I picked up 3 oz.'s of of some 1792 flake yesterday. Absolutely a great blend. Smooth, no tongue bite, and a nice flavor. Not complex, but definitely nice. A very nice blend that you should have at your standby
Samuel Gawith 1792 Flake - Try Now or Later?
- Thread starter slownumbers39
- Start date
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
Site Sponsors
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor
- Status
1792 Flake: what a trip. The second most powerful smoke I have ever had (only eclipsed by Dunhill American Blend from the 1970s)in my experience.
I am half way through my first tin of this heady stuff. My interest was piqued a short while back when I read a Wikipeda piece about tonquin(tonka) beans. That article stated this was used in tobacco blends SG 1792 Flake and Dunhill Royal Yacht. Being sort of a RY junkie (of both the original more potent Dunhill and the current Orlik versions) I had to try it to see.
Loading my first bowl in a large billiard was not wise. It thumped me in short order. The flavoring was not unpleasant but so heavy that I could not tell if it resembled Royal Yacht at all (from what I can remember once I recovered my wits). Like McC's Dark Star it was a monster to keep afire, too. Now when I load it I take a full box of matches along with a fully loaded Zippo out with me to my wife-designated-smoking-area.
It takes some getting used to including discovering that it shines in a small MM cob best (it's European name IS Cob Flake, after all.)
By the third day I was ready to taste test: one bowl of 1792 followed an hour later by the RY, this done more that once. The flavoring of RY is more complex and subtle and hence I still cannot tell if the article spoke the truth. I even loaded a layer bowl - half 1792 under Royal Yacht. In this configuration I could tell when the burn switched over, but not to the degree I was expecting (filtering the RY through the lower 1792 notwithstanding).
Now, two weeks later I find I load 1792 as my last smoke of the day (in a cob). Too much for a daytime smoke and certainly no all day candidate.
Still, I'm glad I bought it and will not trade off the second tin I initially got. It really should come with a warning about smoking while operating motor vehicles or heavy equipment.
I am half way through my first tin of this heady stuff. My interest was piqued a short while back when I read a Wikipeda piece about tonquin(tonka) beans. That article stated this was used in tobacco blends SG 1792 Flake and Dunhill Royal Yacht. Being sort of a RY junkie (of both the original more potent Dunhill and the current Orlik versions) I had to try it to see.
Loading my first bowl in a large billiard was not wise. It thumped me in short order. The flavoring was not unpleasant but so heavy that I could not tell if it resembled Royal Yacht at all (from what I can remember once I recovered my wits). Like McC's Dark Star it was a monster to keep afire, too. Now when I load it I take a full box of matches along with a fully loaded Zippo out with me to my wife-designated-smoking-area.
It takes some getting used to including discovering that it shines in a small MM cob best (it's European name IS Cob Flake, after all.)
By the third day I was ready to taste test: one bowl of 1792 followed an hour later by the RY, this done more that once. The flavoring of RY is more complex and subtle and hence I still cannot tell if the article spoke the truth. I even loaded a layer bowl - half 1792 under Royal Yacht. In this configuration I could tell when the burn switched over, but not to the degree I was expecting (filtering the RY through the lower 1792 notwithstanding).
Now, two weeks later I find I load 1792 as my last smoke of the day (in a cob). Too much for a daytime smoke and certainly no all day candidate.
Still, I'm glad I bought it and will not trade off the second tin I initially got. It really should come with a warning about smoking while operating motor vehicles or heavy equipment.
I agree about the small cob. I have an MM Pony, one of the smallest they make, and it is my dedicated 1792 Flake pipe. It doesn't get used often, but it's there when I want it.
On the weekend I gave he SG 1792 Flake a try and was thoroughly underwhelmed. Put it in a cob, got a coffee and a glass of water and prepared for the "wretching" to begin shortly after lighting up. Sat on my stump, lit up and gave it some puffs. Have to say that it was difficult to keep lit, especially in the beginning and I did note a deep "earthy" flavour, but found it to be fairly blase' overall. I did pick up a very slight buzz, but not anything noteworthy really. I was ready for an ass kicking, but when I was done, I was still very much wanting. Peterson's Irish Flake, which I tried many months ago really did a number on me and I was expecting the same with the 1792 Flake. Did something go wrong here, did I miss a step, should I dry it out before smoking? Thoughts and ideas are appreciated.
Dry it out more. Sip it and enjoy the smoke. Its not a deep or complex blend, but an enjoyable blend. You really need to smoke several bowls sometimes to get a feel for a new blend.
