Peterson Posturing

LatakiaLover Knoxboard Yoda Joined: 02 Sep 2006 Posts: 1755Location: NortdahKOHtaa, USA Posted: Sat Mar 17, 2007 11:55 pm Posted the following:
Recent about-face concerning Petersons

This is gonna be fun: A hardcore Dunhill collector for 20+ years... first the Ferndown bent bulldog review, and now this. Before someone misquotes me because they didn't see the qualifier, or takes what I'm about to say out of context, this opinion ONLY APPLIES to the following Peterson lines:

• 
  
  Straight Grain , Silver Supreme, Gold Supreme, Gold Spigot

• 
  
  DeLuxe System, DeLuxe Classic, Army Spigot, Celtic Natural, Rosselare Natural, Grafton

They are Peterson's "firsts" and "firsts w/possible specks" pipes, and never have fills. Not heresay information, btw, but straight from the keyboard of the owner of Peterson, Tom Palmer.

Ready? "I think they are better pipes than either Dunhills or Ashtons when compared heads-up, and if price is considered, it's an absolute rout. "

What led me to think so? [This] brace of four Petes are all better finished, better cut, better engineered, have much better overall attention to detail, and smoke better than most of the several dozen primo Dunnies I have, and all of the Ashtons. (The one in the upper left is new and hasn't been smoked yet, and while the P.O.Y. in the upper right hasn't either, the identical one Tom swapped it for was smoked extensively.)

Why did it take me so long to discover this? For the same reason I'm posting about it: Peterson's budget lines overshadow their premium stuff. "Taint" their reputation, if you will, in the minds of those who only think of current production Petersons as being "good price-point smokers" and not collectables. (This association thing is why most "first" makers use a different name for their budget lines---Ben Wade for Charatan, Parker for Dunhill, Tilshead for Upshall, etc.)

Once you look closely, though, the preconceptions and prejudices evaporate. I only wish I discovered all this sooner. I seriously doubt I will ever buy another Dunhill or Ashton now that I know about Peterson's high grades and Les Woods' pipes.

Just callin' 'em the way I see 'em, since 1953.

P.S. More pics (not available) of the newest one with interior bowl stain removed. An Army Spigot. Every detail is to my eye, perfect, and the silverwork so thick and well done it's almost sensual. The dark pipe below it is to show the exact shape & size match to my all-time favorite shape, the Dunhill LB.

Editor's note: LL, as he is known, is one of the most well respected and knowledgeable members on the knoxboard and writer of excellent pipe, and tobacco reviews.

Review: Peterson Straight Systems Pipe

MoSheeBoard Knoxboard Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 10:46 am

Post subject: Mini Review: Peterson Straight Systems Pipe

I've always been a fan of the Peterson Systems Pipes. They seem to be consistently good smokers. I currently own a #307, a #309, and a #314 (my favorite). All of these were full bent shapes. In the Systems line, there is one (the #31) that is a straight pipe. Curiosity finally got the best of me and I purchased the #31.

The #31 is a lightweight pipe (1.2 oz) in a, I think, billiard shape. The light weight of the pipe is partially attributable to the small size of the bowl and the thin wall of the bowl (the thinness in my collection of Petersons). The pipe measures 5 3/4 inches in length.

Is it a true Systems pipe? Most definitely. There is a moisture trap which runs horizontally under the bowl, a little past the center point of the bowl. The smoke hole is bored at a steep angle from the chamber through to the trap. The mouthpiece ends in a classic P-Lip. However, a metal stem runs from the end of the mouth piece to the end of the trap.

So how does all of this work. With its small bowl, the #31 Systems pipe is good for short smokes. The small bowl is made all the smaller by the moisture trap which runs under the bowl. This all makes for a lightweight pipe which is easy to clench in your teeth. However, this also limits smoking duration to 15-20 minutes of nirvana. The metal stem produces the occasional dreaded gurgle. I don't know why this was included in the design. However, the stem can be unscrewed (its threaded in) and discarded which, for me, resulted in a better smoke without the gurgle. This did not affect the moisture trapping function.

The smoke hole which is bored from the chamber to the moisture trap presents an occasional problem. Remember, the hole is bored at a steep angle down. If the hole is blocked, there is no way of clearing it and you have to dump your tobacco and start all over. In my other Systems pipes, I can use my pick and simply poke the obstruction clear and continue smoking. The same goes for loosening up a too tightly tamped bowl of tobacco.

So how does the #31 pipe smoke. Once boken in, it provides the same consistently good smoke that my other Peterson's have. What more is there to say? Would I recommend the #31 pipe. To each his own, however, I prefer my other Systems pipes. My main concern with the #31 pipe is the limitations on clearing the smoke hole. For this reason, I would not buy another #31 pipe.

Agree? Disagree? Do comment: