Edward G. Robinson's Pipe Blend
- Thread starter JimInks
- Start date
SmokingPipes.com Updates
Watch for Updates Twice a Week
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
Just now, I got two 1.5 ounce tins of the new production of Edward G. Robinson's Pipe Blend to test smoke before official release. So I'll be smoking a bit of it, breaking my normal routine of not smoking the same tobacco back to back, so I can accurately judge the quality of the new production, and report to Sutliff on it. I'm smoking the first bowl in a 1982 black sandblasted paneled slight bend Savinelli flat bottom sitter.
Geez, Jim; it's been 3 hours. What's your verdict? I, for one, would like to know what- if anything- they changed in the blend.
Papipeguy: I'm on my fourth bowl now, and I like it better than the recent free samples that Sutliff had given out. I need to explain something, and this is a good time to do it. A few months ago, I sent out some samples from the tub Sutliff had originally given me to a few friends. They all loved it. When Sutliff gave out the free samples, these same guys requested it, and told me it didn't taste the same as what I had sent them. Another guy who bought a tub told me the same thing. So he, and one of the guys who got a free sample sent me some of their EGR to compare, and they were right. The flavor was less plum-like and more hay-like, and not as strong or as deep flavored as what I originally got.
I contacted the people at Sutliff about this. They looked into the problem, and did their own comparison test, and discovered I was right. They had some production problem with the EGR so it didn't quite match up to what I had smoked. As they were going to sell it in tins now, they made up a new batch this past week, tinned it, and sent it to me to taste test. From what I can tell, it's much closer to what I originally smoked from the tub they gifted me some months ago, though the tobacco is a little dry. I prefer to have just a little moisture in my tobacco, so I'm going to hydrate it slightly and see what happens. But, dry or moist, this new batch is most certainly superior to the samples Sutliff sent out. I like it!!
I contacted the people at Sutliff about this. They looked into the problem, and did their own comparison test, and discovered I was right. They had some production problem with the EGR so it didn't quite match up to what I had smoked. As they were going to sell it in tins now, they made up a new batch this past week, tinned it, and sent it to me to taste test. From what I can tell, it's much closer to what I originally smoked from the tub they gifted me some months ago, though the tobacco is a little dry. I prefer to have just a little moisture in my tobacco, so I'm going to hydrate it slightly and see what happens. But, dry or moist, this new batch is most certainly superior to the samples Sutliff sent out. I like it!!
Btw, by sheer coincidence, a fellow pipe smoker sent me a couple of ounces of the 1960s version of EGR, and it arrived at my house about an hour after I got the tins from Sutliff. I'm hydrating it a little and will test it out either later tonight or tomorrow.
I'm smoking 1960's Edward G. Robinson's Pipe Blend in a 2003 IMP horn Meer. It smells different out of the baggie than the tub of EGR Sutliff sent me some months back, and different than the freshly minted EGR tin I got today. But, as I'm getting into it, the taste is very similar to what I've been smoking today, the difference being this '60s version has a light wine taste I did not get from the other versions. Might be fermentation? I'll find out as I smoke more of it. I sure like the taste of it, though!
Rothnh: I agree. I've been trying to determine which answer is correct. Not sure I'll be able to do that, though. Worse comes to worse, I'll just sit back and enjoy it. The wine taste is almost like a sour/tart white wine if that helps any.
What I am happy about is that Sutliff has fixed the production problem in the new EGR. And I'm glad they were willing to listen to me when this all started, and think enough of me now to value my opinion. And I'm just a customer. I just don't see this brand of consideration from a company very often. Sutliff gets my deepest respect for all of this.
What I am happy about is that Sutliff has fixed the production problem in the new EGR. And I'm glad they were willing to listen to me when this all started, and think enough of me now to value my opinion. And I'm just a customer. I just don't see this brand of consideration from a company very often. Sutliff gets my deepest respect for all of this.
2nd bowl back-to-back of Edward G. Robinson's Pipe Blend - first bowl in a baby briar hinted that this blend would benefit from a bigger bowl with a conical bottom, and I was right! Like opening up a good whiskey (topped w/it is my guess) with a few drops of spring water, the bigger bowl opened up EGR to expose its complexity and depth. Burns nicely with lots of smoke to carry the flavor, sipped gently is more than sufficient, and not to be trifled with more aggressively. Reminiscent of some of the better aro OTC's of yesteryears, an easy satisfying all day smoke that grows on you - Black Cavendish, Burley, Cavendish, Latakia - worth stocking!
This is the Gillywalker Jim calls out earlier in this thread. My review was honest and I did receive bite from EGR. That review was written in 2008. I was much younger than... As someone who did not live through the 50 60 or 70s I realize now as a pipe smoker I missed out on many classic OTC blends. I will agree with Jim, although my review was written with honest intent it is damaging to the lifehood of that classic blend. In respect to Jim's efforts with EGR I have removed that review. I have reordered a sample ounce and will give it a non-newbie review.
- Status