Here is my review of Samuel Gawith’s 1792 Flake. I know to give a fully-qualified review, it would probably be better to have smoked a few pounds of this tobacco, so I’ve labeled this “first impressions” to leave open the door that my taste and understanding may evolve over time. I’ve divided the review into entirely arbitrary, nonstandard sections.
I find expectations have a lot to do with my experience of a new blend, so I’ll go ahead and list what I expected going into my first 1792 experience.
-This was supposed to be a stinker of a tobacco. I’ve heard it compared to everything from a tire fire to engine grease to manure.
-1792 Flake is supposed to have a huge nicotine kick.
-As with many blends with “Gawith” in the name, I had heard the tobacco comes quite wet.
-There is a tonquin (tonka bean) topping that I’d either love or hate. I’ve seen some forum-goers even go so far as to compare it to Lakeland flavorings. I was interested to see what this would be like. Some reviewers described it as vanilla-like, and I thought, “How could a bean smell like vanilla?” only to immediately recall that vanilla does in fact come from a bean.
I was actually quite surprised by the tin note. I was expecting much worse. This just smelled like beef jerky. I couldn’t detect the tonquin at all at first, but to be fair, I had just opened up the other items in my Pipes and Cigars order—Ennerdale and Dark Flake Scented. It’s no wonder this topping seemed mild in comparison. I didn’t actually notice the tonquin flavoring until after I rubbed out some of the flakes. I washed my hands, and the tobacco smell washed away while the tonquin stayed, so I could discern it apart from the overall tin note.
The flakes were, as I had expected, very moist. But this moistness was a bit different than what I’ve seen with other moist blends. I’d describe it as more oily than wet. I discovered with my G&H Sweet Maple Twist that I needed to let the tobacco dry a bit after rubbing it out to avoid the pain of constant relights. In the past, I’ve had some odd resistance to drying my tobacco out, and have smoked it too moist on a few blends, but my experience with the G&H Twist changed my attitude. I let the flakes dry out until they were at an appropriate level of moisture and then, after I had rubbed out a couple of flakes, I let the rubbed out portion dry further.
This tobacco smoked more cleanly than any I’ve ever smoked. I was very surprised by this. I’ve smoked a bowl down to a white ash before (Royal Yacht does this beautifully), but what surprised me about this smoke was how little ash was left at the end. I started with a fully packed bowl, but ended up with what seemed like a millimeter of ash in the bottom of the pipe. I don’t know if this is good or bad—it doesn’t seem that it would matter—but there was something satisfying about so thoroughly smoking through all of the tobacco.
There was no bite. I did have to relight a couple of times because of brief interruptions to my smoke. Otherwise, I think it would have easily smoked cleanly all the way through. I don’t mind a few relights, but I thought I’d mention, since they seem to bother some so much.
I think a lot of how well the tobacco smoked was because I took the time to dry it out thoroughly. I wouldn’t want to try smoking it as it came.
Here was another surprise: I expected some rank, manly stench from this tobacco. Not so. It was manly, but not rank: a smooth, deep and rich flavor. I noticed a nutty burley taste coming through from the Kentucky, combined with a flavor from the Virginias sort of akin to what one tastes in Royal Yacht. I assume that Virginias-on-steroids flavor is the dark-fired Tanzanian leaf. I am still a new smoker, and so it’s difficult for me to draw comparisons since I have a small pool to draw from, but this was a bit like a richer, meatier Irish Flake—if Irish Flake’s flavor profile matched its nicotine punch.
The tonquin topping was far milder than I expected —in fact, I could hardly discern it at all while smoking. I expected 1792 to be like Royal Yacht in composition—a really strong tobacco with a mild topping. I still think that description could be fairly applied to 1792, but to my palate the tonquin was about 25% as strong as the plum topping on Royal Yacht is. The tobacco itself was very much in the forefront, and if I had not heard so much about the topping before, I probably would not have noticed it at all. I’m sure this reveals my plebian palate, but I think it’s worth mentioning in case the topping has scared some people off.
Another surprise: my wife was a fan. She actually interrupted me mid-smoke for a brief make-out session (too much info!—sorry) and didn’t mind the aroma at all. Perhaps tonquin has unknown aphrodisiac qualities? Though she loves aromatics, in the past she has said she wasn’t so much a fan of how Royal Yacht, Five Brothers, and Nightcap smelled, but said 1792 just smelled “smoky”—not “like a cigarette,” which is her go-to insult for any tobacco.
1792 is reputed for its strength, and it deserves this reputation. I enjoy strong blends, and this was the first time I actually contracted the “niccups” I’ve always heard about. Toward the middle of the bowl I felt some nicotine creeping up on me, and thought maybe I should give it a rest, but instead just puffed right through it. I felt the nicotine hit was actually about the strongest I’ve felt, though I didn’t get the sick feeling I sometimes have when aggressively smoking a strong blend. I felt light-headed, buzzed, glued to my chair a bit, but not sick—which is nice, because I like the former and hate the latter. I doubt that this had anything to do with the tobacco—it was probably just how hydrated I was or how much food I happened to have on my stomach.
I’d put this right up there with Irish Flake, G&H Twist, and Royal Yacht as far as nicotine content.
