Have we all fallen for some click-bait here? 
Chacom Hate?
- Thread starter Mantis_Shankman
- Start date
Huh, interesting. I decided to ask my buddy Mike, who has a pretty good wealth of knowledge when it comes to pipes, but is also one of the pipers with a negative view of Chacom and here is what he had to say,
“They were the first, and they have a legacy and I appreciate that. But around WW2 they increased production and the quality of their pipes went down. I am not a fan of the thick lacquers that they started using in the early 2000’s which seem to cause the bowl to smoke too hot. Also many of their newer pipes are just ugly, glossy and too modern for my taste. I personally don’t see why someone would choose one over a Savinelli or a Peterson.”
I suppose this isn’t really the answer I was looking for. But it does seem like there are common complaints about their glossy pipes. I don’t have any experience with them, so I am not sure how they smoke. As to the validity of the WW2 pipe claim, I guess i’ll have to take his word for it.
“They were the first, and they have a legacy and I appreciate that. But around WW2 they increased production and the quality of their pipes went down. I am not a fan of the thick lacquers that they started using in the early 2000’s which seem to cause the bowl to smoke too hot. Also many of their newer pipes are just ugly, glossy and too modern for my taste. I personally don’t see why someone would choose one over a Savinelli or a Peterson.”
I suppose this isn’t really the answer I was looking for. But it does seem like there are common complaints about their glossy pipes. I don’t have any experience with them, so I am not sure how they smoke. As to the validity of the WW2 pipe claim, I guess i’ll have to take his word for it.
I am guilty of using the term “piper” it does sound kind of douchey now that I think about it.
I have yet to see any of these glossy, heavily lacquered pipes that they make. Mine actually barely have a finish on them at all, and smoke very cool.
I think he was just looking for a reason not to like them. I don't find what he says to hold water.
I think he was just looking for a reason not to like them. I don't find what he says to hold water.
I'd rather hear someone call me a piper, than to hear someone refer to tobacco as "bakky." Ha ha.
I am pretty sure he is referring to these. I don’t have any of the lacquered ones either. But I must admit, it does seem like a thick coating… this wouldn’t be my cup of tea.
Yes some of thier pipes have very thick finish on them, I think most everyone round these parts tends to avoid those though. They also have pipes that do not have said finish.
I don't think it's fair to judge an entire companies catalog by thier lowest price point pipes. A cheap pipe is a cheap pipe no mater who makes it. Peterson has thick finishes as well on some of thier pipes.
Every company in the western world increased thier production after WWII, it was a post war boom. I'm not really sure that means they went to shit because of it. Was your friend buying a lot pipes in 1939 or 1946? How qualified do you think he might be to judge the quality of pipes he likely did not experience contemporaneously. Pipe production quality across all western brands did fall at the outset of WWII and never recovered. Chacom was not affected any more than any other brand.
As for thier shapes being "to modern" well that sounds like his personal opinion, some people like modern, some don't...
Nording, Savinelli, and quite a few other companies also sell heavily lacquered pipes. Just don't buy those. Chacom also has a huge line up of spigots at very reasonable prices. None of those are lacquered.
I have five or six French made pipes, only one Chacom, which is stained green, one of the green pipes where the stain holds up over time. It was made especially for Iwan Ries, though it is not a house pipe but stamped with the brand. It is a straight tapered stem billiard, with an honest good-sized Group 4 chamber. It has been a work horse and a smooth smoking pipe, so I'd recommend Chacom.
It is also possible that the first pipe I ever bought, a Tinder Box St. Ives house pipe, was made by Chacom. It is about 40 years old and still looks handsome and smokes great. It is a rather unique bent pot with a vertical saddle stem. After forty plus years, still a star.
It is also possible that the first pipe I ever bought, a Tinder Box St. Ives house pipe, was made by Chacom. It is about 40 years old and still looks handsome and smokes great. It is a rather unique bent pot with a vertical saddle stem. After forty plus years, still a star.
