Is This a Charatan Reject?

[mawnansmiff]

I spied this rather fetching estate Cherrywood on the pages of a particular Ebay seller that I occasionally frequent. It was advertised as a 'London Made Cherrywood Sitter' but in the more detailed information she said though it was marked as a reject she thought it to be made by the Charatan Company. The only nomenclature on the pipe is 'Reject' over 'London Made' as seen in picture #6.
It has some beautiful grain as can be seen but for the life of me I cannot see why it was stamped 'reject'. The only fault I can find (and I'm being picky here) is the draught hole is not perfectly central in the bowl.
What do the experts think, is this a known Charatan shape?

The length of the pipe by the way is 14cm or 5 1/2 inches.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[oldmansmoking]

Nice pipe Jay how much did it cost you?

 

[owen]

Love it. Gilpin 281,481.

 

[dmcmtk]

What Owen said, Gilpin. See the upper left.

http://www.pipepages.com/charatanpage2.htm

 

[mawnansmiff]

"how much did it cost you?"
Money and fair words George ::
Thanks Owen and Dave. I didn't actually understand Owen's post until you showed the catalogue Dave. I did wonder if it was more 'poker' than 'cherrywood'. Interesting that of all the Charatan versions I have seen, they all have a saddle stem where of course mine is tapered. That said, I do wonder if mine has a replacement stem as it only fits snugly one way up suggesting it wasn't made at the same time as the pipe.
So if it is a Charatan what would make it a reject? I have to say it's a pretty smart looking pipe and now cleansed is a great smoker albeit with a faint aromatic ghost.
I'm rather hoping Ken stumbles upon this post, he might have more to say on the pipe whether a Charatan or not.
Many thanks chaps.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[didache]

Charatan or not, it is a very handsome beast.
Mike

 

[dmcmtk]

The only thing I'm noticing is the shank looks a little bit shorter than in the catalog image...

 

[blendtobac]

The only thing I'm noticing is the shank looks a little bit shorter than in the catalog image...

That may be why it's a second. There may have been a flaw that popped up near the end of the shank when they were finishing it, so they trimmed a bit off.
Russ

 

[oldmansmoking]

"how much did it cost you?"
Money and fair words George ::

Come on Jay how much did it cost you?

 

[wyfbane]

Jay likes being coy. He thinks it makes him look younger.
Nice pipe. I have a Charatan in that shape, but the stem is a little chewed.

 

[mawnansmiff]

"That may be why it's a second. There may have been a flaw that popped up near the end of the shank when they were finishing it, so they trimmed a bit off."
Cheers Dave and Russ. From my eyes it looks perfect (never seen another with full shank or no) and am delighted with the deal. For some reason I was the only bidder so got it at the start price ::
George, it cost me the princely sum of £19.99 but please keep that under your hat :wink:
Wyfbane, does yours have a saddle stem?
Regards,
Jay.

 

[snagstangl]

I had one like that with a saddle stem, it was a tinderbox unique.

 

[snagstangl]

I sold it, but here it is.

 

[wyfbane]

Jay, I will have to look. I am entertaining and just popped on for a moment.
Will get back to you on that, It may not.

 

[pipesmokingtom]

That's a great looking pipe. I'd personally prefer the shorter shank with a saddle bit, so a bit of a combination of the two I guess.
Lovely, though.

 

[kenbarnes]

Joan Nicholson, the sander at Charatan, who worked with Barry 1959-1978 and taught me sand-papering in 1976 (working next to her for six months) created this shape and showed it to my father and Dennis Marshall. They both liked it and asked her to give it a name. She told me that what she meant was Kipling and she forgot the name at the time and Gilpin emerged from her mouth and that's what they called it and made it into one of the catalogue shapes. Occasionally, you may see a 1970s freehand Gilpin pop up. These were hand made by Joan - her shape!

 

[oldmansmoking]

Thanks Jay, good pipe nice price. Well done.

 

[mawnansmiff]

Snag, that's pretty much identical albeit with a full length shank. Ken, thanks for your input, you always educate us with your knowledge. So in your opinion was the seller correct in her assumption that it is a Charatan reject or do you think it to be a no name reject?
I gave it a thorough reaming last night (didn't look as though it needed it) and was surprised at how much carbon cake was removed. Now the faint aromatic ghost is virtually gone. Another surprise was an almost two hour smoke with FVF. The bowl is 20.27mm wide and 41.28mm deep so deceptively larger than it looks. It weighs in at 48.24g.
Regards,
Jay.

 

[kenbarnes]

So in your opinion was the seller correct in her assumption that it is a Charatan reject or do you think it to be a no name reject?

Yes, it was turned in the Charatan factory and is a Charatan 'second'/reject. Charatan never stamped their name on rejects or seconds. From the mid 1960s their seconds, pipes with small flaws, were stamped Ben Wade and thirds were stamped with many different brand names like Mountbatten, Tinderbox (own label), Commodore, Mcquaid and so on and fourth grades were LM rejects (London made rejects). The names would change all the time but the shapes remained constant and can be recognised by the more knowledgeable pipe-smokers/collectors. There are many reasons why a pipe becomes a reject. This may have been, as mentioned before, a cut back or it has a very large flaw in the tobacco chamber which is then 'carbonised'/blackened or the countersink and 'face' was not drilled straight or the draft hole was wonky etc

 

[mawnansmiff]

Many thanks for the additional info Ken. As I said mine has a draughthole that is off centre so that too likely contributed to it being rejected.
One interesting point is that I see member Pipestud sold a Charatan Gilpin back in May this year and he gives the weight at 44.5g. Mine with its truncated shank is heavier at 48.2g! I can only put this down to the tapered stem I have being possibly heavier than an original saddle stem.
Regards,
Jay.