Cherry Pipe Tobacco by Smoker Friendly

[Briar Lee]

Cost $19.99 for 12 ounce bag.

Recommended for change of pace smoke

For years I’ve smoked endless bowls of (mostly) Smoker’s Pride Cherry Cavendish at my office during the workday, and I’m not going to switch brands now. I probably have ten pounds laid back at any time.

The typical bagged value premium cherry is an aro bomb that smells and tastes like cotton candy at the county fair.

Smoker Friendly Cherry is different.


It seems to be a blend of well aged sun cured burley, red Virginia, and black cavendish topped with a tart European cherry sauce. It’s rather difficult to light and keep burning, doesn’t have enough nicotine for my needs, but there are subtle notes of nutty burley and citrus and hay Virginia, and sweet black cavendish. It burns slow, with a fine white ash, no bite, bitterness, or rough edges.

But there’s no candy flavored cherry sweetness. This is a “pipe shop” blend intended to compete with Lane RP-6 and the like. It’s a high quality blend at a value price.

The unique thing about SM Cherry is a wonderful aftertaste of Morello tart cherries, the same as my Grandmother had that were sour to eat but made delicious pies.

That tart cherry sauce is glooped on thick. Pack this blend with a light hand, and get used to relights.

Most value bags of Cherry Pipe Tobacco have Cavendish in their names, not this one.

If I had it to do over, I’d try the $4.99 1 1/2 ounce pouch.

But Smoker Friendly Cherry Pipe Tobacco deserves a trial, I think.

You might like tart cherries, instead of sweet ones.

 

[Homer]

JimInks review 1/5.

 

[telescopes]

JimInks review 1/5.

That's 1:4.

 

[HawkeyeLinus]

JimInks review 1/5.

Just means @Briar Lee should focus on Jim’s 1* ratings! All a matter of taste.

 

[Chasing Embers]

JimInks review 1/5.

Had I paid attention to reviews I'd have missed out on many favorites, and most of my cellar wouldn't exist.

 

[Briar Lee]

JimInks review 1/5.

I love Jminks, but the man has such a refined palate after three thousand reviews, he also knocks Half and Half.

Notice he complains of the goopy cherry sauce, too.

He’s also correct this blend burns sopping wet.

Smoker Friendly in Versailles is next door to the famous Pioneer Cafe, where generations of hard working rural folk have gorged on home cooked food fit for thrashers at harvest time. Smoker Friendly products are intended for them.

I’ve put a few ounces in a clear plastic tub the Blind Hog BBQ at Tipton uses for brownies so delicious words cannot describe. Let’s see how the sun bakes this blend.



Whoever used Grandma’s tart cherries to put the cherry on top of a tobacco blend needs a full chance at glory, I think.

 

[OSOBUCO]

Had I paid attention to reviews I'd have missed out on many favorites, and most of my cellar wouldn't exist.

Indeed! And the opposite is also true - buying something based on a review and then regretting it. The best reviewer of anything regarding flavor/aroma is ones own self. That said, when I find a professional reviewer who picks up the same flavors and aromas as I do I will consider their opinions. I have several "highly rated" aros on my shelf that make me gag. I bought these based on "reviews" - big mistake LOL.

 

[bobpnm]

The brilliant thing about Jim’s reviews is consistency over thousands of reviews. Has little to do with whether or not you will like a specific blend. He is a constant in a world of variables. Invest some time in learning how your tastes relate to his observations.

 

[Chasing Embers]

Invest some time in learning how your tastes relate to his observations

Or invest that time honing your own taste. Too many posts have popped up here in disappointment that a blend doesn't taste the way a review described it.

 

[HawkeyeLinus]

The brilliant thing about Jim’s reviews is consistency over thousands of reviews. Has little to do with whether or not you will like a specific blend. He is a constant in a world of variables. Invest some time in learning how your tastes relate to his observations.

This!

 

[HawkeyeLinus]

Or invest that time honing your own taste. Too many posts have popped up here in disappointment that a blend doesn't taste the way a review described it.

And this!

Haha, says I must wait 13 seconds before performing that action - didn’t need memories of my honeymoon!

 

[Briar Lee]

The brilliant thing about Jim’s reviews is consistency over thousands of reviews. Has little to do with whether or not you will like a specific blend. He is a constant in a world of variables. Invest some time in learning how your tastes relate to his observations.

I have never read even one of Jim’s reviews and wondered if he was smoking a different blend than I was trying, even this one.

