|
Post by bonanzadriver on Jul 24, 2017 20:46:39 GMT -5
This is a followup thread to the one posted earlier trying to determine the age of the tin. Thanks to the generous help of folks here @ TBP, we were able to determine that the tin was probably from the mid 80's or a little newer. So, as I'd stated on the previous thread, I had decided to pop the top and give er a whirl, barring any nasty mold of course. As had been posted by others, the tobacco was wrapped in a paper pouch of sorts... Time to unwrap and see what we have... Am I correct in assuming that the "2 15 92" is the date of the tobacco? The tobacco was extremely dry. I tend to really let my tobacco dry out before I smoke it. I find it easier to smoke and enjoy the flavor more personally. This tobacco is beyond Tobacco Dry... It's like Fresh Saltine Crumbly DRY!
So, I decided to hydrate it a bit using a paper towel moistened with bottled water placed under the lid and snugged down. I'll come back to this in a couple of days and see how the tobacco has progressed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 21:04:44 GMT -5
I have used the same technique, to good effect, a number of times. Curious to see how the Velvet smokes.
|
|
|
Post by bonanzadriver on Jul 24, 2017 21:09:20 GMT -5
Me too Don.
I really don't know what to expect. Kinda thinkin it's similar to CH or PA? Dunno
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 21:12:13 GMT -5
Not sure, but maybe PA. My grandpa rolled PA cigarettes all the time. I did notice he occasionally used Velvet. Must have been somewhat close.
|
|
|
Post by billyklubb on Jul 24, 2017 21:20:45 GMT -5
Not sure, but maybe PA. My grandpa rolled PA cigarettes all the time. I did notice he occasionally used Velvet. Must have been somewhat close. My Grandpa did the same. It was one or the other. I always figured they were pretty darn close back in the day.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 21:24:44 GMT -5
Is it Velvet or Paladin that's supposed to be the tongue-biting champion of the world?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2017 23:39:53 GMT -5
Is it Velvet or Paladin that's supposed to be the tongue-biting champion of the world? I have heard that occasionally about both, more so Paladin. Middleton's cherry gets a lot of tongue bite complaints in reviews. There is a hilarious Mr. Subliminal review of Middleton's that Brian Levine plays once in a while on his podcast.
|
|
|
Post by bonanzadriver on Jul 28, 2017 22:01:04 GMT -5
Hello fellow Patchers,
Tonight, after re-moistening the paper towel a few times this week, the tobacco seemed to have gotten back to a smokable moisture level.
To be clear, I prefer my tobacco dry. Probably drier than many people smoke it, but not pencil shavings dry like ti was.
Cutting to the chase, it was ok. Not knock yer socks off fantastic, just ok. Not as good, to me anyway, as CH or PA, but still better than many of the Aro's I've tried this year.
Now that it's revived somewhat, I'll keep it sealed up tight in the mason jar and give it a try from time to time.
|
|
|
Post by peterd-Buffalo Spirit on Jul 29, 2017 9:45:40 GMT -5
Dino...that tin from '92 was produced by Pinkerton Tobacco in Owensboro KY...at the same time they produced a number of "OTC" tobaccos...Granger, Paladin, Half & Half, etc. One of the larger issues they faced was their inability to be consistent with their production...
They were customers of mine and I called on the plant monthly providing hydraulic oils, cutting fluids, etc. I talked with their production folks on many occasions and the feelings I got were that they didn't really see a need to be more consistent...Their thoughts were that "hey, its an OTC"...Now that STG produces all the Pinkerton tobaccos I see there is far more care in production than there ever was before...
...just a bit of history...
|
|