are many of the larger size standard pipes. Moreover, few of the imported or domestically produced small sized pipes are what might be regarded as genuine miniatures—pipes so small that they are not suitable for use by pipe smokers in the same way as, and as alternatives to, larger sized smoking pipes” (U.S. Tariff Commission, Tobacco Pipes of Wood 1952/53, 11).
Pipe-bowl size was not a topic for analysis in the lengthy history of meerschaum and porcelain pipes. For the balance of the century, tobacco-bowl size was not a talked-about, studied, analyzed, or dissected issue in the pipe industry or among pipe smokers. Why, then, is pipe-bowl size now discussed, debated, and disputed among so many briar-pipe smokers? Let’s review the literature.
Pipes Present
Having quit smoking a pipe many years ago, I can’t remember if I ever considered bowl size a factor when I purchased pipes. My singular concern was always price. I never gave thought as to whether there was a bowl-size standard and, if there was one, I was wholly ignorant. It’s been some 40 years since I bought a pipe, 30 years since I smoked one, and 10 years since I attended a pipe show, so I am not current on pipe-smoker norms, practices, and rituals, but I enjoy researching and writing about various aspects of the pipe and what people say about them.
It’s an Aldous Huxley Brave New World of the pipe as to how smokers think and act. Science and technology now seem to play a significant role in choosing a pipe and the ideal tobacco for that pipe. Is this now the blueprint, the path for better, more enjoyable pipe smoking? The typical dialogue used to be about cracks, pits, flaws, fuzz, and fills in a briar. Now, pipe-bowl size seems to be the emergent, ever-present, online topic du jour. Had someone identified a problem, and many are now striving to solve it? I don’t know how, why, or when this online continuum of comments about a briar pipe’s bowl size began. It’s a participative conversation that’s more akin to a controversy. Perhaps it’s something that pipe smokers have wanted to discuss or understand for quite some time, and now the Web is the ideal medium in which to opine, exchange ideas and experiences, and to learn more. (BTW: There is another active online discussion on draft-hole dimensions … an orifice fixation!)
Size is a component of the anatomy, architecture, or geometry of a tobacco pipe. Pipe-bowl size is not a science, but it has an influence and an impact on tobacco packing and smoking. Surely, “one size fits all” is not the answer but today’s briar pipes are not tailored or customized to individual needs. Size for the best smoking experience and smoke duration is significant, but in what quantitative or qualitative dimension? With all this current chatter, if it’s that important, I (facetiously) ask: does a pipe smoker now use a micrometer or a hand caliper when he shops for a new pipe? And before he buys, does he calculate A = πr2 to determine the bowl’s capacity and suitability?
If, in fact, bowl size is important, because it affects the flavor of the smoke and how much tobacco the bowl can hold, that ought to determine what type of pipe to smoke. Have pipe makers abided by such a standard and made pipes to this standard? They have not. The briar pipes of yesterday and today, whether factory-made or handmade, compete on other factors, such as quality of the wood, grain, finish, form, stylistic uniqueness, stem material, price, etc. For me, two questions arise: (a) if important, why wasn’t this topic detailed in the many books written about pipe smoking, and (b) today, why is there no apparent agreement among experienced pipe smokers about what size bowl yields the best pleasant smoking experience? Bowl shape impacts how comfortable the pipe is in the mouth. Bowl size is more important than the overall size of the pipe, right? But a particular pipe-bowl shape could trump a pipe’s bowl size, right?
What about those who simply say “size matters”? I’ll try to be funny and say that it’s often mentioned in adult films, on the Playboy channel, or on Howard Stern’s talk radio show. Others may say, “it depends.” Well, this narrative is not about adult incontinence products.
From the petersonpipenotes.org: “146. A Guide to System Shapes, 1896-2019, Part 1 (The 300 Shape Group)” that illustrates pipes and lists their length, weight, bowl height, chamber depth, chamber diameter, and outsider diameter in millimeters. An AliExpress ad: “Tobacco pipe, briar wood pipe, diameter 20mm, bowl depth 25mm, handmade smoking pipe, exquisite small pipe, multi-color optional.” On uktobacco.com: “Falcon Standard Smooth Plymouth Briar Bowl. Height: 25 mm; Bowl Diameter: 35 mm; Bore: 22 mm.” (The Brits use “bore” to mean borehole.)
I remember that, long ago, briar stummels were sold by picture, not by precise dimension, but Alexander Briar Pipes (briar-pipes.com) advertises stummels for sale this way.
