New Stanwell

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.

maxpeters

Can't Leave
Jan 4, 2010
439
20
Received a new Stanwell a few days ago. The pipe is a shape 11 Rondo. I've been putting it through it's paces and it smokes just fine. Now.

Although that wasn't the case when I first got it. The problem wasn't the size, or shape, or any defects per se, or the usual things that can make a pipe a poor smoker. It was the damn filter. I just couldn't get it to smoke well. About half the time the draw was very constricted. The other half it was only average. I don't know why this was happening. I tried inserting the filter one way, then the other. Didn't seem to matter. Went through about half a dozen. I finally took the filter out and tried it, as this has worked with other filter pipes that I have, but this particular pipe's draw without the filter inserted was almost non-existent.
It uses a 9mm charcoal filter. I didn't have a 9mm adapter for it. I know that you can buy one to convert it to a filterless pipe, but looking at them, they all seemed too short to fit all the way into the shank and down to the draft hole. I wanted to keep any fluid coming up from the bowl, out of the shank area if possible, since it was 10mm wide and 20mm deep. I don't like the idea of that area always being wet and collecting gunk.

The opening in the tenon was 9mm wide and 32mm long, so the filter could fit in it. I don't have any measuring equipment to measure the actual draft hole size, but from the bowl to the beginning of the mortise, and from the lip to the start of the filter area seemed to be about 3mm or 4mm wide.
To get to the point, I made my own adapter. I went to the hardware store and found some stiff plastic tubing. Bought a one foot for 98 cents. The closest I could get was 8mm wide with a 5mm opening. A little large according to most accepted opinions, but that's what I had to work with.

After measuring the exact length from the start of the filter area in the stem, to the draft hole at the end of the mortise,

I cut a piece of tubing and fit it into the area where the filter should go.

Now the pipe smokes great. The opening could stand to be a little smaller I guess. Say 4mm, but I found that I can control the draw by using a tamper as needed. Tighter draw, tamp a little heavier, looser draw, a little lighter.
I have had quite a few bowls from it now, and am really happy with the results. It doesn't gurgle at all, the taste is not affected, and it is an easy smoker. I use the extra absorbent pipe cleaners with it since they are thicker.

The only other thing I noticed that I will keep an eye on is that some of the staining has been coming off on my hands. When I finish a bowl, there is a reddish stain on my fingers. I have only had one other pipe do this, and that was many years ago. It was a Ferndown, and it also left stain on the fingers for a while. It eventually stopped doing this, so I hope that this Stanwell will also.
I really like the pipe and how it smokes now. It seems to be well made and I haven't found any fills on the bowl. The shape 11 is a pot shape, but with a danish flair. Really a nice looking pipe. I only have two other pots, but have always liked they way they smoke. Photos below:

hard to see because of the lighting, but red stain on fingers from a warm bowl.


 

philobeddoe

Lifer
Oct 31, 2011
7,403
11,568
East Indiana
Sorry to hear about the stain coming off, I hope that it stops shortly. I had a Peterson do that to me about fifteen years ago and I had to return it to the tobacconist as it just got worse with each smoke. However, good on you for the hardware store fix to the draft hole, I'm glad that you were able to get the pipe to flow correctly. It looks like a nice shape and I like the scalloped rim.

 

