A Dunhill Set (1925)

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

.
.

Log in

Search on Site

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

.

.

Recent Posts

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

.

.

forciori

Member
May 29, 2019
140
50
112
Brasil
pipedia.org
Perhaps the most important piece of my modest Dunhill collection, the set of three - beautiful and in great condition - pipes Ao (Bruyère) w/ (inner tube 5861/12) from 1925, under Alfred's management. Acquired at auction, was very dirty but in excellent condition:
- Stem and the bit in perfect shape with the reg. number 654638 intact;

- All the pipes with perfectly visible marks;

- All the bowls beautifully symmetrical;

- The case in great condition, with a few signs of age, but very beautiful.

- 3 shapes: Billiard, 60; Billiard, 35 & Dublin - 42.
Let's see how it was?





They were without the inner tubes. I sent an e-mail to Dunhill and they sent me, free of charge, three new and original tubes.

The stems after polished with the inner tube already:



The pipes after cleaning:



Practically new. =)
Other pics:









The case with Pat. N. 141486/19:

Using o/:







The set and some of his brothers:

That's all folks! ;) See you around.

 

scloyd

Preferred Member
May 23, 2018
2,101
348
Your collection and photos are amazing. Thanks for posting. All of your threads with photos are enjoyable to look at. :worship:

 

sablebrush52

Preferred Member
Jun 15, 2013
9,905
910
Top notch job on the clean up! I also have to add that your pictures show real flair and a great talent for lighting, texture, composition, and telling a story.
Thanks for your posts!

 

cigrmaster

Preferred Member
May 26, 2012
13,767
1,241
United States
Amazing job at the refurbishment. The pics are killer, definitely top notch pipe porn.
forciori, thanks for taking the time, really amazing stuff.

 

alaskanpiper

Preferred Member
May 23, 2019
2,320
1,879
Alaska
Excellent job on the refurbishment! Those pipes look absolutely beautiful! I have to ask....how did you end up with such a Dunhill fetish? Do you enjoy the way they smoke? The classic shapes? The general luxury connotation? Are there other makers you enjoy?
Ive always admired the shapes. Just not the price.....:)

 

forciori

Member
May 29, 2019
140
50
112
Brasil
pipedia.org
Thanks. The stems were polished by me and the cleaning by my friend, Naddeo (some pictures were taken by him too).
So, If you think about it then you'll realize that Alfred Dunhill has redefined the market. He was a prolific inventor and a great businessman.

Every time that you have a blasted pipe in your hands, remember to make the deference to the inventor; without Alfred, we would not have the so esteemed blasted pipes.

Why do I admire Dunhill? Because every Dunhill pipe it's historical, traditional, beautiful, elegant, datable and artistic. And of course, they don't devalue over time. I know the value of every penny that I have, so I do not consider it strategic to invest in things that not are going to be worth anything over time.
Like any pipes of any brand, some are fantastical, some are not so much. I do not have pipes from any other brand, not anymore. Just dunnies, that's it.
What defines luxury? An ATV with a moose horn (it seems) can be considered an extravagance, right?

I do not have pipes to affirm me socially, I have pipes because I love to smoke a good and traditional pipe.
I see my friends buying much more expensive pipes than Dunhills or buying a myriad of cheaper pipes (which is the same), and I don't see this turning into a social class discussion. "Quantity is not quality". There is a difference between price and value: I do not observe the price, I observe the value.
So, that's it! Thanks!

 

alaskanpiper

Preferred Member
May 23, 2019
2,320
1,879
Alaska
I am glad to hear you have found a marque that inspires you. Nothing wrong with a little pride in ownership, and if you find value in it, then more power to you, regardless of your reasons. I just like to hear how people come to love the things they love.
Being as new to the field as I am, I'm simply keeping it cheaper (Sav, Pete, Nording, etc.) to explore various shapes until I find the ones I like at which point I will take the step to invest in fewer, higher quality options. I do know I like the classic billiards and dublins though, and just recently purchased my first Ashton. It is my first higher price point pipe. Nothing against Dunhill, as they certainly make some beautiful ones, just liked that particular available new Ashton better aesthetically than any of the estate Dunhills that were on the market at this time.
And yes, an ATV (and the bush plane not pictured) are certainly an extravagance, and a luxury. But ones that are deep rooted in the culture of Alaskans and that help us put 600+ pounds of sustainable, organic, lean, and delicious moose meat on our families tables every year. Would the price be cheaper and easier to buy beef at the grocery store? Almost certainly after accounting for Avgas, maintenance, gear, etc. But this does not have the intangible value that comes with flying, hunting, and busting your ass to put food on the table generation after generation. The lifelong value of the memories created in learning it when you are young, and teaching it when you are older. And the value that comes with a unique and special cultural identity. In addition, meat tastes a hell of a lot better when you put the effort in to harvest it, then pack it from the field to the atv, the atv to the meat pole, the pole back to the atv, the atv into the airplane, fly the airplane home, then out of the airplane and into the truck, out of the truck and into the garage, and then butchered, packed, and prepared all independently as a family. 600 pounds at a time. Especially if that meat is harvested by someone you love, for the very first time.
Whether it's a collection of Dunhills, or an ATV, if it makes you happy and gives you a reason to smile, I say give it all you got, and who cares what anyone else thinks.

