I get less bite with balsa filters.
Do Filters Cool Down a Pipe?
- Thread starter ukparagolfer
- Start date
Sorry, I simply don't agree. I am not a new pipe smoker. I don't puff, I sip. My packing and cadence usually result in a flavorful smoke, right to the bottom on a single light. I think engineering and size of the airway absolutely affect the draw. Try smoking an old Grabow or any other pipe with a smaller, more restricted draw, and compare it to one of the newer artisan pipes with a wide open draw. Huge difference. If it didn't matter, why would makers that produce filter pipes also make and offer adaptors??? It would be pointless!
Hmm the word ‘Proper’, I’m not sure is applicable in this situation(s), but rather, ‘Learn’ about the Common Various Methods, and then Apply your own style of ‘Drying Tobacco’ ‘Loading’, ‘Lighting’, Smoking Cadence’ (Sipping), ‘Tamping’’, ‘Cooldown’ then possibly, using cleaners while smoking.
To achieve a good smoke!
plain answer is yes. someone did a test with a heat guage on youtube - definite yes. he said the difference was there but you wouldn't notice drastics
Hm. I do notice a difference. If I’m smoking a filterless pipe and minding my cadence and ember, I get a well-behaved smoke that doesn’t bite. If I’m distracted and puffing away like crazy, I notice a sharply increased likelihood of tongue bite and unpleasant flavor changes.
With a 9mm Big Ben charcoal filter or similar, distracted puffing rarely ever bites me—I might only feel a mildly spicy sensation, and sometimes the flavor scolds me a little with an ashy off note. If I’m using a 9mm charcoal filtered reverse calabash like an Al Pascia Curvy, I have to try really hard to get tongue bite, and I’ll see unpleasant flavor changes well before that point.
With a 9mm Big Ben charcoal filter or similar, distracted puffing rarely ever bites me—I might only feel a mildly spicy sensation, and sometimes the flavor scolds me a little with an ashy off note. If I’m using a 9mm charcoal filtered reverse calabash like an Al Pascia Curvy, I have to try really hard to get tongue bite, and I’ll see unpleasant flavor changes well before that point.
I still think the best filters I've tried are the Vauen Dr. Perl charcoal ones. They seemed to interfere the least with the flavor. Second is a fluffed up cotton ball in the humidome of a falcon. Better then the dry rings.
Those are the ones I've found to be the worst: as soon as they start soaking up some moisture they taste like crap and all you taste is filter.
Interesting. How do you prepare and use the cotton ball? I have a falcon and would love a simple alternative to the dry rings. I'm a simpleton, so if its not to much trouble, and you are able to, take a pic of what it looks like.
I totally agree could not have put it better. I only ever use charcoal filters never had one get blocked. I don't see the point of balsa filters now they do alter the taste of the tobacco it just tastes of wood, balsa in fact. Other advantage of charcoal filters it lets me smoke notorious bitey blends pain free.
fluff it up so no effect on the draw and stick it around the domeInteresting. How do you prepare and use the cotton ball? I have a falcon and would love a simple alternative to the dry rings. I'm a simpleton, so if its not to much trouble, and you are able to, take a pic of what it looks like.
Actually, all this video shows is that one filter is (possibly) cooler than the other, but it doesn't compare it to no filter at all (unless he does a video about that as well).
I've probably said this before but I've talked to tobacco scientists who have really studied these things and basically all a filter does is capture smoke. It literally makes you smoke slower. It doesn't capture parts of the smoke. The smoke coming through is the same composition just less of it. Again it's literally the same effect as smoking slower. Or at least that's what their lab equipment tell us. But yeah you'll get less bite and less burn, but sipping will do the same thing and it's pretty much free to smoke slower.
I disagree wholeheartedly. Take charcoal filters in general...fish filters, chemical filters (like I used to use on farm projects) etc. Their primary purpose is to capture certain toxins and they do a very good job at it. Also, it would be hard to convince me that if you put a plastic object in a pipe shaped exactly like a Sav balsa, therefore restricting air flow the same amount as the balsa, that the nicotine levels, for instance, would be the same...Savinelli's own tests show that their balsa filters do capture some nicotine, while the plastic object, by definition, wouldn't absorb any.
He's also got probes in there blocking off more of the smoke. If he'd quit chugging that pipe like a locomotive, it would be even cooler.
yes it captures some nicotine but the smoke is going to have the same percentages of whatever in it. I hope I am making sense. Even anything more absorbent is not going to selectively grab the "bad" stuff and leave the yummy stuff in the smoke. It will just absorb the smoke and everything in the smoke. The smoke does contain nicotine so that's going to be in the filter too. The point is if you think a filter is going to be a magical device that makes your pipe healthier it will but the same way that smoking less would be healthier. That said since it does scorch the mouth less which is considered the main way a pipe harms anyone I just contradicted myself. But chemical the smoke will not be changed.
I'll take the word of someone with a cool lab and funding. Doesn't make it true or me right. But if I have to pick I (and I don't), I know who I'll agree with.I'll agree to disagree with you...
LOL, well, I'm not just a hay farmer, I also spent the better part of 25 years working in the experimental crops division of Southern States...that was my primary job until I retired. Filtering toxins was central to my analyses of products such as fertilizers and pesticides. I'm not a total idiot in that area.