maxpeters

Can't Leave
Jan 4, 2010
439
20
ben88, yep. Seems to be a popular size opening for those who like a more open draw. I personally like a draft hole of between 3 mm and 4 mm. But all I was able to come up with was the 5mm tubing, so I used that, and it seems to work fine. If I ever find something that is a little smaller, and fits all the way down the shank, then I will use that. I found adapters from some European sellers that cost a little over $3.00 + S&H, to some from CupO'Joes for $2.45 + S&H, but it just seemed too short to keep fluid out of the inside of the shank. I also came across one on Amazon at almost $10.00! so I opted for the 5mm tubing for .98cents.
This is from an article by Piet Binsbergen, pipe repair/restorer, but there are a lot of other sources out there:
"So why 4mm then?
There are those who are for this notion and there are others that are totally opposed to wide open draws.
Some are of the opinion that larger draft holes offer a more oxygen rich fire in the bowl causing a hotter smoke and a bigger chance of charring the bowl leading to burn out. Tobacco may burn to fast smoking hotter and wetter.
I have not found this to be the case. I have had numerous pipes in for various repairs with restrictive draws showing signs of severe burn out and charring of the bowls. I believe the reason for this is that the smoker is puffing so hard and fast to keep the tobacco lit that the tobacco burns too hot in any case. This as most of you know opens the door to all sorts of complications. Tongue bite being one of them. I will not spend time discussing tongue bite here but would rather refer you to an article on the subject written by a good friend and pipe collector / dealer David Peterson of the "Virtual Smoking Lounge". Access it here:
http://binsbergenpipes.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&Itemid=6
For those of you who have not yet read this article, I suggest you do, it is one of the most informative pieces of pipe writing out there.
It is interesting, according to Peterson, that tongue bite originates from chemical burns concerning the Ph levels of certain tobaccos versus their burn rate, and not hot steam or smoke.
The wet pipe or spitter as it is known is a direct result of a restrictive draw midst all other contributing factors such as correct technique have been ruled out of the equation. A by product of burning tobacco is water vapour and condensation and this is a given. The amount of this by product is directly related to the type of tobacco smoked. Face it; there is no ruling it out in any instance. Water forms in small droplets which run down the stem collecting in the shank or in many instances it collects in the dottle at the bottom of the bowl which is acceptable. I have found through experimentation conducted on clients pipes that a 4mm draft hole minimizes the water droplet forming and restricting the draft hole, hence the gurgle. The draft hole is large enough to curb this issue with water moving away to designated areas faster before it collects and restricts the draw in the stem or shank. Although not conclusive this was evident in a high end British pipe with a clear Perspex stem. The draft hole was drilled with a tapered bit starting at 3mm at the tenon and running down to 2mm near the bit or button. One could clearly see the water vapour process in action. The Draft hole is so restricted and small in diameter that water vapour forms at the top and say bottom of the stem growing in size until they join and restrict the stem causing a gurgle.
The stem was replaced with an identical one fabricated from vulcanite and drilled 4mm from top to bottom with the shank opened into the bowl with the same diameter. The problem was immediately brought into check.
Although hot smoke loaded with steam may not be the major contributing factor to tongue bite, it does however destroy the quality and richness of the smoke. A cool smoke is thus a smoke fuller in flavour. A 4mm draft hole does just this. The smoker does not puff away at double pace to keep the tobacco lit, slower draws produce a fuller more stratifying 'ball of smoke' in the mouth and smaller paced sips lower the amount of water vapour produced in the smoking process in turn creating a cooler smoke."

 

saltedplug

Lifer
Aug 20, 2013
5,194
5,097
I don't smoke filtered pipes. If the listing says it takes a filter, I move on. I read that filtered pipes with or without the filter or the adapter smoke fine, but I take the detour.
The smoke and air drawn through the pipe must negotiate the airway without dropping moisture; gurgle results if the vapor turns to water at any point, particularly the mortise/tenon junction, or in the stem, I guess, as the airway through it must accommodate to the V that opens into the bit, which if shaped for comfort requires another shape change; which if shaped properly, from what I read, should still be of the same area as the draft/shank/mortise-tenon/stem/V/bit. This is one of the standard airway practices; I know J. T. Cooke uses it. Will Purdy uses this as well but tweaks flourishes along the way including, I believe, a bit of an enlargement to the opening of the tenon. For more information see the FAQ on his site.
Given that all the skill needed to accomplish the above, why complicate the matter with enlarging the shank airway to fit the filter and/or adaptor? And for me, why would I want a pipe that was made to take a filter when I don't use one anyway?
There are apparently many airway strategies, and what I know is only the above. But as there are so many pipes available, why bother with pipes that can take a filter? Because you like them, and I'm sure there are many fine filtered pipes out there.
But the smoke of unfiltered pipes tastes fine to me.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.