This tobacco is wet, it is gloppy, it leaves the bowl wet, and it has a strong aftertaste—-of tart cherries.

I’ve dried out the top and turned the mix over to dry it out more.



Ma Agee grew sour Morello cherry trees in her backyard. We grandkids only tried eating them raw once, but Grandma made pies with them the angels envied.

XXXXXX

A morello cherry is a sour cherry cultivar. Morellos are distinguished by their very dark skin, flesh, and juice. They are extremely popular for things like cherry pie, cherry jam, and cherry preserves, and they are also used in an assortment of other desserts. The rich, complex flavor of the morello cherry complements an assortment of ingredients, especially chocolate. You may be able to find morello cherries at a market in season, and they are often available frozen; you can also try growing them, if you live in USDA zones four through eight.
Sour cherries are more formally known as Prunus cerasus, and at one point there were a number of sour cherry cultivars. Unfortunately, the advent of industrial agriculture led to a decline in overall crop diversity, including diversity among the sour cherries, and the morello was one of the few cultivars left behind. Agriculturally, the morello cherry is preferred because it flowers later than other cherries, reducing the risk of damage as a result of frost or severe storms.

XXXXXX

I’ve not visited her place in a long time, now part of the Hermitage Public School, and the cherry orchard is long gone.

But I’m taking some Sour Cherry tobacco with me the next time I drive to Humansville, and see if I can still hear us all sing Fraulien again over at Grandma’s place, at least in my memory.

 

[Homer]

It's a shame that this pipe tobacco is not sold in Europe (like many other American pipe tobaccos).

 

[didimauw]

Had I paid attention to reviews I'd have missed out on many favorites, and most of my cellar wouldn't exist.

Reviews do nothing for me. Strictly ingredients.

 

[telescopes]

Reviews should be used to help in providing context. When picking a blend, one wants to know the type of tobaccos that are in it, the strength, the aroma, etc. Reviews are helpful if the reviewer is consistent and reveals some of the above "plot" points. For instance, I love Haunted Bookshop. Based on some reviews, I might not have chosen it. However, it contained some tobaccos blended in it that I prefer and I bought enough to sample. My decision was made by me and me alone to continue to purchase it. Other blends, such as the one Mr. Lee is discussing, I know for a fact that I will skip. Jim's review was enough to inform me that I knew exactly what to expect and what I would get. I am not interested in that type of tobacco and so I'll skip this one. I don't need to sample it. I really don't like goopy tobaccos with chemical cherry flavors where the flavor of the tobacco is almost invisible. Keep in mind, I use Frosty Mint as a condiment and I like Creme Brûlée. I am not opposed to all such tobacco - just certain blends. But that's for me. I note that Jim gave Molto Dulce four stars. This is a goopy tobacco with heavy toppings. Why four stars? Reading that review and then the one being discussed is very informative as to his reasoning.

Something has to peak your interest before you purchase it with hard earned money. Reviews are a helpful part of informing the buyer what they may be getting. Dismissing them totally out of hand or suggesting they have little worth is disingenuous and makes a point that perhaps one was not wanting to really make.

 

[Briar Lee]

I’ve dried out this blend in the sun for going on three days.

Yesterday evening most of the gloopy sauce was gone, just baked away.

It’s a lot easier to smoke, easier to keep lit, and the flavor profile has changed considerably to a smooth, mild drugstore type blend but still with a tart cherry aftertaste.

There’s one drawback though.

Yesterday I tried a pipeful in my office and my wife said ewww, that smells like it’s gone sour. Is that the tobacco you left outside?

When they say European cherry, they mean Grandma’s sour cherry tree.

 

[Tom-202]

The brilliant thing about Jim’s reviews is consistency over thousands of reviews. Has little to do with whether or not you will like a specific blend. He is a constant in a world of variables. Invest some time in learning how your tastes relate to his observations.

Maybe, but Jim’s reviews often sound like they are cut and paste, the same phrases over and over. Like cue cards for VA and Burley etc. I don’t get a feel off his reviews; not a lot of heart. What I want from a review isn’t a long list of what someone says they taste or smell like some pro wine taster, but some hint as to the character of the blend. Like, if you like A, this is like A; or if you like Z, this is Z light. We are all so different.