Bowl No1 mm/grin/oz Total Length 78,00 3,07 Bowl No1 mm/grin/oz Total Length 78,00 3,07 Width 38,00 1,50 Height 42,00 1,65 Chamber Diameter 18,00 0,71 Chamber Depth 35,00 1,38 Shank 16,00 0,63 Weight 37,00 1,31
Will all pipe ads eventually include these details? And does a buyer need this level of specificity when choosing a pipe?
It’s a question seeking some math-based answer that pipe smokers can trust and use as a guide for pipe purchases. Is it bowl or chamber size? Essentially, the chamber is the complete volume of the bowl, while depth and width are individual dimensions of that space. Bowl shape, width, diameter, or depth? Depth will affect the overall smoking time, while width will affect temperature, the more surface area available to burn. Bowl depth specifically indicates the vertical distance from the top of the bowl to its bottom, and bowl width refers only to the diameter of the bowl at its widest point. When defining dimension, there should be some agreement on which is important; if not, then every dimension is important to some degree. The 14mm bowl size seems to be the standard bearer, a balance between size and functionality. It’s the go-to choice for most smokers, a versatile option that is widely available.
Be not surprised that our toking brethren have a bong bowl and joint size guide. “With regard to more traditional-looking pipes, it has been suggested that one possible way of distinguishing drug paraphernalia from a ‘traditional’ tobacco pipe is by the size of its bowl. The argument is that a traditional pipe has a larger bowl than a drug pipe, because the drug user needs to smoke less material than does a normal tobacco pipe smoker to get the desired enjoyment” (“Importation of Certain Drug Paraphernalia into The United States,” USITC Publication 2223, September 1989, 12).
AI offers several surprisingly-informative explanations.
The most important factor in a tobacco pipe bowl size is the balance between the capacity to hold enough tobacco for a satisfying smoke while still allowing for proper combustion and temperature control; essentially, finding a size that lets you smoke at a comfortable pace without overheating the tobacco.” ‘The Jones scale is a helpful tool for understanding tobacco pipe bowl sizes. It measures both the mass and the bowl volume of a pipe on a scale of 1–9, with larger numbers indicating more tobacco capacity. Pipes that fall outside of the normal range are labeled as ‘XS’ (extra small) or ‘XL’ (extra large).
The size of a briar tobacco pipe bowl is important because it can affect the smoking experience:
- Temperature: Wider bowls tend to be hotter, while narrower bowls tend to be cooler.
- Flavor: Wider bowls can allow for more flavor.
- Ease of use: Very small pipes can smoke hot, while very large pipes can be difficult to keep lit and may hold too much tobacco.
A tobacco pipe bowl’s “shape” refers to its overall geometric form, like rounded, cylindrical, or slightly flared, while the “size” refers to the volume of tobacco it can hold, which is primarily determined by the bowl's depth and diameter, regardless of its exact shape.
If you want information about tobacco pipe bowl sizes, experts to consult would be high-end pipe makers, experienced pipe smokers, and specialty tobacco shop owners who can provide detailed knowledge about different bowl sizes, their smoking characteristics, and the impact of bowl size on the overall pipe experience.
Newest way to enjoy pipe smoking based on bowl size is the trend towards smaller pipe bowls, often referred to as ‘micro bowls’ or ‘mini bowls,’ which allow for shorter, more focused smoking sessions with a greater emphasis on flavor and quality of tobacco, rather than long, leisurely smokes.” Note that dimensions are not specified. Therefore, more a smoking pipe is bent, more it has a short length. Width: We always measure the bowl at its widest point. Height: We always measure the bowl from the bottom to the highest point. Chamber diameter: We measure the inner diameter at the very top of the bowl.
Illustrated guides
The Web
There’s no shortage of online pipe pundits, cognoscenti, scholars, and smoking savants. One thing that I quickly learned is the importance of choosing the right search term. If the term is bowl size, the Web responses are typically dimensions of sugar or soup bowls. When I searched “tobacco pipe bowl size,” Google responded with sales of brass pipe screens for bongs. Eventually, I found the correct search term.
To contribute to this discourse, the best way I know how is to present the views of those who seem to be “in the know.” No surprise to find lots of information, an assortment of different and disparate claims, some overly confident opinions, some confusing, some conflicted. I didn’t expect that everyone would be on the same page, but would I find a degree of unanimity? It’s hard to find consensus on almost anything nowadays, although reaching consensus is possible in a small group. Pipe smokers are, by no means, a small group.
At this juncture, reader, choose a path to study. First is a list of websites that offer a little or a lot of information about bowl size and its relationship to smoking. (Did I not indicate that it is a popular Web topic?) You may want to read some of these and skip the remainder of this article. Or you can read an assortment of comments that follow this extensive list chosen at random and in no particular order from a few who have offered a considered opinion.