 

chasingembers

Preferred Member
Nov 12, 2014
16,790
2,294
Every time that you have a blasted pipe in your hands, remember to make the deference to the inventor; without Alfred, we would not have the so esteemed blasted pipes.
That may or may not be true. Dunhill was great at marketing for sure. Many even believed early pieces had ivory for they're white dots.
http://pipesmagazine.com/forums/topic/early-sandblasted-pipes-many-unknowns-yet-remain

 

forciori

Member
May 29, 2019
140
50
112
Brasil
pipedia.org
It's possible, for sure. But we're talking about history and we can't denie the history with speculations, right? History builds with facts and the fact is: who registered the patent was Alfred. That's undeniable, that's history. You don't have to be negationist just because you don't like the brand. ;) Thanks.

 

chasingembers

Preferred Member
Nov 12, 2014
16,790
2,294
History builds with facts
My point exactly, no reason to be a denialist.
"First, as a historical note, be sure to note that this YELLO-BOLE is SANDBLASTED!!! And, it was made between 1932 and 1935. Now, how do you suppose that could happen since Alfred Dunhill applied for his United States Patent for sandblasting in 1918 and it was granted by the United States Patent Office in 1920 (Patent Number 1341418/20). The Patent should preclude other pipe companies from sandblasting pipes for a minimum of 20 years - - - but in less than 15 years this YELLO-BOLE was sandblasted! What that tells you is that KB&B was sandblasting PRIOR TO Alfred Dunhill "inventing" and patenting the sandblasting process!!!
 

forciori

Member
May 29, 2019
140
50
112
Brasil
pipedia.org
This doesn't confirm anything. The patent does not guarantee that no one will apply the concept, it ensures that the credit has to be given to the inventor **if he claims the right**. The fact that Alfred did not complain cannot configure presumption of guilt.
If it was someone else's creation, why wasn't it registered? Even if it hadn't been registered, why didn't the inventor claim the right? This doesn't make any sense. Again, this is speculations. Present me facts, not conjectures... ;)
You don't have to be negationist just because you don't like the brand.
...Get over it, man! Thanks!

 

sablebrush52

Preferred Member
Jun 15, 2013
9,905
910
Duane, can you tell me the source of the quote? Not all patents were for 20 years. Many, like the Barling stem design patents, were for 15 years. Besides, Dunhill didn't invent sandblasting. The acknowledged inventor of the sandblasting process is Benjamin Chew Tilghman, who patented the process in 1870. So sandblasting had been around for 47 years before Dunhill patents their process.
The Dunhill patent claim to inventing sandblasting for pipes has long been a subject of disputation in the pipe history community. One of our most knowledgeable pipe historians, Tony Soderman, who passed away a couple of years ago, was adamant that Dunhill had stolen the idea from Barling. I thought that was nonsense. Everyone "knew" that Barling didn't start producing sandblasts until much later. But pieces of evidence have a way of floating up.
There was a model in the Barling line called a "Niblick". No one had ever seen one. I had asked both Jon Guss and Tad Gage if they knew what a Niblick was and neither had any idea, having never seen one. It's an interesting model because it isn't constantly in the line. It occurs in the teens for a few years, the twenties for a few years and again in the late thirties. Then, a few years ago, a package arrived in my mail, a gift from a member here. It was a Barling Niblick, and it was a sandblast. Another Niblick turned up last year, and it too was a sandblast. Then another pipe history researcher sent me a scan from a catalog from 1917, listing a Barling Niblick. So while Dunhill did not invent the sandblasting process, they certainly seized on the esthetic possibilities and exploited them to the fullest extent.
So if Barling did first invent a sandblasting process for pipes, why wouldn't they have patented it? Maybe because they weren't the first to sandblast a pipe. Maybe because producing sandblasts didn't interest Barling. They were into perfect smooths. Even long after the patents had expired, long after other makers were producing sandblasts, Barling didn't produce sandblasts, except for the very rare Niblicks. It just wasn't their thing until wartime shortages forced them to look at using less than perfect wood to create product, wood that couldn't produce a perfect smooth or an intricately carved quaint. And when they realized how popular blasts were, they went into making them wholeheartedly. They called their post WW2 sandblasts "Fossils". That term didn't get used until after the war. But here's another interesting tidbit that floated up. Barling registered the "Fossil" appellation in 1928. So they must have been thinking about it even though they weren't producing sandblasts. The deeper you dig into pipe history, the more interesting and convoluted it gets.