Resto Question: Do You Prefer a Minimal or "Full" Pipe Restoration?

[captainsousie]

I know the answer for most of us is "it depends." However, what do you prefer in a pipe resto? A minimal restoration where the pipe is cleaned, reamed, stem is deoxidized, rim is cleaned off and maybe a buff/polish or a full resto where the pipe is stripped, re-stained, possibly topped, and polished to the max? Somewhere in between?

Personally, I've always been one to keep the "character" of the pipe and leave dents, nicks, minor tooth marks in the stem, scorched rims, etc. I personally don't enjoy it when a pipe is completely changed and made "perfect." I also find that a lot of complete restos result in the loss of original color and often reduction in stamping clarity. Now obviously there are exceptions as well as some absolute geniuses that can make a pipe look like new with no apparent damage or loss of originality. There are also hacks who use the "minimal restoration" approach to hide the fact that they don't have any idea what they're doing.

All this is just to say that in my own practice, I try to do as little modification to the original pipe as possible to keep it as original as I can. I'm also interested to see what others here prefer and why.

Obviously, if it's your pipe, do with it what you will and ignore my biased opinion because we all know the value of an opinion...

 

[lraisch]

For the most part, I would prefer to stay with a minimalist approach of cleaning and polishing. That would generally include reaming the bowl and removing bite marks or re-stemming. Only in dire circumstances would I want a pipe re-stained and I would avoid topping a bowl.

I did ask Mike Myers to "re-round" (his term) my 70year old Dunhill Shell and he did a brilliant job.

 

[ashdigger]

Both is definitely the answer. It really depends on what the pipe “needs”. Does it need a good cleaning or a new stem? Does the shank need a stainless insert? Does the bowl need an extreme amount of repair due to fissures?

My skill level is deep clean. Everything else get done by a pro.

I absolutely know what I’m good at, and I’m really aware of what I suck at, BUT that took years and many mistakes to figure out.

That last comment was about all things. Not just pipes.

 

[mso489]

In the case of a well maintained pipe that is sound and has no damage, especially if it is a good pipe in terms of brand, and of pleasing design (whether expensive or not) I'd go with a lighter touch. It preserves the original character of the pipe and more of its history.

With pipes that have led a harder life and may be beat up, with nicks and scars, chewed bits, way too much cake, and maybe too much reaming, I'd say sometimes an overhaul is the only way to make it snappy looking and appetizing to smoke again. That gives you latitude to try things like topping the bowl, redoing the finish, and replacing the stem, that are all to the good.

In my case, if a pipe is one I'd buy, it probably shouldn't be over-restored.

 

[sablebrush52]

For me, restoration is giving the pipe what structural repair it needs to function properly plus such optional cosmetic treatments as might be deemed desirable. Then there's just cleaning up a pipe. I don't do restorations. I just clean up pipes.

With the pipes that I have had restored in the proper sense of the word, I've opted to limit the cosmetics to just the minimum needed for function, such as a minimal level of topping to restore enough rim to be cleanable, but not so much as to erase the pipe's history. So, dings will remain in a topped rim if deep. The majority of topping repairs are pretty awful, off level, super sharp edge that's a dead giveaway on an otherwise worn pipe, and mismatched color re-staining of the rim, which is not a simple matter to get right except to folks who do it badly.

I loath botoxed pipes and there's something extremely dishonest in selling a pipe whose wear and tear has been hidden from the buyer, especially when the seller claims the botoxed pipe is as found.

 

[lukasstrifeson]

I know the answer for most of us is "it depends." However, what do you prefer in a pipe resto? A minimal restoration where the pipe is cleaned, reamed, stem is deoxidized, rim is cleaned off and maybe a buff/polish or a full resto where the pipe is stripped, re-stained, possibly topped, and polished to the max? Somewhere in between?

Personally, I've always been one to keep the "character" of the pipe and leave dents, nicks, minor tooth marks in the stem, scorched rims, etc. I personally don't enjoy it when a pipe is completely changed and made "perfect." I also find that a lot of complete restos result in the loss of original color and often reduction in stamping clarity. Now obviously there are exceptions as well as some absolute geniuses that can make a pipe look like new with no apparent damage or loss of originality. There are also hacks who use the "minimal restoration" approach to hide the fact that they don't have any idea what they're doing.

All this is just to say that in my own practice, I try to do as little modification to the original pipe as possible to keep it as original as I can. I'm also interested to see what others here prefer and why.

Obviously, if it's your pipe, do with it what you will and ignore my biased opinion because we all know the value of an opinion...

Like you said: it really depends - both on pipe condition and stem.

But in general: I'd like an estate to retain the spirit of its era.

 

[lukasstrifeson]

For me, restoration is giving the pipe what structural repair it needs to function properly plus such optional cosmetic treatments as might be deemed desirable. Then there's just cleaning up a pipe. I don't do restorations. I just clean up pipes.

With the pipes that I have had restored in the proper sense of the word, I've opted to limit the cosmetics to just the minimum needed for function, such as a minimal level of topping to restore enough rim to be cleanable, but not so much as to erase the pipe's history. So, dings will remain in a topped rim if deep. The majority of topping repairs are pretty awful, off level, super sharp edge that's a dead giveaway on an otherwise worn pipe, and mismatched color re-staining of the rim, which is not a simple matter to get right except to folks who do it badly.

