Dunhill Royal Yacht: a review

Brothers of Briar

Help Support Brothers of Briar:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

George Kaplan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
2,735
Reaction score
1


First of all, I'd like to thank our brother A.J. (ajn27511) for sending me a tin of this blend. He PM'd me out of the blue one day and asked-Asked, mind you- if he could send me some samples to pass around. Your generosity is the stuff of legend, A.J. I thank you kindly, sir.
Secondly, I do realize that Monbla has posted a recent review of this same blend. (From the same tin, actually) I don't mean to step on Monbla's toes with a competing review. I simply wish to write from my own experience before reading other points of view on this blend, as this is my first proper review on this forum. I look forward to comparing notes with him and others as soon as I finish this.
Finally, before I "get on with it already", I should point out some of what I mentioned on another thread. As I have little experience with straight VAs, which this is, this is the sort of analysis that triggers my inner scientist. Some may use (or misuse) terms like OCD or anal retentive to describe this behavior. I'm neither of those. I simply have a certain fetish for precision when it comes to things like this. (I guess "fetish" is another misused word. :lol: ) I couldn't just smoke a bowl and write about it; I had to set up some parameters first. In the end, I decided to save these details for the end, since in all honesty, they are largely self indulgence on my part. Know then that this review is based on three bowls, smoked over the course of a day. The bowls in question were a somewhat narrow one, a nice wide pot, and an un-smoked cob of a size somewhere between the two.
Dunhill Royal Yacht, in my opinion, a very simple and straightforward blend in all respects. It does have depth of character, but I had to work to discover it.
The cut is a rather narrow ribbon, finer than most I've seen. In color, it's a nearly uniform dark coffee bean brown, with a few small flecks of a lighter caramel shade. The aroma in the tin is quite pleasant. A sort of figgy raisin scent it up front, with subtle hints of leather, wood, and old books. Overall, it smells like good tobacco.
Due to the fine cut, I packed fairly loosely in all three bowls. It took well to the match, and after the second light, burned smoothly. This is a surprisingly cool-burning tobacco, with no real bite unless you really push it.
The flavor at first was a little underwhelming. I got mostly the taste of grass or hay at first, reminding me slightly of cigarettes. Midway through the bowl, though, it starts to show its subtle complexity. It takes on an essence both earthy and light. The flavor of walnuts and hearty oatmeal comes through. Near the end of the bowl, the slightest hint of caramel can be detected. Throughout this smoke, I was haunted by something familiar yet elusive. This has a certain essence of a driftwood fire. This isn't the smokey campfire flavor of latakia at all. Sun-bleached driftwood, rather, burns somewhat cleaner, with a crispness reminiscent of fresh linens. I get that from this.
Royal Yacht is described as having an added flavoring. If this is true, it's like a pinch of salt on a steak, or a splash of spring water in a fine scotch, bringing out the flavors that are already there. At no point did this seem like an aromatic to me.
Of the three pipes I used, I liked this best in a cob. It had a fuller flavor from the start, and seemed to reach its "second act" sooner. As I mentioned, it burned evenly in all three, needing no relights and little tamping. I did allow it to go out halfway through the larger pot, to see if a later relight would change its character. This seemed to have no effect at all. Likewise, exhaling through the nose did nothing but irritate my sinuses. I think this baccy's just too dignified to stand up and do tricks. That was pretty much my impression of this from start to finish. It's a simple, honest tobacco. Some complexity can be coaxed from it, and you efforts will be rewarded. It just doesn't show you all its talents at once. This could seem a bit odd to those used to a "flashier" blend.
Personally, I think I'll buy five or six to cellar, revisiting it annually as it ages and my tastes mature. Hopefully we'll meet up down the road some day, when I can appreciate it to a greater extent. I don't dislike it, mind you; I just feel I may not quite be a straight VA man yet.
Now for the parameters I promised!!!



These were all smoked on Saturday, June 2nd, 2012

Pipe #1...late morning. An old Viking. (in honor of AJ)
Time: 10:35am
Place: My front porch waiting for the rain to stop
Temp: 52F
Humidity: I just told you it was raining. Do try to pay attention!
Accompaniment: Fresh- ground Arabica bean coffee. Black.
Other notes: That squirrel's back. You know the one. The EVIL one. It's Ok. he doesn't know about the spear gun. Not yet.

Pipe #2...Tea time. A fresh, medium-sized MM cob. Not sure of the model. It's a diamond-shanked one they don't make any more.
Time: 3:45pm
Place: The shore of Asylum Lake.(Nicer than it sounds)
Temp: 71F
Humidity: It's early June yet; you can still see through the air, but I AM standing by a lake.
Accompaniment: Bell's Porter. I know it's tea time, but I'm not much of a tea drinker.
Other notes: The dragonflies are hatching en mass today.

Pipe #3...Evening. Sassieni #5 bent pot.
Time: 9:15pm
Place: Favorite chair, an Eames knock-off
Temp: 64F
Humidity: This chair makes my butt sweat a little.
Accompaniment: 2 fingers of Wild Turkey Rye. 2 large ice cubes.
Other notes: Wes Montgomery on vinyl.

Additional details: If anyone's still keeping score, I wore this shirt for the duration of the testing:


 
A few things:

1. Thanks for taking the time to review this blend. I have a few old Murray's tins and have never actually tried this stuff. Someone once told me it has a bit of tonquin essence and is also quite strong. Not that either of those things bother me.

