673 vs 80s Pete

[Cotton1]

I'm planning to buy a pipe or two and these two have my eye along with a Stanwell estate.

I am hoping someone here has both and can give pro and cons.

I honestly am leaning towards the Savenelli but have yet to own a Pete. My small pipe assortment will grow this year but I not by much.

My thanks for any help in advance!

Cotton1

 

[FurCoat]

I would get the Sav. To me it looks better and if it smokes like my 626, which is similarly proportioned, it will smoke very well. The Pete is a looker also, but know that the bowl coating is a awful. I have removed the coating from my Pete's prior to smoking. Really can't go wrong with either, so it boils down to which one do you want the most.

 

[ssjones]

Is the 80s a P-lip? If so, that could be make your decision. Not everyone is a fan (I am ).

 

[verporchting]

Both are good brands but I have had poor luck with Peterson pipes with bent stems. The drilling has been poor and the stem bent crooked and/or twisted to an unreasonable extent. I have never experienced that with any Sav.

That’s not to say Pete doesn’t make a good pipe because the 80s is a lovely shape when done properly.

Personally I’d buy the Sav unless I could inspect the Pete in person to guarantee it didn’t have those flaws.

 

[ssjones]

Also estate or new? If new, the Peterson bowl coatings wipe out, if estate, it's moot.

 

[Cotton1]

Is the 80s a P-lip? If so, that could be make your decision. Not everyone is a fan (I am ).

Not the one I had on radar. I have never had a p lip and admit I am curious about those.

 

[Cotton1]

Both are good brands but I have had poor luck with Peterson pipes with bent stems. The drilling has been poor and the stem bent crooked and/or twisted to an unreasonable extent. I have never experienced that with any Sav.

That’s not to say Pete doesn’t make a good pipe because the 80s is a lovely shape when done properly.

Personally I’d buy the Sav unless I could inspect the Pete in person to guarantee it didn’t have those flaws.

Sadly, will be a on line purchase

 

[Cotton1]

Also estate or new? If new, the Peterson bowl coatings wipe out, if estate, it's moot.

Pete or Sav will be new. I'm looking at a Stanwell estate too. That's why I can't buy both Pete and Sav to compare at the moment.

 

[verporchting]

I have never had any problems with straight Petes but I’ve resolved to never buy another bent style Pete unless I can see it in person.

I do suspect the older Petes were done better and didn’t suffer from these issues but who knows.

If you’re interested in the Pete ask the seller for close up photos of the drilling and check the alignment of the stem from several angles. If it looks bad run away.

 

[Cotton1]

I have never had any problems with straight Petes but I’ve resolved to never buy another bent style Pete unless I can see it in person.

I do suspect the older Petes were done better and didn’t suffer from these issues but who knows.

If you’re interested in the Pete ask the seller for close up photos of the drilling and check the alignment of the stem from several angles. If it looks bad run away.

Thank You

 

[ray47]

Savinelli has the better track record.

 

[bullet08]

I'm bias. Pete all the way. Never had issue with bad drilling. But I do need to mention some of the stems are not very straight. No issue with smoking. Then again, I always get ones with sterling silver bands (other than St. Paddy's and Christmas pipes). Bowl coating is there, but either you can smoke 'em off or get rid of it in multiple different ways. Natural finish doesn't have bowl coating. If you are concerned about dip coating, that hasn't happened in few years. 80s is a good model. Following is a flame trained spigot 80s.

 

[Cotton1]

Savinelli has the better track record.

Thank you! I was leaning that way and it's good to hear from folks here who know!

 

[Ahi Ka]

Unless you are going estate or for higher grade eg. spigot above, go for the savinelli bro. I’m a Peterson man through and through but I still want a 673. Lol

 

[Cotton1]

I'm bias. Pete all the way. Never had issue with bad drilling. But I do need to mention some of the stems are not very straight. No issue with smoking. Then again, I always get ones with sterling silver bands (other than St. Paddy's and Christmas pipes). Bowl coating is there, but either you can smoke 'em off or get rid of it in multiple different ways. Natural finish doesn't have bowl coating. If you are concerned about dip coating, that hasn't happened in few years. 80s is a good model. Following is a flame trained spigot 80s.

View attachment 60707

It's a beauty! Thanks for the heads up on the stems, the one I was considering has a stem shaped like the shank.

 

[Cotton1]

Unless you are going estate or for higher grade eg. spigot above, go for the savinelli bro. I’m a Peterson man through and through but I still want a 673. Lol

At some point I must have a Peterson. I just always think of them in a different shape, more like the "pubs". I might need your advice on a different style in the future.
Thanks!

 

[Cotton1]

Ordered the Stanwell last night. Still not sure about the other two...wife likes the larger band on the Peterson and I like the looks of both.

I'm wondering if there will be any deals on either of these on IPD? Just a few more weeks away.

 

[Ahi Ka]

Ordered the Stanwell last night. Still not sure about the other two...wife likes the larger band on the Peterson and I like the looks of both.

I'm wondering if there will be any deals on either of these on IPD? Just a few more weeks away.

I would assume most sites will have an generic x% of pipes. SPC might have more off these brands as laudisi are in business with them

 

[BROBS]

My only beef with savinelli is the balsa filter or if you don’t use it the space for it is still there.

 

[tschiraldi]

I think Stanwell makes a much better pipe, consistently, that Savinelli or Peterson, and I've had several of all three. Stanwell for my money. I'll never own another Peterson and O hate the balsa filter in the Savinellis, and I don't like their adapter either.