|
|
Post by Pistol Pete 1911 on Jul 20, 2018 21:07:36 GMT -5
Hahaha hahaha hahaha I smoke match and didn't even know it Dunhill 965 match LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by AJ on Jul 20, 2018 21:11:58 GMT -5
For me most matches fall short like the match for Sugar Barrel but Sutliff’s ERR Match is a home run.
AJ
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 21:17:11 GMT -5
For me most matches fall short like the match for Sugar Barrel but Sutliff’s ERR Match is a home run. AJ From what I've read the original Sugar Barrel was sweet, but not too sweet. All of the matches are less sweet. What's the point? They can't make it just a little sweeter to be like the original, which is not really sweet? |
|
|
|
Post by AJ on Jul 20, 2018 21:38:26 GMT -5
For me most matches fall short like the match for Sugar Barrel but Sutliff’s ERR Match is a home run. AJ From what I've read the original Sugar Barrel was sweet, but not too sweet. All of the matches are less sweet. What's the point? They can't make it just a little sweeter to be like the original, which is not really sweet? The original was sweeter than the match. The original not only had delicious taste but the room note was very noticeable and quite pleasant. Back in the 60s it was one of my favorite blends and the girls liked it too. Sadly the match falls short in in taste and room note. Wish I had a few pounds of the original. AJ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 22:06:47 GMT -5
From what I've read the original Sugar Barrel was sweet, but not too sweet. All of the matches are less sweet. What's the point? They can't make it just a little sweeter to be like the original, which is not really sweet? The original was sweeter than the match. The original not only had delicious taste but the room note was very noticeable and quite pleasant. Back in the 60s it was one of my favorite blends and the girls liked it too. Sadly the match falls short in in taste and room note. Wish I had a few pounds of the original. AJ I'm pretty much a choo choo train and the P&C tubs of Sugar Barrel and Chatham Manor I bought seem to burn hotter than they should. This is not an issue of the multiple matches I have smoked. I don't understand that if you know an original blend is X amount of sweetness why you would make a match and not make it as sweet. It's in the blender's power to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by AJ on Jul 20, 2018 22:47:57 GMT -5
The original was sweeter than the match. The original not only had delicious taste but the room note was very noticeable and quite pleasant. Back in the 60s it was one of my favorite blends and the girls liked it too. Sadly the match falls short in in taste and room note. Wish I had a few pounds of the original. AJ I'm pretty much a choo choo train and the P&C tubs of Sugar Barrel and Chatham Manor I bought seem to burn hotter than they should. This is not an issue of the multiple matches I have smoked. I don't understand that if you know an original blend is X amount of sweetness why you would make a match and not make it as sweet. It's in the blender's power to do so. Dave your point is right on target. It’s a mystery that needs to be solved. AJ |
|
|
|
Post by zambini on Jul 21, 2018 0:59:03 GMT -5
The original was sweeter than the match. The original not only had delicious taste but the room note was very noticeable and quite pleasant. Back in the 60s it was one of my favorite blends and the girls liked it too. Sadly the match falls short in in taste and room note. Wish I had a few pounds of the original. AJ ] I don't understand that if you know an original blend is X amount of sweetness why you would make a match and not make it as sweet. It's in the blender's power to do so. Market research? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2018 8:37:48 GMT -5
] I don't understand that if you know an original blend is X amount of sweetness why you would make a match and not make it as sweet. It's in the blender's power to do so. Market research? Today’s profit margin, money first consumer second 👍 |
|