2. The pictures are a nice touch but the best part is the list of conditions surrounding each smoke. Beverage, setting, temperature, etc. very helpful. Gives an idea of how this blend fares under different circumstances

3. Your T-shirt f**king rules! :cheers:
 
George,
A very,very well thought out and written review! And from the looks of that tin, that is some late Murray's produced RY!!! ( early to mid 90's) so your smoking some nice aged straight va :) I've finished up what you sent to me and am now on a new tin of the Orlik blended stuff and though it's a bit "fresher" or sharp than the aged, it's still the same good, good, st.va :p Enjoy as it's one of the GOOD ones !! :p
 
A few more things:

1.) Good review--more extensive testing than I've given anything in a 24 hour period.

2.) I think I want a diamond-shank cob. I've never seen such a thing.

3.) I have a brown, epic "Sasquatch vs. Unicorn" battle shirt. Holy eff, we are related. :|
 
monbla256":3t9uzuzd said:
And from the looks of that tin, that is some late Murray's produced RY!!!
Really? How can you tell? I can't find any mention of either Murry's or Orlik anywhere on the tin.
 
George Kaplan":znjvro74 said:
monbla256":znjvro74 said:
And from the looks of that tin, that is some late Murray's produced RY!!!
Really? How can you tell? I can't find any mention of either Murry's or Orlik anywhere on the tin.
You won't find mention of them. Never did and they don't now. Here's a link to a site that can help you date Dunhills stuff:

http://loringpage.com/pipearticles/duntob1.htm
 
monbla256":vupwiymo said:
George Kaplan":vupwiymo said:
monbla256":vupwiymo said:
And from the looks of that tin, that is some late Murray's produced RY!!!
Really? How can you tell? I can't find any mention of either Murry's or Orlik anywhere on the tin.
You won't find mention of them. Never did and they don't now. Here's a link to a site that can help you date Dunhills stuff:

http://loringpage.com/pipearticles/duntob1.htm
Alright, the loringpage site only seems to cover up to 1990. This tin of RY has all the same fine print as my other Dunhill tins purchased in the past six months. Perhaps A.J. could enlighten us. Was this a new tin, or one that was in the cellar for a number of years? Monbla, you say you notice a difference between the sample I sent and your recent purchase? Could this be due to the dryness of the sample from my tin? If I actually just reviewed a 10-year-old specimen, I'd like to know for sure. My sense of accuracy demands it! :p
(Anyone else with info on this, please jump in.)
 
I might have made a mistake as I just looked at my recently ( this past Saturday) bought tin of RY and it looks as yours. I did not realize they were now putting BOTH oz AND gram wieght designation on tins again as they did back in the early/mid 90's! As far as "difference" in taste, it is so subtle as to be almost non existant really. Your sample and my freshly opened tin have the SAME aroma and the only difference I can discern in the smoking is that my freshly opened tin is what I would cal "sharper" in taste overall, which I'm sure levels out with some air time in an opened tin. This is how ALL of Dunhill's blends did in the past, but not really enough to warrant a greatly discernable difference in taste or aroma. To me, NONE of this really is of much consequence to the overall flavor, aroma or smoking qualities for me :p I'm still of the "old school" where we smoked "fresh" tobacco most of the time :p
 
Bottom of tin label: "1.76oz/50g"

=not Murray's production. Also, Murray's tins have painted on labels. Not stickers. Also that tin says produced in EU Not the UK
 
That's funny, Monbla. After I compared this tin to my others it occurred to me that all my other Dunhills have come from the same B&M, a cigar shop that doesn't seem to move a lot of pipeweed. For just a minute I was thinking maybe ALL the Dunhill I've smoked in the last two years has been aged Murry's! :p
 
Here is a Murray's era tin
cc0e5561.jpg
 
s.ireland":fou3pxv5 said:
Bottom of tin label: "1.76oz/50g"

=not Murray's production. Also, Murray's tins have painted on labels. Not stickers. Also that tin says produced in EU Not the UK
Very true, but the last few years of Murray's tins had BOTH oz and gram wieghts which is what threw me. I did not realize till I looked at my recently puchased tin that they have gone to a "universal" gold tin with paper labels. They've sort of come full circle to how they did it 50+ years ago :p
 
Great review Mr. Kaplan. Very well presented and thought out. And you went the extra mile in trying it in several different pipes. Not many
go to those lengths when presenting a review such as this.

Looks like I'll be picking up a tin of this.



Cheers,

RR

 
Thanks for the great review! Love the tasting notes. I think I may be in the same position with RY as you. I think it's actually very dependent on conditions, including the condition of one's palate. At times I love it, at times it's just meh. I always want to keep a tin or two around but it's not a holy grail baccy by any means.

Give us some more of those great reviews!
 
There's one thing I left out of this review. A.J. decided this blend wasn't for him because of the high nicotine content, also mentioned by Monbla and supported by some of the responses to his review. As I smoked cigarettes through most of my thirties, and now enjoy a regular pinch of nasal snuff, I imagine my tolerance is rather high. I am a poor judge of nic strength in pipe tobaccos.
 
George nice review man. I have to say, still to this day I have never smoked a Dunhill mixture. I started with pipes a good twenty years ago and took a really big break from the hobby. Nonetheless it's always interesting to me to read reviews of blends that have been around for a long time. I have been delving into the Gawith stuff with full force & keen interest in tasting blends that were flavored with various botanicals for tempering stronger tobacco flavors. Anyway, RY sounds interesting.
 
Top