Overall, this was a great, rich smoke. 1792 Flake may have just edged out Royal Yacht for what I’ll go for when I want a strong, substantial smoke with a husky flavor profile.
Expectations:
I find expectations have a lot to do with my experience of a new blend, so I’ll go ahead and list what I expected going into my first 1792 experience.
-This was supposed to be a stinker of a tobacco. I’ve heard it compared to everything from a tire fire to engine grease to manure.
-1792 Flake is supposed to have a huge nicotine kick.
-As with many blends with “Gawith” in the name, I had heard the tobacco comes quite wet.
-There is a tonquin (tonka bean) topping that I’d either love or hate. I’ve seen some forum-goers even go so far as to compare it to Lakeland flavorings. I was interested to see what this would be like. Some reviewers described it as vanilla-like, and I thought, “How could a bean smell like vanilla?” only to immediately recall that vanilla does in fact come from a bean.
Tin Note:
I was actually quite surprised by the tin note. I was expecting much worse. This just smelled like beef jerky. I couldn’t detect the tonquin at all at first, but to be fair, I had just opened up the other items in my Pipes and Cigars order—Ennerdale and Dark Flake Scented. It’s no wonder this topping seemed mild in comparison. I didn’t actually notice the tonquin flavoring until after I rubbed out some of the flakes. I washed my hands, and the tobacco smell washed away while the tonquin stayed, so I could discern it apart from the overall tin note.
Preparation and Smoke:
The flakes were, as I had expected, very moist. But this moistness was a bit different than what I’ve seen with other moist blends. I’d describe it as more oily than wet. I discovered with my G&H Sweet Maple Twist that I needed to let the tobacco dry a bit after rubbing it out to avoid the pain of constant relights. In the past, I’ve had some odd resistance to drying my tobacco out, and have smoked it too moist on a few blends, but my experience with the G&H Twist changed my attitude. I let the flakes dry out until they were at an appropriate level of moisture and then, after I had rubbed out a couple of flakes, I let the rubbed out portion dry further.
This tobacco smoked more cleanly than any I’ve ever smoked. I was very surprised by this. I’ve smoked a bowl down to a white ash before (Royal Yacht does this beautifully), but what surprised me about this smoke was how little ash was left at the end. I started with a fully packed bowl, but ended up with what seemed like a millimeter of ash in the bottom of the pipe. I don’t know if this is good or bad—it doesn’t seem that it would matter—but there was something satisfying about so thoroughly smoking through all of the tobacco.
There was no bite. I did have to relight a couple of times because of brief interruptions to my smoke. Otherwise, I think it would have easily smoked cleanly all the way through. I don’t mind a few relights, but I thought I’d mention, since they seem to bother some so much.
I think a lot of how well the tobacco smoked was because I took the time to dry it out thoroughly. I wouldn’t want to try smoking it as it came.
Flavor:
Here was another surprise: I expected some rank, manly stench from this tobacco. Not so. It was manly, but not rank: a smooth, deep and rich flavor. I noticed a nutty burley taste coming through from the Kentucky, combined with a flavor from the Virginias sort of akin to what one tastes in Royal Yacht. I assume that Virginias-on-steroids flavor is the dark-fired Tanzanian leaf. I am still a new smoker, and so it’s difficult for me to draw comparisons since I have a small pool to draw from, but this was a bit like a richer, meatier Irish Flake—if Irish Flake’s flavor profile matched its nicotine punch.
The tonquin topping was far milder than I expected —in fact, I could hardly discern it at all while smoking. I expected 1792 to be like Royal Yacht in composition—a really strong tobacco with a mild topping. I still think that description could be fairly applied to 1792, but to my palate the tonquin was about 25% as strong as the plum topping on Royal Yacht is. The tobacco itself was very much in the forefront, and if I had not heard so much about the topping before, I probably would not have noticed it at all. I’m sure this reveals my plebian palate, but I think it’s worth mentioning in case the topping has scared some people off.
Another surprise: my wife was a fan. She actually interrupted me mid-smoke for a brief make-out session (too much info!—sorry) and didn’t mind the aroma at all. Perhaps tonquin has unknown aphrodisiac qualities? Though she loves aromatics, in the past she has said she wasn’t so much a fan of how Royal Yacht, Five Brothers, and Nightcap smelled, but said 1792 just smelled “smoky”—not “like a cigarette,” which is her go-to insult for any tobacco.
Nicotine Kick:
1792 is reputed for its strength, and it deserves this reputation. I enjoy strong blends, and this was the first time I actually contracted the “niccups” I’ve always heard about. Toward the middle of the bowl I felt some nicotine creeping up on me, and thought maybe I should give it a rest, but instead just puffed right through it. I felt the nicotine hit was actually about the strongest I’ve felt, though I didn’t get the sick feeling I sometimes have when aggressively smoking a strong blend. I felt light-headed, buzzed, glued to my chair a bit, but not sick—which is nice, because I like the former and hate the latter. I doubt that this had anything to do with the tobacco—it was probably just how hydrated I was or how much food I happened to have on my stomach.
I’d put this right up there with Irish Flake, G&H Twist, and Royal Yacht as far as nicotine content.
In Summary:
Overall, this was a great, rich smoke. 1792 Flake may have just edged out Royal Yacht for what I’ll go for when I want a strong, substantial smoke with a husky flavor profile.
