Think of a floor drain in your basement, rather than a cartoon mouse hole in the baseboard.I'm struggling to picture what this means. If the draft is below the heel, then is it coming out the bottom of the pipe?
Mike S.
Think of a floor drain in your basement, rather than a cartoon mouse hole in the baseboard.I'm struggling to picture what this means. If the draft is below the heel, then is it coming out the bottom of the pipe?
I went with a return. I have a $90 savinelli with better drilling than this had.It's like getting a new car that the hood doesn't line up perfectly with the body. It doesn't affect how well the car operates, however it may or may not rattle. May or may not pop open on you while driving down the interstate. But, if you start up the car to test drive it to see for use, you can't return it. And, having a hood defect could affect your ability to resell it.
It's your call.
It's inexcusable. I would hope that they don't want to start getting the same rep Petersons have. And, I hope the vendor doesn't just reshelf the thing to sale to some other sucker. Savinelli needs to get a stern shakedown over this. Rattle their cage to make sure they do a better job of QC. Inexcusable!!!I went with a return. I have a $90 savinelli with better drilling than this had.
Doesn't Laudisi own them both now? Pete and Sav are basically on the same tier of "really good factory pipes", so it wouldn't be a surprise to see Laudisi have the same QC standards for both.It's inexcusable. I would hope that they don't want to start getting the same rep Petersons have. And, I hope the vendor doesn't just reshelf the thing to sale to some other sucker. Savinelli needs to get a stern shakedown over this. Rattle their cage to make sure they do a better job of QC. Inexcusable!!!
I may be wrong, but I think they merely handle the distribution of Savinelli, and I am not sure how intrusive their investment in Peterson is. But regardless, it's inexcusable, IMO.Doesn't Laudisi own them both now? Pete and Sav are basically on the same tier of "really good factory pipes", so it wouldn't be a surprise to see Laudisi have the same QC standards for both.
I'm not much of a cage rattler, although I'd be surprised if they didn't do name searches on these forums periodically.It's inexcusable. I would hope that they don't want to start getting the same rep Petersons have. And, I hope the vendor doesn't just reshelf the thing to sale to some other sucker. Savinelli needs to get a stern shakedown over this. Rattle their cage to make sure they do a better job of QC. Inexcusable!!!
I am merely an expert in my own opinions, and thusly belong just to me. They do not reflect or represent this forum, the administration, nor are they a representation of any person living or dead.I'm not much of a cage rattler, although I'd be surprised if they didn't do name searches on these forums periodically.
SP said they would do a full QC check. I imagine this will become an unsmoked estate pipe.
I was likewise starry eyed... it really was a perfect pipe for me. Honestly, it was so gorgeous in every respect that the poor drilling really jumped out at me.I'm so starry eyed when I get a new pipe, I'm not sure I'd have the presence of mind to inspect it for flaws unless it just cracked in half. I'd go back to the retailer and find out if they can exchange this for a better example of the same pipe. For two hundred bucks, a pipe should pass inspection. However, it might just smoke fine; that's the judgement call, yours to make. Interestingly, the lower priced Savinelli pipes I've bought have been trouble free over many years. There may be irregularities I don't see, but they've been consistent and durable over, in some cases, decades.
I have a Castello with an off-center draft hole in the bowl.Thinking about just buying a Castello instead.