I loath botoxed pipes and there's something extremely dishonest in selling a pipe whose wear and tear has been hidden from the buyer, especially when the seller claims the botoxed pipe is as found.

Great distinction to make between restoration and repair. I guess if one was to try to strip a pipe down to the bare briar and re-dye/re-stain the pipe and cut a new stem that could be even considered a repair?

 

[sablebrush52]

Great distinction to make between restoration and repair. I guess if one was to try to strip a pipe down to the bare briar and re-dye/re-stain the pipe and cut a new stem that could be even considered a repair?

Striping and restaining is absolutely NOT restoration in any sense, as nothing is being restored, it's being subbed out.

When an Old Master is undergoing restoration, structural repairs are made to the painting's support, the surface is carefully cleaned to remove accumulated grime, old "restorations" may be removed because they went overboard with the painting or did it badly, and damaged areas are patched and then overpainted as minimally as possible to minimize the damage. The overpainting is separated from the original paint by a barrier so that it doesn't affect the original and can be removed at a later date if necessary, without harming the original. Restoration renews the original. It doesn't replace it.

A total restaining isn't renewing the original, it's replacing it. So, no, re-staining is not restoration, unless done in damaged areas to renew the existing stain, or in the case of a topped rim, to re-stain to match the original finish.

 

[runscott]

I know the answer for most of us is "it depends." However, what do you prefer in a pipe resto?

Yes, that's the answer. I look at each individual estate pipe and decide where on the restoration continuum it's next period of life will be lived. This involves a lot of questions and the condition of each part of the pipe.

Cost is also involved. A guy showed us b&a pics of an 1850s Kalmasch. My similar pipe looked better in its before pic and not as good in its after. He paid a lot to a pro. I did not. Mine has more character and only cost my own labor and materials. To each his own.

 

[Chasing Embers]

I go for a total clean-up. If an estate needs repairing, I throw it away. I clean the pipe, remove all carbon buildup and oxidation where it applies, and sanitize the airway and chamber with alcohol. I lift dings and dents in the briar stummels and remove chatter from stems with a lighter. I follow by finishing the piece with a jeweler's cloth.

 

[ashdigger]

“I loath botoxed pipes and there's something extremely dishonest in selling a pipe whose wear and tear has been hidden from the buyer, especially when the seller claims the botoxed pipe is as found”


^^ This!!! ^^

When I have saves performed I deliberately choose Cumberland stems for pipes that never had Cumberland stems for this reason.

I own a 1963 Dunhill Bulldog that has three stems - 1. The original that was chewed by a cannibal. 2. A good replacement stem. 3. The stem GeorgeD made for it.

If I ever sell or gift that pipe the three stems go with it.

Also, and this matters, is a factory replacement stem a replacement stem or a factory stem that’s now original so that’s it’s not a replacement?

 

[reloader]

I don't have the expertise to fully restore a pipe. I usually just refurbish any estate pipes I acquire. Deep clean the pipe, sanitize it, remove any grime, maybe chatter in the stem, then a quick polish. All the pipes I have will be smoked and I don't have any show pieces. One of my favorite pipes is a beater Peterson System Standard.

 

[Terry Lennox]

Just going to agree with what's been said. Less is more where possible. Ideally just a clean up, sanitized, polish, buffing of stem. But sometimes a pipe has really been smoked hard and underneath decades of char could be a rare shape or whatnot. In that case a full restoration, topping, re-stain can be appropriate.

One thing I have noticed (with Dunhill especially) is that multiple restorations push a pipe too far. If an old pipe has gone through multiple owners, and each one sent it out to be refurbished eventually you have stems that don't line up, sandblasts that have become dull, stampings that are unreadable, logos that are worn away. Be careful out there...

 

[OzPiper]

No mutton dressed up as lamb for me

 

[mso489]

Just agreeing with the general direction of this thread, some wear on a pipe is part of its value, to me. It's like, fitness and health regimes aren't supposed to make you look like a toddler, just bring up your best features at your current age. Aging is your history and validation that you've lived and haven't sat around in a drawing room sipping tea forever. Or if you have, that you have learned something along the way.

 

[jpmcwjr]

It may be that there are several levels of involvement:

Clean up; deep clean; refurbish; repair, and finally, restoration, each one usually taking more skill and time than the previous.

For hopefully a large number of estate acquisitions, deep cleaning is all that's needed. Hopefully.

 

[bullet08]

Good look at my 60's Vespa SS 180 indicates, I don't believe in restoration at all.

 

[TheIronMonkey]

I generally prefer minimal clean up and agree with @sablebrush52 's distinction.

I see a lot of pipes listed that have gone overboard with the carnauba and buffing wheel on the wood and stem that go so far beyond the shine of the original issue. I get that sellers are trying to enhance sales of their rare pipes, but, I wish several of them had a lighter touch with the wax and wheel. Because of this, I'd rather find an estate pipe that is being sold by someone who has done nothing, so that I can just clean up the pipe without reinventing it.

 

[edger]

Melanie Griffith comes to mind. Far too much “restoration” and she is no longer recognizable. You wouldn’t sandblast a smooth pipe just because it has a few dings, would you?

 

[jpmcwjr]

Point taken! Only if it were ugly to begin with, was a great smoker, and I cared a bit how she (the pipe, not Melanie) looked. And had the time and tools. So, for me it's a pretty hard pass.