You need new friends and associates. There is something wrong with them. Not sure what but that just ain't right.
I have purchased a few Chacoms, I have a couple of 297 Canadians that are incredible smokers and I also own some smaller prince and billiard shapes that I love for quick smokes. I like their pipe proportions and respect the company’s heritage.
My question is, what’s the reason for the hate? Was there a point in time when Chacom couldn’t get it right? Is it anti FrenchBigotry
? They seem to be fine now.
I have an H. Wiebe that I like, so “modern” pipes don’t bother me. I also have a couple of Nording Compasses.
As far as Mikes qualifications, he likes old soviet stuff and builds ATV Sleds out of lawnmowers and collects WW2 milsurp. I wouldn’t be surprised if he is actually qualified
.But this isn’t the only complaint I have heard about Chacom, or QC issues, or the only person I have heard say that they doubt care for them.
Unless I’m missing something, your “evidence” of hate is based on the comments of one person who has a bias against the brand based on his personal tastes.
On that basis, I’m sure you could find evidence of “hate” here for every pipe and tobacco on the market.
If I read this right so dumped the dud on SP. Hope none of the members here now own same.
Well you are missing something, I said more than once that I have encountered many people who don’t care for Chacom.
Not what most would consider a connoisseur top tier quality...Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, that doesn't mean they are valid or well informed. I encourage everyone to form thier own opinions based on thier own experiences as opposed to listening to others.
Sometimes group psychology takes over. People want something to complain about or make a joke of something, and it's just fun to join in on the frolic.
For a while on Forums, Mixture No. 79 was the punchline blend, always funny to mention. Until one of Forums' freethinkers did a few posts commending this venerable codger blend, and others tried it and decided it was pretty good. I guess the lesson is, don't always follow the herd.
For a while on Forums, Mixture No. 79 was the punchline blend, always funny to mention. Until one of Forums' freethinkers did a few posts commending this venerable codger blend, and others tried it and decided it was pretty good. I guess the lesson is, don't always follow the herd.
The bend was such that it touched my chin, and that isn't comfortable for me. And I'm certain the tenon just needed a light sand or perhaps some graphite to facilitate a smooth fit. I was new to pipes at the time and was intimidated by making modifications, afraid I might break something.
So I sent the pipe to SP with the original sock and box along with a note describing the issue. I got a "thank you for the heads-up" email from them upon receipt of the pipe.
Knowing what I know now, I would have made the necessary modifications myself. I've used pencil/grahite to smooth a few tenons since then with no problem.
The pipe was not the "dud".
I was.
I've bought old estate pipes almost exclusively, so my idea of a make is always shaped by their classic stock, not their new output.
I love classic Chacoms. But now that I look at their current production, I'll be the first to admit that I'm *really* turned off by some of the modern aesthetic.
The worst by far is their "Carbone" series. Gag a maggot!
Nor am I a fan of other strange finishes, such as those on the Atlas series.
And sure, there are a few ugly shapes to be found, such as reverse calabashes and their awkward 1922 shape.
But for all that,
(a) this does not detract from the really classic Chacoms
(b) there are still plenty of really lovely shapes to be found in their lineup. Just for example, their "R04" may be my favorite factory brandy shape
I love classic Chacoms. But now that I look at their current production, I'll be the first to admit that I'm *really* turned off by some of the modern aesthetic.
The worst by far is their "Carbone" series. Gag a maggot!
Nor am I a fan of other strange finishes, such as those on the Atlas series.
And sure, there are a few ugly shapes to be found, such as reverse calabashes and their awkward 1922 shape.
But for all that,
(a) this does not detract from the really classic Chacoms
(b) there are still plenty of really lovely shapes to be found in their lineup. Just for example, their "R04" may be my favorite factory brandy shape
Pipe quality plummeted overall during WWII, especially in France. Longchamp solved this by wrapping pipes in leather. It certainly wasn't an issue limited to Chacom. Here in the USA, KB&B even started making pipes from Manzanita burls (Mission Briar) due to lack of quality briar at this time.