When Dunhill "Factory Funk" Meets 21st Century Artisan Standards

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Drucquers Banner

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

georged

Lifer
Mar 7, 2013
6,125
16,818
All factory made pipes are produced "on the clock", assembly line style. A worker has only X minutes to complete his task before the whistle blows (so to speak), and the pipe (or batch of pipes) moves on.

Anyone who couldn't keep up didn't stick around long.

The top name artisan carvers, though, like Lars Ivarsson, Tokutomi, and etc. can take as long as they want. Often, those guys finish a step and shelve the pipe for a while so they can come back to it with fresh eyes. Their workday is doing an hour here and an hour there on a variety of pieces that might have been in their shop for months. Only when the maker looks at it for the second or third time and can find no errors or imperfections does it get shipped.

So. I've always wondered what a Dunhill (or equivalent quality English brand) pipe would be like if the factory workers had been given a "free time" week to make a few of their favorite shapes back in their company's classic era, AND the Scandinavian Standard (for lack of a better term) regarding what was technically possible had been known to them.

That motivation is what powered this project.

The pipe is an exceepingly rare 1943 shape 475 Shell whose stem was just OK. It had ZERO flare, when a tiny amount always looks better (it's like the forward bowl cant on a billiard looking better than dead vertical), the bend had a bit of kink in it, the topline of the stem had been cut straight before bending which bloinked the arc a smidge, and the tenon was a bit too short for a thin-shanked pipe (meaning if dropped would be more likely to crack or shatter the shank than snap the tenon off cleanly).

There was also significant-but-not-horrible overall oxidation, button wear, and "buffer shrinkage" from decades of topping up the shine. (None of which was Dunhill's doing, of course)

So, all those things were addressed in a single go, and here is the result:



P1010567 copy.JPG
P1010569 copy.JPG
P1050811.jpg
P1050812.jpg
P1010572 copy.JPG
 

georged

Lifer
Mar 7, 2013
6,125
16,818
Gorgeous! As always from you...........
BTW, it's a 1933.......... 😉

No shit?

I bought it in the early 90's thinking it was a birthyear pipe ('53), and was told by someone maybe five years ago who knows a lot more nomenclature-y stuff than me it was a '43.

I can't remember the particulars about why, though.

So, I've been telling people it was a '43 since then (the mid-war part made up for the not-being-a-birthyear thing).

Now it's lost another decade. lol

What is the combinatorial Stamp Stuff that says so?
 

beefeater33

Lifer
Apr 14, 2014
4,266
6,836
Central Ohio
No shit?

I bought it in the early 90's thinking it was a birthyear pipe ('53), and was told by someone maybe five years ago who knows a lot more nomenclature-y stuff than me it was a '43.

I can't remember the particulars about why, though.

So, I've been telling people it was a '43 since then (the mid-war part made up for the not-being-a-birthyear thing).

Now it's lost another decade. lol

What is the combinatorial Stamp Stuff that says so?
Well George, I was wrong. I had to go review my notes...........
The patent # 1341418/20 led me to believe it was 1930's........... BUT I overlooked the "Dunhill Shell" nomenclature............. a 30's pipe would have a "Dunhill's Shell" (possessive) marking.

Those wartime pipes are tricky bastards, and trip me up everytime.

Sorry for the confusion............ cray

I will offer a thesis on the "original" stem.

1943 saw vulcanite severely rationed.......... most went to the war effort. Most pipes produced during the war had horn stems. I've read (but have no proof) that Dunhill later would replace the horn stems with vulcanite after the war...........

I'm wondering if your stem was a genuine Dunhill replacement? I can imagine that they didn't spend a LOT of time on them, as I understand they did it as a courtesy......... Maybe that's why the tenon was a bit short?......... A quick and easy, as opposed to a true Dunhill fitment?

Many mysteries around these old pipes........... I sure do miss Mr. Loring.............. puffy