- “What is a Pipe Part 3: The Design of the Tobacco Chamber” (canerodpipes.wordpress.com)
- “Understanding the Anatomy of Tobacco Pipe Parts: Exploring Different Parts” (metro-cigar.com)
- “Pipe Bowl Size does it make a difference?” (botl.org)
- “How Does the Shape of Your Pipes [sic] Bowl Affect the Smoke” (havanahouse.co.uk)
- “Does the Shape Affect the Smoking Characteristics of a Pipe?” (pipesandcigars.com)
- “How Does Bowl Geometry Affect a Pipe?” (pipesandcigars.com)
- “Bowl preference: wide\shallow, narrow\deep?” (cigarforums.net)
- “Best Bowl Dimensions for Different Types of Tobacco?” (pipesmokersdens.com)
- “Bowl depth—when is it too deep” (brothersofbriar.com)
- “Bowl size; Aromatics vs Non-aromatics? Flakes vs other” (brothersofbriar.com)
- “Bowl size—Page 2—Pipe Smokers Forums” (pipesmokersforums.com)
- “Narrow vs Wide Chambers” (pipesmokersdens.com)
- “Chamber Sizes” (pipesmokersdens.com)
- “Pipe Chamber Diameter” (brothersofbriar.com)
- “Chamber size, shape, does it matter” (pipemakersforum.com)
- “One Size Fits All?” (blueroombriars.com)
- “A Guide to Pipe Bowls and How They Can Influence the Smoking Experience” (paykocpipes.com)
- “Different Tobacco Smoking Pipe Types: Shapes, Styles, Designs & Materials” (bespokeunit.com)
- “Why Is Bowl Size Important?” (happypuffs.medium.com)
- “Pipe Guide” (smokershaven.com)
- “Pipe Packing and Smoking Techniques” (pipedia.org)
- “Your pipe preferences for each class of tobacco” (tobaccoreviews.com)
- “Thought on thick-walled pipes?” (tobaccoreviews.com)
- “Top Tobacco Pipe Size for Best Smoking Experience?” (medium.com)
- “Purpose of pipe bowl width and depth” (brothersofbriar.com)
- “Which Do You Prefer, Big or Small Pipes?” (brothersofbriar.com)
- “Air Flow: bowl size, pipe length, and airway diameter?” (pipemakersforum.com)
- “Shapes of Things” (pipesmagazine.com)
- “Ideal Bowl Size?” (pipesmagazine.com)
- “Bowl Depth and Smoking Time” (pipesmagazine.com)
- “Advice on Bowl Shapes/Sizes for Different Blends” (pipesmagazine.com)
- “Small vs. Large Pipes: A Dialogue” (smokingpipes.com)
- “Small vs. Wide/Big bowl (pipesmagazine.com)
- “What makes a pipe smoke great?” (pipesmagazine.com)
- “Impact of Bowl Shapes on Smoking Quality” (pipesmagazine.com)
- “Aromatic Bowl Size” (pipesmagazine.com)
- “Tobacco Pipe Aesthetics and Design: Whole Number Ratios” (literaryworkshop.wordpress.com)
- “Which Tobacco for Which Size Bowl, for Aging, for drying etc” (briarpatchforum.com)
- “How to choose a Tobacco Pipe—The Pipe Shop Guides” (thepipeshop.co.uk)
- “Pipes for beginners—What to consider when buying” (cigarworld.de)
- “Accoutrements College: Pipe Accessories” (tobacconistuniversity.org)
There’s at least one YouTube video on this topic: “Tobacconist Field Guide: Pipe Shapes.”
Perspectives, Premises, and Points of View
“I cut most chambers at .75”x1.2”-1.5” depending on shape. It’s hard to cut something like a prince or pot on the deeper side, unless it’s a larger sized pipe. I do some at 7/8” if I’m making something bigger. Chamber profile really has to do with bowl shape and leaving enough meat for good chamber walls. I don’t, personally, go by any rule of “what smokes better in what size/profile.” I smoke whatever I want in any pipe, and I don’t really notice a huge difference. There ARE certain pipes that smoke a certain blend better than others, but if I put that same blend in a pipe with similar sized and shaped bowl, it doesn’t usually smoke the same way. Pipes are weird” (pipe maker J. Everett: pipesmokersdens.com).