 

[Tom-202]

Reviews should be used to help in providing context. When picking a blend, one wants to know the type of tobaccos that are in it, the strength, the aroma, etc. Reviews are helpful if the reviewer is consistent and reveals some of the above "plot" points. For instance, I love Haunted Bookshop. Based on some reviews, I might not have chosen it. However, it contained some tobaccos blended in it that I prefer and I bought enough to sample. My decision was made by me and me alone to continue to purchase it. Other blends, such as the one Mr. Lee is discussing, I know for a fact that I will skip. Jim's review was enough to inform me that I knew exactly what to expect and what I would get. I am not interested in that type of tobacco and so I'll skip this one. I don't need to sample it. I really don't like goopy tobaccos with chemical cherry flavors where the flavor of the tobacco is almost invisible. Keep in mind, I use Frosty Mint as a condiment and I like Creme Brûlée. I am not opposed to all such tobacco - just certain blends. But that's for me. I note that Jim gave Molto Dulce four stars. This is a goopy tobacco with heavy toppings. Why four stars? Reading that review and then the one being discussed is very informative as to his reasoning.

Something has to peak your interest before you purchase it with hard earned money. Reviews are a helpful part of informing the buyer what they may be getting. Dismissing them totally out of hand or suggesting they have little worth is disingenuous and makes a point that perhaps one was not wanting to really make.

I’d agree if Jim’s reviews tended to be nuanced. What I get is the same phraseology over and over. Since we are all different, an English is not an English. I had a supposed Lat forward this morning that felt like the Lat was in the deep background, but that’s not what the reviewer said — yes, it smelled good out of the tin but the smoke wasn’t heavy Lat. So what does heavy mean? Damned if I know. I am simply saying I wish reviews said less about what someone tastes and more about how it compares with A or B or C so the reader can calibrate.

 

[telescopes]

Maybe, but Jim’s reviews often sound like they are cut and paste, the same phrases over and over. Like cue cards for VA and Burley etc. I don’t get a feel off his reviews; not a lot of heart. What I want from a review isn’t a long list of what someone says they taste or smell like some pro wine taster, but some hint as to the character of the blend. Like, if you like A, this is like A; or if you like Z, this is Z light. We are all so different.

I think Jim tries to fill a consistent niche and leaves the other types of reviews for others. What you get from him that you don't get from others is an analysis of the various tobaccos in blend he and an assessment of how they work or not work with each other. If they sound cut and past it is because I imagine many of the tobaccos in the various blends are not just similar, but vary only in percentage of the overall blend. It's important to note that a four star rating from Jim does NOT necessarily mean he enjoyed the tobacco as something he would want in his regular rotation. It only means that for that particular genre, the tobacco is doing what it is suppose to be doing and it is doing it well.

 

[bearwolf56]

Cost $19.99 for 12 ounce bag.

Recommended for change of pace smoke

For years I’ve smoked endless bowls of (mostly) Smoker’s Pride Cherry Cavendish at my office during the workday, and I’m not going to switch brands now. I probably have ten pounds laid back at any time.

The typical bagged value premium cherry is an aro bomb that smells and tastes like cotton candy at the county fair.

Smoker Friendly Cherry is different.


It seems to be a blend of well aged sun cured burley, red Virginia, and black cavendish topped with a tart European cherry sauce. It’s rather difficult to light and keep burning, doesn’t have enough nicotine for my needs, but there are subtle notes of nutty burley and citrus and hay Virginia, and sweet black cavendish. It burns slow, with a fine white ash, no bite, bitterness, or rough edges.

But there’s no candy flavored cherry sweetness. This is a “pipe shop” blend intended to compete with Lane RP-6 and the like. It’s a high quality blend at a value price.

The unique thing about SM Cherry is a wonderful aftertaste of Morello tart cherries, the same as my Grandmother had that were sour to eat but made delicious pies.

That tart cherry sauce is glooped on thick. Pack this blend with a light hand, and get used to relights.

Most value bags of Cherry Pipe Tobacco have Cavendish in their names, not this one.

If I had it to do over, I’d try the $4.99 1 1/2 ounce pouch.

But Smoker Friendly Cherry Pipe Tobacco deserves a trial, I think.

You might like tart cherries, instead of sweet ones.

View attachment 203772View attachment 203773View attachment 203774View attachment 203775View attachment 203776

I appreciate the positive things you said about Smoker’s Pride Cherry Cavendish. I read some fairly negative reviews about it such as it's too wet, would bite, burn, have to be careful, etc. That was I read reviews as I waited for my first order to arrive. When I got my order, not only was it not wet, but was far from goopy, burned great, and didn't have any bite. I'm not sure how they were smoking it but I had no trouble. It's now become one of my favorite all day smokes. Thank you for your positive take on it.