Does tobacco that has been well stored for more than 20 years get better?

[Woo]

I admit that tobacco will only change very well in 5 years, but I have not tried tobacco produced in the 20th century (very expensive) will this continue to make tobacco more delicious? Or will it deteriorate, just like wine, a year or two of storage will make the wine more flavorful, but 10 years will basically spoil it completely.

 

[hoosierpipeguy]

Depends on your view point, depends on the blend. I've had a few blends that were over 20 years and still robust and fabulous. I don't think you're going to see a great deal of change from 10 years on. There are members here who have a great deal more experience than I with tobacco that old, hopefully they'll with in.

 

[jewman22]

I'd imagine, same as wine or whiskey, it would depend on the blend. Meaning some get better, some get worse and some don't really change a noticeable amount. While I don't have a lot of experience with aged tobacco, my favourite has 21yrs of age on it, and it is smoother than when it was first blended.

 

[verporchting]

Depends on the blend. Many will not. A few may be sublime. Bad tobacco will only be improved by not having to smoke it for 20 years - check back in 200-300 years. If it’s turned into unsmokable dust it may have improved somewhat. Or not. Just drier.

 

[mso489]

Virginia leaf ages well and often with improvement, I've heard. Whether this would tend to decline by the twenty year point, I don't know. That's maybe the outer limit for any improvement. Latakia is undependable; I've had it disappear (in terms of flavor) after a few bowls once a tin is opened, not invariably, but I've had it happen. Burley preserves well, but isn't noted for improvement, though I think it mellows somewhat. Most aromatic flavoring fades with time. And all of this is lore and guesswork. People on Forums have reported having great smokes from twenty year old blends.

 

[peregrinus]

produced in the 20th century (very expensive) will this continue to make tobacco more delicious?

No.
With all tobacco there is a curve, and all blends reach a point of diminishing returns unique to that particular blend and then begin to decline. For some, they start out as crap and die as crap, There are number of Virginia and Vapers such as St. James Flake for example, where there is a definite improvement in taste and even smoking quality that evolves over a decade, but at some point the focus changes from any improvements to the tobacco, to one of preservation.

 

[sablebrush52]

Tobaccos don't improve over time. Tobaccos change over time. Whether that change is an improvement is up to the individual smoker to decide.

 

[kcghost]

Depends on the type of tobacco it is. Aromatic not at all or at best marginally. Generally speaking Englishes will change for roughly 10 years and Va/VaPers will change for up to 20 or more years. But there can be wide variance in the numbers.
.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

A really dry wine breaks down the alcohol molecules back into complex sugars over a more vast time than just a few years. A dry heavily oaked white can become nirvana in 20+ years.
But like wines, tobacco becomes more unstable and reactive to oxygen also. You might get a great smoke when you first pop a +20 year old Capstan or Escudo, but might as well chain smoke that tin, because it can become shitdust quickly. And, I wouldn’t necessarily turn down a +20 year old tin of an English. Some of them become very interesting also. But, it’s definitely a challenge predicting what will age to your tastes. It’s a gamble, but like all gambles some will pay out, but many will crap out. Which ones will depend on your tastes.

 

[mso489]

It's true, the improvement is in the mind of the pipe smoker. Your level of enthusiasm probably takes a bowl from good to ecstatic.

 

[saltedplug]

I've read many times that VAs can change indefinitely. Whether that means 50 or 100 years is beyond the life expectancy of all but a very few.

 

[Streeper541]

... like wines, tobacco becomes more unstable and reactive to oxygen also. You might get a great smoke when you first pop a +20 year old Capstan or Escudo, but might as well chain smoke that tin, because it can become shitdust quickly.

I believe that's at least part of the reason why many folks are so free about letting others try their old tins at the pipe show smokers.

 

[OzPiper]

I can't speak of aged tobaccos as I have only returned to smoking pipes 3years ago and have not had the opportunity to lay down a cellar.

I have still, and have smoked cigars from the '70's and '80s, and they exhibit mellowed attenuated flavours. My guess is that most would have been better smoked when they were 10years old, rather than at 30 or 40.

I can speak with some experience of aged wines. The 3 oldest I've had in the past 3 years are a 1837 Bual (Madeira), a 1855 Port and a 1874 Rivesalte (sweet white wine from southern France). All 3 bottles were stonkingly good, and far more youthful tasting than one would expect. But these were exceptional bottles. 99.999% of bottles half their age would only be fit to be poured down the drain.

I have drunk and enjoyed German white wines that were over 50yrs old, but if I had my druthers, I'd druther enjoy most of them in their first flush of fruity youthfulness at 2-10 years old. Bridget Bardot was still very attractive at 60, but one would not argue with the fact that she was at her physical prime between 18 and 25 years old (I apologise for this non-PC male sexist comment ?)

Flavours change with age. It's whether you like those changes. My wife will only eat slightly underripe bananas. She will not eat a banana once it develops those esters associated with a ripe banana. Whereas I am the opposite, and will only eat a properly ripened banana.

Older is not necessarily better. Just different.

 

[magicpiper]

I have a 1992 tin of McClelland Christmas Cheer. I don’t have high expectations that it will still be good when I open it. Whatever chance the VA tobacco had at aging well was, most likely, disrupted by rust or the seal being compromised. Maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised. ?

 

[AroEnglish]

I've got some Sillem's Black that's been in a mason jar for 10 years. It's much mellower than when it was fresh but still has all the good flavor. Definitely going to jar more of it eventually.

 

[sablebrush52]

I've read many times that VAs can change indefinitely. Whether that means 50 or 100 years is beyond the life expectancy of all but a very few.

So far, the bulk of the blends that I've smoked that were over 50 years old were well past their pull date, faded and strange. Only Burley seems to be ageless.

 

[sablebrush52]

I have a 1992 tin of McClelland Christmas Cheer. I don’t have high expectations that it will still be good when I open it. Whatever chance the VA tobacco had at aging well was, most likely, disrupted by rust or the seal being compromised. Maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised. ?

Hopefully it will be fine. But don't wait forever because those tins are not the same grade as their later tins.

 

[beefeater33]

I've got some dunhill blends from the '70's that get better with each passing year.........

 

[thebigragu]

Tobacco doesn't need preservatives. The curing process is sufficient to ensure that tobacco, if stored properly, will last indefinitely. It *can* mold, if too wet, and ultimately rot, again if too wet. But it doesn't putrify, spoil, rot, become septic or anything else which warrants a "preservative." The reason some manufacturers put humectants [chemical preservatives] in their tobaccos is to prolong the "shelf-life" of the "fresh" (read moist) tobacco. For some reason, people don't want to find their own personal "humidity index" for their tobaccos, so the manufacturer second guesses, loads the stuff with propylene glycol, and packs the stuff in little pouches. Not all tobacco is so adulterated, but in some cases, the tobacco in pouches is, while that in tins is not. Pouches have a shorter "shelf-life."

G.L. Pease, 1997-12-22

In terms of quantity sold: most tobacco mixtures are flavored with chemical additives. This includes almost all 'dime store' blends, most premium continental European blends (including most of the traditional English blends being produced on the continent now), and many premium US & UK blends. These blends will most probably not improve with age & are probably best smoked as close to 'off the store shelf' as possible.

 

[ashdigger]

I’ve had tobacco that was approximately 100 years old and conducted a Forum Tasting of tobacco that was approximately 80 years old.

It was good, but oxygen immediately goes to town on it once opened