Bowl Size By Group Number.

[mawnansmiff]

I often read mention of pipes being a 'group 4' size bowl or having a 'group 2' size bowl but none of this makes any sense to me as I have no reference guide to go by.
I understand it is/was specifically a Dunhill sizing mechanism but obviously it can apply to any pipe.
So how do these group sizes equate in actual measurements and how low/high does the 'scale' go?
As I am on the hunt for a large bowled bent bulldog the more information I have, the better the chance I have of finding the right pipe for me.
Much obliged for any and all replies.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[aldecaker]

Oh, boy. This one tends to be a bit of a rabbit hole!

 

[cosmicfolklore]

It is completely stupid. There is no chart anywhere, and everyone seems to have a different take on it. One unmarked pipe, six Dunhill guys will all give you completely different group sizes and reasons. This is why I only give the width and depth of chambers. Everyone can understand those. You have to be konked in the head a few times to understand group sizes. YMMV

 

[pitchfork]

There's some variation within each "Group," but it still serves as a handy frame of reference, especially when the alternatives are either vague adjectives like "large," "small," and "medium," or else precise dimensions.
It's like when you rent a car, you can opt for "compact," "mini," "medium sedan," etc. Basically, it's a convenient, helpful way to express complex information.
If you want a "large" bulldog, you probably want what people would refer to as a Group 5 (or larger). Though a Group 4 might do. :lol:

 

[aldecaker]

I sometimes get the feeling that "Dunhill group number" actually started out as an absurd Monty Python-esque comedy sketch, then was somehow mistaken for an actual measuring system. Like the Ministry of Silly Pipe Sizing or some such.

 

[pitchfork]

Here's a couple of Group 4 bulldogs -- the bowl sizes are fairly similar ( .83-87" chamber diameter; 1.18-1.26" chamber depth).
A Group 5 would be larger still.
http://www.alpascia.com/pipes/d/Dunhill-B809-i37761.html
http://www.alpascia.com/pipes/d/Dunhill-B796-i37665.html

 

[mso489]

The only retailer who regularly tries to match up particular pipes with a group size is Iwan Ries. So go to their site and look up some pipes you own or otherwise know fairly well, and that will give you a dead-reckoning feel for the sizes. It's an inexact non-science anyway because there are so many different sizes and shapes of chambers, but I've been shopping at Iwan Ries so long that I have a pleasant delusional sense that I can identify the sizes by magic thinking or something. Much better are the chamber diameter and chamber depth specs that draw a good picture of what you're getting. Those Grade numbers drive the engineers and technicians among us crazy precisely because they are so vague. But if you want to get a sense of them, IR is the place to go. It's just for fun. Read the actual diameters and depth of chambers, I'd say.

 

[pitchfork]

Serious Dunhill collectors don't rely on the group size, they use the shape number, which seldom varies in size.

True enough, but lots of us un-Serious folks use the Group sizes as a general shorthand.

 

[pagan]

@pitchfork said it all, the Dunhill chart/sizing mechanism is often referred to bu some but not an industry standard, best to ask questions on specific measurements for what you are looking

 

[mawnansmiff]

"This one tends to be a bit of a rabbit hole!"
But what group size rabbit hole?..Sorry, I couldn't resist :D
Seriously though chaps, thanks very much. It never occurred to me it was a non-arbitrary sizing system. It's just that I read of it so often I assumed it actually meant something tangible, apparently it doesn't!
I shall stick to actual size measurements, at least they are on the whole universally understood.
I do have a digital caliper but of course it has no 'group size' scale, I now see why ::
Thanks again chaps, I knew I would get the answer here.
Regards,
Jay.
PS: BTW I am not on the hunt for a Dunhill 'dog, way beyond the means of this church mouse :crying:

 

[cosmicfolklore]

I'm just glad someone didn't come on here and say, "I was konked on the head once, and I understand group sizes just fine, thank you very much Cosmic jerkhead." ::

You never know when someone is going to take a joke and put it on and wear it.
But yeh, width and depth, which is more important? Discuss...

 

[skraps]

But yeh, width and depth, which is more important?

Well, sometimes they say the more width, the harder it is to get depth....
Wait.... what were we talking about again? 8O

 

[jefff]

Grp 1 is small... Grp 6 is usually much larger
I hope this helps.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

My wife says that I'm a group 3. I'm not sure whether that is good or bad.

 

[skraps]

My wife says that I'm a group 3. I'm not sure whether that is good or bad.

Better than Group 1... just sayin.

 

[aldecaker]

I don't know which is more important, I just know that a diameter of about 3/4" by a depth of about 1 1/4" seems to suit me just right.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

I like a deeper chamber and a longer smoke.

:::shivers::: this is turning me on. ::

 

[dottiewarden]

As I am on the hunt for a large bowled bent bulldog the more information I have, the better the chance I have of finding the right pipe for me.

As we know the Dunnies are out of your league, just buck up on the Pete and be done with it!

 

[mawnansmiff]

I would Dottie, I really would but I don't fancy the prospect of having to smoke the stain out of the innards.
Rattray's do a rather nice one though.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[northernneil]

I remember reading once that Dunhill group sizes were based on the size of the briar before shaping. Explaining why there is such a variation in finished sizing.
For example, a group 4 would be cut from a smaller chunk of briar than a group 5, but in the end, they might be very close in final dimensions after the pipes are complete.
I do not have the source, and cannot remember if where I got this information was a legitimate resource. So I do not know how reliable this information is, but it kind of makes sense to me.