Stanwell shape 20 - What do you think about it?

lucilucius

Lurker

Jul 1, 2018

24

6

• Jul 2, 2018

• #1

one of my pipe friends said that 20 may be the best shape ever designed by Sixten Ivarsson while he was still with Stanwell. I totally agree with him.
how about you, what do you think about it? It'd be wonderful to get to see some of your old Stanwell pipes here also.
cheers,

 

Chasing Embers

Captain of the Black Frigate

Nov 12, 2014

43,445

109,364

• Jul 2, 2018

• #2

Picked one up a few years ago from a auction site for around $50. I like the shape, but it was too bowl heavy for me.

 

mso489

Lifer

Feb 21, 2013

41,210

60,459

• Jul 2, 2018

• #3

I don't like bowl heavy, but as a shape, it is excellent. I have an Ivarsson designed Stanwell, a hemispherical rather than cylindrical pot, which PC offers in brushed brown for $49.99, pleasing to have at such a moderate price. It is very light weight. For looks, your Ivarsson is most handsome.

 

Chasing Embers

Captain of the Black Frigate

Nov 12, 2014

43,445

109,364

• Jul 2, 2018

• #4

For looks, your Ivarsson is most handsome.

Click to expand...

Indeed. That blast and swoop on the stem are very classy.

 

dmcmtk

Lifer

Aug 23, 2013

3,672

1,685

• Jul 2, 2018

• #5

Definitely one of the classic Ivarsson shapes. What we also see, with the shaping of the front of the bowl, is the prelude of the same motif later seen during the "Fancy Freehand" era. Other Ivarsson shapes to consider in the progression to the result of shape 2o are 6, 10, 50, and 55.

 

mso489

Lifer

Feb 21, 2013

41,210

60,459

• Jul 2, 2018

• #6

My Ivarsson pot isn't shown on the current PC Stanwell brushed brown series, but a similar shape 95 is show in brushed black, but the weight is given as 2.5 ounces, and I don't believe mine is that heavy at all, so maybe there are two versions, but the shape is the same, for reference. I regard mine as pretty much a pocket pipe and easy clencher. I thought mine was a shape 86, but I'm not spotting the shape number on the stamp.

 

dmcmtk

Lifer

Aug 23, 2013

3,672

1,685

• Jul 2, 2018

• #7

Another thing I can say, is the older early (late '50's ~ 1960's) Danish Stanwell's, regardless of shape, are very light weight pipes.
I no owna, or smoka, any of dese new Stanwellini pipes. :wink:

 

mso489

Lifer

Feb 21, 2013

41,210

60,459

• Jul 2, 2018

• #8

It's true. Those Danish made Stanwells are prizes and prized. I have only Italians, but given that they uprooted the whole production, they are a good product. But if you have the Danes, enjoy them to beat the band.

 

lucilucius

Lurker

Jul 1, 2018

24

6

• Jul 2, 2018

• #9

I also do agree that early Stanwell pipes are excellent. The one in this picture is a remarkable example, simple S, no crown, as light as a feather and smoke like a charm. :wink:

 

dmcmtk

Lifer

Aug 23, 2013

3,672

1,685

• Jul 2, 2018

• #10

Stanwell shape 50(note the shaping from the "top down" view),

Stanwell 01, this example of a very hard to find pipe, is in excellent condition.

 

jaytex1969

Lifer

Jun 6, 2017

9,520

50,598

Here

• Jul 2, 2018

• #11

I thought mine was a shape 86, but I'm not spotting the shape number on the stamp.

Click to expand...

I'm not well versed on classic Stanwell shapes, but I got a shape 86 during the brown brushed feeding frenzy and it is a great VA flake smoker:

 

tschiraldi

Lifer

Dec 14, 2015

1,813

3,555

55

Ohio

• Jul 2, 2018

• #12

Way too much excess wood (weight) for my tastes. I'm a bit of a minimalist, though. If it's not necessary, it has to go.

 

jpmcwjr

Moderator

Staff member

May 12, 2015

24,739

27,336

Carmel Valley, CA

• Jul 2, 2018

• #13

Only since you asked for opinions, I don't like it at all. Good photos, though!

 

bnichols23

Lifer

Mar 13, 2018

4,131

9,554

SC Piedmont

• Jul 2, 2018

• #14

For me, gorgeous from the side, ugly from the top. Strictly gut, no objectivity at all. Some Stanwells I've loved, others trike me as meh.
In terms of art? I love it! Would I buy to smoke? Nah, probably not.