Wide chamber pipes, with a larger, pot shaped bowl, features a bigger opening, allowing more oxygen to pass into the pipe. Therefore, when the tobacco is lit, it will be exposed to more air than in other pipe types, creating a larger ember, and producing more smoke. The higher level of smoke can help to enhance and develop any flavours present in the blend, allowing for a fuller flavour to be enjoyed. While this may sound ideal, and like you should immediately throw out all of your narrower pipes, there are some downsides to choosing a wide chamber pipe. Because more air can enter the pipe, it means that the added oxygen can keep on fuelling the fire, raising the temperature too much. This can bring out unpleasant tastes in the tobacco, which can ruin what would have been a lovely smoke. The flavours can be impacted due to the sugar present in a blend being caramelised too fast, as it is too hot. To avoid this happening, it is important to keep the combustion temperature lower. You can do this by lighting the pipe with matches rather than a lighter, slowing down your smoke, or choosing a pipe tobacco blend with a lower amount of sugar (havanahouse.co.uk).
“To look at this further, let’s just assume one principle as fact: wider, or more open chambers allow for smoke that has fuller flavor and that narrower chambers have a thinner taste. This is likely, to some degree, to be due to the open chamber just simply producing more smoke because more lit tobacco is exposed to the air” (Russ’s Views, “How Does Bowl Geometry Affect a Pipe?,” pipesandcigars.com). “You also need to take into account Smoking time. A small pipe smokes for about 20 minutes while a large pipe can smoke for about an hour. Lots of small pipes are small on the inside as well as the outside for easy carry. Not many large pipes have small bowls. That’s not to say a small fine pipe can’t have a big bowl and thin walls as Many do. I would say a large bowl is big enough to stick your thumb in while a small bowl is pinky to ring finger size” (Mikewood, pipesmokersdens.com).
Attention, all pipe smokers, this is a Public Service Announcement from yours truly, Truett, declaring that small pipes are, in fact, the best pipes. In fact, I‘ll go a step further and say that those who prefer large pipes are likewise crude and unsophisticated; whereas, aficionados of small pipes are refined, efficient, and by all metrics, ‘cool.’ As the old adage goes, you are what you smoke. You want to be cool, right? Then, smoke a cool pipe. Smoke a small pipe. There’s no debate, and don’t even try to convince me otherwise. …To all pipe smokers, avoid large pipes at all costs.” And later in the article, “Small pipes are stupid. Large pipes are the future of pipe smoking. There’s no argument. …I propose that all small pipes be banned from production, all pipes not at least six inches in length and with a chamber capacity no less than one-and-three-quarter inches (Truett Smith, “Small vs. Large Pipes: A Dialogue,” smokingpipes.com)
Was all this humor or hubris? Serious or superficial advertising? Truett’s assertions generated many reader comments, one of which from Christopher M was spot on: “My friends, have we not all learned by now that it’s not the size of the bowl but what you’re smoking on the inside of it that counts?” Well said, Christopher!
“In terms of size, you'll probably want to avoid very small pipes, as they tend to smoke hot, and very large ones, as they are often harder for a novice to keep lit and may hold too much tobacco to finish comfortably, initially” (“Pipe Packing and Smoking Techniques,” pipedia.org). For me, this statement is rather vague. I know this much: pipe-packing technique depends on the size of the bowl.
“So I put out the question, is there a specifically 'good' or recommended bowl size for a pipe? (Wide/shallow? Narrow/deep? Wide/deep? Narrow/shallow?) Or is this solely down to an individual preference and always is such? Perhaps this is the blandest of bland examinations, and perhaps this newbie is overanalysing” (cosmiclurker, pipesmagazine.com).
An unsourced posted on October 8, 2023: “Some of the most common sizes include: Small bowl: A small bowl is typically 1 inch or less in diameter. Small bowls are ideal for short smokes or smokers who prefer a more intense smoke. Medium bowl: A medium bowl is usually around 1–1.5 inches in diameter. Medium bowls are an excellent all-around choice for smokers of all experience levels.”
“While materials, wood curing methods, stem funnels, tobacco and other factors will certainly weigh on your smoking experience the second most important factor (after the tobacco you choose) will actually be the size and shape of the bowl itself. People often develop a fondness for a certain pipe thinking that it’s some proprietary manufacturing secret or the type of wood that’s providing them with such satisfaction when in fact it’s the particulars of the bowl. Here are some aspects of bowl design that will have a significant impact on your smoking experience” (“A Guide to Pipe Bowls and How They Can Influence The Smoking Experience,” paykocpipes.com).
“For myself, 3/4” or under for diameter is small, 13/64 or about 20–21 mm kinda medium, and 7/8” large. 1” you are probably talking about a specific usage, like a pot or something. And again for height, 1 to 1 ¼” I’d think of as small, 1 1/2-1 ¾” a good medium, and anything up near 2” deep is a pretty big pipe” (sasquatch, pipesmokersdens.com).
