The Quality of 100 y/o Briar

[alfredo_buscatti]

I don't know if any of you have seen his UTube videos, but there is a colorful guy who has claimed the title of "the Count" who has several videos about old briar and pipe refurbishment and maintenance. He is about 70, and in several of his videos he is accompanied by his 20-something son who talks, as you would expect, very little. One of the things he plugs is the "superior" quality of very old briar. Smokingpipes has a pre-trans Barling with good grain that they're selling for $225.00. The Count claims that this old briar smokes and makes the tobacco taste better.

I dunno and have been unable to find posts that do/do not corroborate his claims.

Yak, I know you have a number of old pipes. What do you or any of you think?

 

[momus]

I only have four pipes in my immense collection. Three I bought new, and one I bought used (doesn't "estate" pipe sound much more elegant than "used" pipe? Ha.) Anyway, my used, er "estate", Sav has a much sweeter smoke than the others. It was pre-cleaned before I bought it, more or less, so no older carbon buildup, and my spidey sense tells me that has to do with the age of the briar and the amount of smoking that has gone on in that thing. Others I know claim the same thing that older pipes develop a sweet taste over time.
The other concurrent argument is that back in the day they used higher quality briar and now there is less of it. I don't know. I have a feeling that argument is weak and I can think of about four different potential holes in it. But I'm too lazy to actually care enough to research that end.
So, in the end, the more a pipe is smoked the better taste it should give you----that's the advice I've heard. So older pipes, regardless of how fantasitic that briar was or wasn't in the 19th century, should smoke nice because they've been smoked in a lot.

 

[nograinsnotears]

It's difficult to talk about this theme if we don't fix some parameters to make a reasonable comparison.
In my humble opinion, the woods we have 100 years ago were/ are better than the woods of today, due to the water pollution, climate change and so on.. The structure of the woods are not as the same as 100 years ago, and they are considered as polluted as well.
So I guess if we have 2 pipes of the same shape, same dimension, made by a good, experienced maker, but one with 100 years old aged briar and one with 2 years aged briar, then the 100 years old aged briar pipe has the greater chance to smoke better (after breaking in, etc..).

 

[Muddler]

I have a reasonable collection of old (60-ish years) GBD pipes. The smoking characteristics of these pipes is superb. So, while I can't provide proof of it through a comparative test, my sense is that old wood smokes better than new.

 

[Boulder]

I can understand that an old forest wood is harder/denser and may burn cooler/longer and make it a
collectable, but at some point the maintenance and carbon/cake of the pipe must play a more important
role in taste. As I see it the tobacco cooks/burns on the carbon/cake and not the wood.

This is a reason a properly maintained meerschaum pipe is considered a preferable pipe for
upscale tobacco because it does not rely on as many factors.

Don't get me wrong as I luv my flake in a nice heavy briar.

 

[Doc Manhattan]

It's likely a case of selection bias. The pipes that smoked like crap in 1911 got thrown in a drawer, burned through, abused as yard pipes, and in general replaced. And there were a lot of crap pipes then, because only a very tiny percentage of the huge numbers of pipes of that era survived to the present date. The sweetest smokers were much more likely to stick around, either in use or because someone wanted to save Grampa's favorite pipe (which was his favorite because it smoked so nicely.)

 

[ArchaggelosPipes]

The most impostant thing for a good smoking pipe is the briar.
Firstly it's the origin of it, Corsica has the best briar, then Greece, Maroco, Italy and at last Spain.
Then it's the briar mill, which can make the briar better.
And then the briar curing.
Air curing is the most common way of curing, the briar must past at least 18 months after boiling.
Every year that past the briar is losing its moisture and becomes lighter and absorbs moisture from smoking much better, so it is smoking better, dryer and cooler.
There is also the famous Dunhill oil curing, which I know nothing about.... 8)

 

[alfredo_buscatti]

A great article on the value of old briar is here, "This Old Pipe" by GLP:

http://pipesmagazine.com/

 

[Kyle Weiss]

Wait... smoking a pipe...making pollution...human-caused climate change...pipes destroying themselves over time... *[DIV/#0]* I hate my brain, and curses to all of you humans. It's your fault.

Or we just had a limited supply and/or people won't go pick the stuff out of rocks for twenty cents a day anymore...still, someone's fault.

...in any case, does old briar, carved or not, equal truly better?

 

[the macdonald]

It's difficult to talk about this theme if we don't fix some parameters to make a reasonable comparison.
In my humble opinion, the woods we have 100 years ago were/ are better than the woods of today, due to the water pollution, climate change and so on.. The structure of the woods are not as the same as 100 years ago, and they are considered as polluted as well.

Based on pollution factors the 100 y.o. briar should taste like coal smoke. Any household that could afford it, burnt coal, because clean burning whale oil was at an all time high, and basically all industry ran on it...and then we could consider sewage treatment, oh wait, there was none. The Earth 100 years ago, especially around Europe was not a sanitary place.

Regardless of the quality of the wood, after 100 years of smoking I think the best you could hope for is neutral taste.

I really want a “bog oak” or Morta pipe but I am nervous I’ll get the chunk of wood carrying the black plague.

I think the few carvers left working (ignoring factory pipes) these days are way more selective in what wood they use and work harder to deliver a quality product.

 

[dshpipes]

My understanding is that old briar smokes better because of, well, its age. Old wood has had a long time to dry out, losing its saps and other moisture in the process. As a result, older briar is purer than young briar.

In short, I hypothesize that old briar smokes better as a result of the loss of its sap as it has dried. That's the best and most reasonable explanation that I've heard.

That, and it comes from old growth, which has been through the ringer (fires, floods, droughts) and thereby become hardier. Less sure why hardiness would effect the taste of the smoke, but hey, it might!