:puffpipe:
:puffpipe:
It is definitely difficult to keep lit. I haven't quite mastered that...
I do quite enjoy the flavours, though. Perhaps we inflated its impact a little too much for you!
I know someone else who felt the same way.
Trust me, though, if you smoke a whole bowl it is a fairly strong blend and you should feel its potency with no problem.
The interruption caused by relighting and inconsistent burning can make it seem like nothing special.
I do quite enjoy the flavours, though. Perhaps we inflated its impact a little too much for you!
I know someone else who felt the same way.
Trust me, though, if you smoke a whole bowl it is a fairly strong blend and you should feel its potency with no problem.
The interruption caused by relighting and inconsistent burning can make it seem like nothing special.
I found the best way to enjoy 1792 without fighting much with it is to dry it to the point the flakes are easy to spread apart with fingers, then stretch them out thin and lightly filling a Tankard or a small billiard with a narrow bowl. Give it a couple char lights and tamp lightly, then let it sit around for about 15 minutes. Next time you light it it should burn to the bottom with ease, maybe a slight tamp every now and again.
Again, I find 1792 less overwhelming in both taste and Nic factor ( NOT strength ) than Irish Flake. If you get it to smoke flawlessly, it'll kick you in the stomach still .....
Again, I find 1792 less overwhelming in both taste and Nic factor ( NOT strength ) than Irish Flake. If you get it to smoke flawlessly, it'll kick you in the stomach still .....
WHEW! Good to know that all is not lost with the 1792 Flake, as I had high expectations from the numerous posts I have read. I currently have this flake is some smaller jars, so I will take the flake out of the jar I currenly have open, dry it out for a while, then pull the flake apart and repackage. I am sure that the wife will quite enjoy the smell while it drys, lol. Perhaps drying will concentrate the flavours and should make keeping it lit easier. Going to keep smoking it in a cob as I have read of ghosting issues. Looks like it will be warming up through the weekend, so I will give this tobacco multiple attempts once it has dried out a bit. nice to have people that can help fine tune certain details when it is not working out for a guy, thanks everyone.
jmitchellive, that is what hooked me. I kept reading about the 1792 Flake and became intrigued with it, saw a great deal come up online and bought some. I like strong tobacco that "gets in your face", so this one seemed a natural.
The first, and only previous, time I sampled this tobacco was way back when I was master of my Masonic lodge nine years ago. I was a fairly experienced pipe smoker then (but primarily a cigar man), and I didn't know anything about this mixture.
It was after a particularly long meeting, maybe a degree, that I plopped down in a chair in the dining room and eagerly pried open the tin, stuffed the very fresh and wet flake into a large Peterson pipe, and began puffing away like a chimney.
When the brethren picked me up off the floor, and the green in my complexion faded back to its normal gray, I gave the tin to the only other pipe enthusiast in the lodge, figuring he'd know how to smoke it. I swore I'd never go near it again.
But never is here. It's still a tobacco that will knock you out if you're not careful. I find it simply needs time to dry out. It requires a SMALL bowl, as in no larger than a Group 3 at most. The flake must be rubbed out to a fine ribbon. And, most crucially, it has to be smoked extremely slowly. Genuine sipping. Even with all these precautions its nicotine potency is merciless, but at least now I can understand why this mixture has its devoted fans. I'll probably never be one of them, but I feel successful for getting back on the horse and seeing it through.
I've got about 18 pounds in the cellar. When I first tried it I thought it was the most arresting flavor I had had, and the strength was overpowering. But then I contracted a liking for nicotine, my favorite being Dark Flake. I have about 40 lbs cellared. It is my favorite tobacco; sometimes I go for two or three days only smoking it.
Chow down on 1792 at will, regardless of the season!
Chow down on 1792 at will, regardless of the season!
mmmm Dark Flake. Good stuff. Try the Dark Plug if you ever the chance.
Dang, now I am going to dig out my 1792 and give it a try. I have a couple ounces somewhere that is probably a good decade old by now. I never really caught onto 1792, preferring Dark Flake instead.
I have a buddy who smokes this stuff on his way to work in the morning.
Dang, now I am going to dig out my 1792 and give it a try. I have a couple ounces somewhere that is probably a good decade old by now. I never really caught onto 1792, preferring Dark Flake instead.
I have a buddy who smokes this stuff on his way to work in the morning.
- Status