Do yourself a favor and get some of this !

Does it warrant a down grade on the recommendation? In comparison to the original Dunhill 965, I would say definitely down grade the recommendation. However, as a tobacco, it can still hold its own. Until further review the recommendation remains as is. However, I did down grade the strength and taste.

12/12/2010 - I got a sample of this tobacco last week along with my order of a few tins of original Dunhill blends (one of them being My Mixture 965). Without going into much details, comparing this to Dunhill's 965, I did notice that this blend has a hint of sweetness to it.

Is it similar to Dunhill? Personally, I can say that this is close. It's a good alternative (not a replacement) to the original Dunhill 965. Again, as I've stated in one of my reviews, only a Dunhill can be a Dunhill. It may not be similar to the original, but it's darn tootin' close and I LIKE IT.

Just noticed that the original Dunhill brand tobaccos are now listed again at iwanries.com

Hallelujah! My reserves of the originals are running mighty low these days...

---

Popped a tin of the real 965 out of my cabinet, got the last mason jar left of bulk 965 from tinderbox's last stock I bought in a hurry (when I heard it was discontinued), and sat down to compare it with a couple ounces of this sold under the brand name "Consolidated."

I loaded alternate bowls into a Peterson gold mounted supreme shape 338, a smallish pipe in which I could more readily detect any nuances without it getting overpowered at the end of the bowl.

The altadis copy is made of wider cut strands with more vivid contrast, but they both smell nearly the same, though the altadis was not nearly as aged and smelled slightly sweet with less fermentation.

The copy simply reminds me of a far less aged 965 with smoke that is easy to get nipped with, and a little less flavor. It is however, as in the tin note, sweeter due to a thicker brown cavendish (I picked out some strands and took a look with a magnifying glass), and to me, this is a welcome change of pace.

Get some age on it for six months, or preferably a year, and it should be nearly, if not almost identical to the old Dunhill 965 at least in taste.

I may find this more to my liking than the original 965 after it is well aged, but only time will tell.

Yes, similar to Dunhill's famous 965. Identical? No.

As is the case with the original, there is some strength here as well as volumes of creamy smoke (often found in unsweetened Black Cavendish). A little rougher than its namesake and not quite as deep in flavor, this is still a good smoke for those who lament the loss of one of the all-time great tobaccos.

"I bought this (bulk) at a shop in town when I was craving a smoke after my first anniversary dinner. As I didn't bring a pipe with me, I also picked up a MM cob to pack. I was very excited about finding/trying this classic blend, since it's becoming more and more difficult to find.

This was somewhat early in my re-introduction to pipe smoking, and I was unprepared for the nicotine rush which followed. It nearly knocked me down, had me wobbling weak-kneed down Main Street, and when we got home, was put in the back drawer for a while. When I found the courage to come back to it, I tried blending it with other varieties, to help tame the beast. I find it adds a nice smokiness to a bowl, with a rich earthy/nutty flavor.

It slowly grew more palatable with time, but I would only recommed this for those who crave a big nicotine hit, and enjoy a full-bodied smoke."

As you can see, even this replica is a powerful, full-flavored English. Since this was written, I've grown a bit in my tastes for tobacco, and my tolerance to Vitamin N, both of which would change my reactions to, but not necessarily my review of, this blend.

TonyC

First things first: I didn't know any better at the time, but this is nothing whatsoever like 965. There is no doubt this is a lesser tobacco than the original MM965 that inspired it; indeed, the two tobaccos aren't much alike at all.

All that notwithstanding, it is an enjoyable smoke. The Latakia content is just right but, unlike many other Englishes, this blend is quite sweet--sweetened Cavendish, I assume?- -sweet enough it seems almost like an aromatic. Dunhill's brown cavendish is only slightly sweet, but this stuff is positively sugary. But it packs just enough of the goods, too: lovers of traditional Englishes will find peaty, smoky Latakia in abundance.

The tobacco provides glorious clouds of fragrant smoke, smoky Latakia, and easy companionship. It does not provide a substitute for Dunhill, but adjust your expectations and you just might enjoy it.

I loved this stuff when I first smoked it; returning to it now I see I have probably outgrown it. More experienced palates than mine will probably become bored with this quickly.

Altadis' version does have a similar creaminess to is and does have the underlying sweetness that Dunhill's had. But this tobacco seems somehow thinner than Dunhill's; an honest attempt to come up with something similar but never quite willing to push the envelope enough.

It is however, a pretty good tasting English blend. Altadis makes several pretty good English blends and this is one of them. I've tried 3 of their other attempts to replicate Dunhill English blends and they seem rather timid, like this one does. They are all quite good, and if any one of them was the only English I could ever get I'd gladly smoke them. But Altadis makes better English blends of their own, much better.

May, 2010. This boend grows on me. The more I smoke it the more I like it. Try it with coffee and chickory if you havea chance. It's like they are made fof one another. This probably won't be my go-to smoke becauseit does require a person's attention to fully enjoy it. but I will be keeping some of this around for times when I can devote my full attention to it.