“Following the interesting contributions on different types of pipes, I think it would be interesting to talk about which types of tobacco are best smoked in each pipe shape. My preference is for Latakia and Oriental blends, and I think these blends smoke very well in pipes with a normal width bowl, 18-21mm diameter and a maximum depth of 33mm, so I smoke them in squat bulldog or rhodesian pipes groups 3 and 4. I have noticed these blends don´t taste the same in larger bowl pipes (Group 4 billiards, 20mm diameter and 40mm deep). In those pipes the bottom of the bowl tends to collect a lot of humidity that makes an unpleasant smoke.” I confess that discussing pipe shape, bowl width, and Group 4 billiards together is not helpful, at least to me” (“Your pipe shape preferences for each class of tobacco,” tobaccoreviews.com).
“You also need to take into account smoking time. A small pipe smokes for about 20 minutes while a large pipe can smoke for about an hour. Lots of small pipes are small on the inside as well as the outside for easy carry. Not many large pipes have small bowls. That’s not to say a small fine pipe can’t have a big bowl and thin walls as Many do. I would say a large bowl is big enough to stick your thumb in while a small bowl is pinky to ring finger size” (Mikewood, pipesmokersdens.com).
“I’m in the crowd that detests group sizes. They’re just all over the map. I like seeing measurements in inches or metric” (Russ H, pipesmokersdens.com).
Rick Hacker: “The bowl size only affects the length of the smoke: the bigger the bowl, the more tobacco it will hold. Hence, the longer the pipe will smoke” (“For Pipe Lovers,” cigaraficionado.com).
And my favorite: “Despite the need of some pipesters to brag about their bowl size and staying power, there really is no ideal bowl size” (sablebrush52, pipesmagazine.com).
Summary
From Sir Walter Scott’s poem of 1808, “Oh what a tangled web we weave...” meaning a very confused and difficult-to-understand topic, might be a good way to summarize pipe-bowl size today! (Walter Scott was referring to a different kind of web.)
It’s evident that there is no general agreement on the significance or importance of tobacco bowl-size. As well, there’s no consensus—if a consensus is desired—on an ideal or optimum size and configuration. After so many years, one would think that there would be a gauge, a standard, something that pipe smokers can use when deciding which pipe to buy but, alas, there is none. And there is no pipe-bowl-size jefe, guru, arbiter, wizard, or master (Thank G_d!). Who would be foolish enough to assert that he is the right person to decide what is the optimum or ideal size of a pipe bowl?
To conduct a serious study of pipe-bowl size that provides sound guidance for both the experienced and the neophyte pipe smoker is a “mission impossible.” Investigating the topic yields a smorgasbord of different opinions, based on different experiences and viewpoints, at least as many as the people who posted them … myriad threads that cannot be sewn together to make whole cloth. For me, researching pipe-bowl size turned out to be a great fuss about something rather unsubstantial in the scheme of pipe architecture.
I’ve concluded that all this discourse about pipe-bowl size is really a (Shakespearean) smoker’s “Much Ado About (almost) Nothing.” There’s lots of chatter on the Web, but little uniform agreement on what size means or which measure is key or critical. It’s a Peterson “Thinking Man” (or Woman) challenge. Those who posted offered their considered opinion, not industry expertise or something authoritative “straight from the horse’s mouth.” Those who may consider themselves experts are often overly confident in their knowledge. (Read “Pipe and tobacco experts: Are there any?”, pipedia.org.)
Are you now enlightened or exhausted? If you’re left without a clear understanding, you aren’t alone. Might all this online exchange be making a briar molehill into a briar mountain? Unlike Pandora who opened a container that released curses on mankind, I may have opened a can of pipe worms. Jedi Master Yoda (“Star Wars”) claimed that “size matters not.” In certain life situations size does matter but, as to pipe-bowls and benefits, I’m inclined to agree with him.
I may be too old and too skeptical to appreciate the value of these pseudo-scientific views and well-intentioned opinions, but I’ll offer my octogenarian two cents anyway: this near-endless discussion of the importance of pipe-bowl size is information and choice overload and, possibly, choice paralysis. I’m not confident that continuing to add to this online conversation would be helpful. To do so, I believe, will further complicate, confuse, and confound a topic that has already been amply sliced and diced. Those uninterested or disinterested will, no doubt, continue smoking as they always have. If your pipes are working for you, change nothing!
In the final analysis, reader, you can welcome all this knowledge or walk away. It’s either a boon or a bane. I prefer to sum it with an old saw that has always served me well in such situations: “ya’ buys yer ticket, ya’ takes yer chance.”