My Mixture 965

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

2 Fresh Former Pipes
36 Fresh Estate Pipes
12 Fresh Mark Tinsky Pipes
120 Fresh Peterson Pipes
36 Fresh Nørding Pipes

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.

FurCoat

Lifer
Sep 21, 2020
8,920
80,269
North Carolina
My thing is I wouldn't want to spend the money and be disappointed. Especially since they still make it.
But of course the plus side would be if it is really close to the original it would be a better price point.
For this reason I have match Balkan Sobranie, 759 and Anglers Dream on the way. I know they will never match the original but I can't go out and buy the original to compare. I figure if these blends are good I can stock up at 28 dollars a pound. I can pad the cellar before Aug. 8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JOHN72 and eljimmy

eljimmy

Lifer
Jan 3, 2021
1,306
5,652
Los Angeles, California
For this reason I have match Balkan Sobranie, 759 and Anglers Dream on the way. I know they will never match the original but I can't go out and buy the original to compare. I figure if these blends are good I can stock up at 28 dollars a pound. I can pad the cellar before Aug. 8.
for sure, if they didn't make MM965 anymore i'd stock match tobacco all day. August 8th?? Some FDA crap happening that day? Let me go do some reading
 
  • Like
Reactions: JOHN72 and RonB

bullet08

Lifer
Nov 26, 2018
8,938
37,943
RTP, NC. USA
Opened Peterson 965 about a week ago. I definitely enjoy it. It has that slight creaminess. Flavor is mild, but tobacco is there for sure. I might get few more tins, but there are better blends out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcon and eljimmy

FurCoat

Lifer
Sep 21, 2020
8,920
80,269
North Carolina
Opened Peterson 965 about a week ago. I definitely enjoy it. It has that slight creaminess. Flavor is mild, but tobacco is there for sure. I might get few more tins, but there are better blends out there.
I agree there are better. I will say 965 is a solid contender though, without getting too heavy on the Lat. LJP has some quality English and the bulk prices are reasonable. I'm stocked up on Royal, Omega and Tashkent.
 

dcon

Lifer
Mar 16, 2019
2,640
21,576
Jacksonville, FL
I will interject that, Match 965, now Match 20, is a closer version to the Dunhill/Murray 965 and, IMO, is preferable to any of the STG Dunhill/Peterson versions. I am not saying that the recent/current 965 is a bad smoke. It is actually quite goof. I just find that the Match is closer to the 965 that I have smoked since the 70s. There are many older members that will attest to this. If the STG has been your only exposure, I can appreciate your taste. I keep tins of 965 in my cellar, but I keep tens of pounds of Match 965.
 

dcon

Lifer
Mar 16, 2019
2,640
21,576
Jacksonville, FL
Has anyone compared McConnell Marylebone to Peterson 965? That’s K&Ks version.
Yes, I have, I actually have done a bowl/bowl/bowl comparison between Dunhill (STG) from 2018, Match 965 from 2018, and (I believe) the McConnell Marylebone was from 2019. I smoke the Match on a regular basis and the others occasionally. I did the back to back smokes in the 3 1961 Dunhill pipes I own (a Bruyere, a Shell Briar, and a Tanshell), all billiards. My preference was pretty clear. The Match was superior to the other two in both smoothness and complexity. I preferred the 965, marginally, to Marylebone. I find an undefined (by me) aftertaste to the 965 that I will call ’chemical’, simply because I do not have jiminks‘ palate. Marylebone has a few rough edges that the original 965 and the Match never would.
 

eljimmy

Lifer
Jan 3, 2021
1,306
5,652
Los Angeles, California
I will interject that, Match 965, now Match 20, is a closer version to the Dunhill/Murray 965 and, IMO, is preferable to any of the STG Dunhill/Peterson versions. I am not saying that the recent/current 965 is a bad smoke. It is actually quite goof. I just find that the Match is closer to the 965 that I have smoked since the 70s. There are many older members that will attest to this. If the STG has been your only exposure, I can appreciate your taste. I keep tins of 965 in my cellar, but I keep tens of pounds of Match 965.
Well ok, guess I'll order me some Match 20. Thank you for the info
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcon and ofafeather

musicman

Lifer
Nov 12, 2019
1,119
6,052
Cincinnati, OH
I will interject that, Match 965, now Match 20, is a closer version to the Dunhill/Murray 965 and, IMO, is preferable to any of the STG Dunhill/Peterson versions. I am not saying that the recent/current 965 is a bad smoke. It is actually quite goof. I just find that the Match is closer to the 965 that I have smoked since the 70s. There are many older members that will attest to this. If the STG has been your only exposure, I can appreciate your taste. I keep tins of 965 in my cellar, but I keep tens of pounds of Match 965.
Came here to say this. I'm a big fan of Match 20. I don't often smoke Latakia blends but when I do, this is the one I often reach for. The current iteration of 965 is a great smoke as well, but at 30 bucks/pd (currently 27 with the IPSD sale at SPC), it's hard to beat the Match 20 for value.
 

FurCoat

Lifer
Sep 21, 2020
8,920
80,269
North Carolina
Tashkent is certainly unique. I honestly haven't been able to pick a favorite between it and Royal.
I find Tashkent tangy, more oriental forward. Royal to me seems to have more sweetness with the added Virginia. Omega is a tad richer than Royal. All are great and unique, I can't pick a favorite either. It's worth having them all in the celkar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.