After reading much about the re-release of Stonehenge Flake and how similar some folks thought it to be with Louisiana Flake I thought I would give both a try being a fan of VaPer blends. My only misgivings were they both were flavoured with cocoa. I do like cocoa but prefer it in a mug.
First off was the LF. This arrived more as a broken flake than being in whole flakes as I had expected. No worries as I rub my flakes out anyway. And so I did with the 50g spread out on a copper tray. It was the wetter of the two blends and the smell of cocoa was rather strong. Fully rubbed out I set some aside to dry off and tinned the rest. When sufficiently dry I loaded a bowl and fired up. Well the cocoa aroma transferred itself to the smoke much more than I was led to believe it would which was a disappointment to me. As for the Perique that was barely noticeable. Just occasionally was I made aware of its presence. Overall the smoke wasn't too bad but nothing too exciting either. I have now smoked three bowls in three different pipes and would rate it at 6/10.
Next was the SF. This is allegedly the same recipe as LF but with the all important addition of a bit of Burley. This arrived (from the States) in almost perfect condition meaning the flakes on the whole were intact. What really took me by surprise was that the flakes were covered in tiny crystals which usually bodes well. The tobacco is slightly darker than LF and looks more 'natural' inasmuch as the LF appeared to be dusted with something and the SF wasn't.
Much drier than LF it still needed a little airing afore it was how I like my flakes. The cocoa aroma was still there during the rubbing out process but not as strongly as in LF. I fired up my first bowl and was pleased that the cocoa was barely noticeable. The Perique on the other hand was very noticeable. I'm not suggesting it was 'over-periqued' just that I was aware of it in every puff. Having now also smoked three bowls of SF I can hand on heart say SF is the winner hands down at 8/10. Something else in its favour is it smokes a fair bit longer than LF for some reason.
Yes they are both made by Gawith and Hoggarth to a similar recipe but in my opinion they are not like for like. I will order more SF but once this batch of LF is smoked that will be it and that is a bugger for me as I can get LF anytime but I have to order my SF from the States.
I must also say that in neither blend did I detect any on the infamous 'Lakeland Essence' which was a blessing :
:
I know member Hawky has done a comparison, has anyone else?
Regards,
Jay.
First off was the LF. This arrived more as a broken flake than being in whole flakes as I had expected. No worries as I rub my flakes out anyway. And so I did with the 50g spread out on a copper tray. It was the wetter of the two blends and the smell of cocoa was rather strong. Fully rubbed out I set some aside to dry off and tinned the rest. When sufficiently dry I loaded a bowl and fired up. Well the cocoa aroma transferred itself to the smoke much more than I was led to believe it would which was a disappointment to me. As for the Perique that was barely noticeable. Just occasionally was I made aware of its presence. Overall the smoke wasn't too bad but nothing too exciting either. I have now smoked three bowls in three different pipes and would rate it at 6/10.
Next was the SF. This is allegedly the same recipe as LF but with the all important addition of a bit of Burley. This arrived (from the States) in almost perfect condition meaning the flakes on the whole were intact. What really took me by surprise was that the flakes were covered in tiny crystals which usually bodes well. The tobacco is slightly darker than LF and looks more 'natural' inasmuch as the LF appeared to be dusted with something and the SF wasn't.
Much drier than LF it still needed a little airing afore it was how I like my flakes. The cocoa aroma was still there during the rubbing out process but not as strongly as in LF. I fired up my first bowl and was pleased that the cocoa was barely noticeable. The Perique on the other hand was very noticeable. I'm not suggesting it was 'over-periqued' just that I was aware of it in every puff. Having now also smoked three bowls of SF I can hand on heart say SF is the winner hands down at 8/10. Something else in its favour is it smokes a fair bit longer than LF for some reason.
Yes they are both made by Gawith and Hoggarth to a similar recipe but in my opinion they are not like for like. I will order more SF but once this batch of LF is smoked that will be it and that is a bugger for me as I can get LF anytime but I have to order my SF from the States.
I must also say that in neither blend did I detect any on the infamous 'Lakeland Essence' which was a blessing :
:I know member Hawky has done a comparison, has anyone else?
Regards,
Jay.
