I cut this into small cubes for smoking and it burned just fine, much better than when I simply rubbed it out. The cool thing is that the mellow tonquin lasted throughout the entire smoke, much the way G&H florals do. It wasn't overpowering and didn't overwhelm the virginias the way I recall 1792 doing (even though it's been awhile!). This one had a creamy undertaste as well, which never faltered. I found very little complexity with this one but that was fine since the flavoring remained throughout the bowl. Good nic punch here, but not enough to make me faint. This is a good blend for those that enjoy the preparation and for whom 1792 is a welcome, if heavy-bodied, joy.

I have tried CP on a few different occassions over the past several years and never really "got it" as far as this blend was concerned. That is not to say that I didn't like it I just didn't really ENJOY it as I would 1792 or several other VAs. It always had a menthol/medicinal taste and mouth-feel that prevented me from experiencing this plug as the fine Virginia that it is touted to be. Last time I bought CP was about 3 years ago. Shortly thereafter I put it away (sealed in Mason jars) after trying it prepared every way possible.

Fast foward 3 years and I'm looking around my stash for something different. Lo and behold I find a jar of Cob Plug. I decide to give it a try. I noticed immediately upon opening the jar that this tobacco had changed. It just smelled different, more rounded and sweeter. After smoking various other plugs during the last few years I have found that I (and my pipes) prefer a cube cut. I pull out a few of the last few flakes that I had cut and slice them into cubes with my pocket knife and load them into a lowly Dr. Grabow sans filter(I LOVE Grabows!). WOW WHAT A DIFFEFENCE A LITTLE AGING MAKES!!!. I'm surprised noone has commented on the aging of this blend. It has become a totally different tobacco. It was no more difficult to get lit than any other flake, plug, rope, or cube cut and much easier than some. What really caught my attention was the taste. It was sweet and creamy with none of the menthol/medicinal taste of 3 years prior. I certainly would not call this a plug version of 1792 but rather a smoother, sweeter cousin. I find it to have much more complexity than 1792. Sure you can taste the tonquin but nowhere near as strong as 1792. Instead the tonquin interplays nicely with the sweetness of the Virginias with a hint of earthiness that I attribute to the fire curing process. I'm a pretty constant puffer and CP refuses to get acrid or ashy tasting or bite. It does require several relights but I don't consider this to be a detriment and may or may not be required with more careful and attentive technique. It burns to a fine gray ash just like its "cousin".

All said I find Cob Plug to be a very exceptional blend and may even be superior to 1792, though I will reserve that final judgement until I have a chance to compare them side by side. I only give it 4 stars AFTER a few years of aging. Aging longer may improve it even more. I just hope SG gets their supply issues sorted out before I run out of CP.

I have tried many tobaccos over the years. Throughout my experience I finaly settled with Erinmore Plug which sadly my tobacconist told me was no longer available.

So, what now. Having searched the web I happened upon Samuel Gawith. I decided to try several of their wonderful tobaccos until finally settling on Cob Plug. I found it to be a very satisfying smoke with a full satisfying flavour and a lovely room note (according to my wife).

I find the COB Plug particularly suitable to my Palette. I find it to be a full bodied smoke with plenty of flavour. I has a steady burn right to the end.

Two weeks ago we were away for a weekend break in Clifden outside Galway (Ireland) and during the sojourn my Peterson pipe clogged up. I was unable to clear it. As luck would have it, we were passing an antique shop in Clifden town and in the window were some new original clay pipes which came from an old tobacconist which had closed down in the 60's. I bought one and enjoyed my smoke of COB very much.

I would recommend COB, but let’s face it everyone’s palette is different. One man’s tobacco ...... etc. But, for me COB is a very enjoyable smoke.

The executive summary is if you like plugs, and strong tobacco, this is right up your alley. Run, don't walk, and buy some.

I did not find the flavoring as overpowering as 1792 though allegedly this is just the plug version. It seemed I could taste the base tobacco much better. It also seemed sweeter, a bit cooler, and more multidimensional.

I like 1792, but really liked my first try at Cob Plug, and I'm sure there will be more. Four stars!

UPDATE I am removing a star based on a couple of other experiences with this tobacco. Fully rubbed out, it can be overpowering in the nicotine department, and also in the taste department. I can't recommend it as highly as before as a result. I do think it works best as flake or cube cut.

I found Cob Plug to be very moist and not as heavily pressed as other plugs. Translation, it was very easy to cut and rub out. I was able to enjoy it with minimal drying time but it's definitely better if it airs out a bit. I would agree that Cob is a creamier and slightly sweeter smoke with less tonquin presence than 1792. I detected a more noticeable mint presence as well. I really had not noticed this very much with 1792 until I smoked the plug. Loosewatches is right on with that one...

Even lovers of 1792 would have to admit that it stinks in any container. Cob hands down stinks even more, especially when a sharp blade is introduced. My wife is not a fan of it burning, being cut or otherwise. It is also more cigar like to me which is not a bad thing but certainly different in my opinion from 1792. All of these factors make me lean more toward 1792 as my preference. And frankly I wish it had more tonquin. But I did just order another plug to make sure. I will say that Cob finishes better than 1792 with a smooth rich dark pressed Virginia flavor that is quite remarkable with slow puffing. In some ways a little like Dark Star without the tongue bite which surprised me.

Having tried all of the Kendal plugs with the exception of Cannon (and I am not so sure that I will) I have learned a lot about the corresponding flakes. If you enjoy 1792, try Cob Plug. You will learn a lot about 1792 and if observant, possibly Bracken Flake as well. I will keep the plug around but just 3 stars on this one...

I slice off the plug as I go. If the slice is too thick I tease it a little. Sometimes I rub it lightly, but chunks are welcome. I tried this evening, but I could not get it to stain my hands. Anyway, I am in no hurry smoking plug tobacco. To me, most any flake beats any ready-rubbed, and any plug trumps a flake. Plugs and twists are an even match. They just taste better, to borrow from Spangles.

07/27/09 UPDATE: I am revising some of my reviews. I have given out more 4 star ratings than anything else. That practice is probably not helping. So, I am reducing Cob Plug to 3 stars, not because I like it less than I did before, but because I am limiting 4 stars to fewer than 25% of all my reviews. One day I may use the 4 star rating to designate my top five.

Cons: much to strong for me to appreciate, too much effort required to prepare for the pipe; very difficult to light and keep lit.

Add a star or two if you drink 200 proof grain alcohol.

It is very black in appearance and stinks in the tin. It is also difficult to keep lit.

While not the strongest tobacco I've ever smoked, it is no weakling and leaves a heavy aftertaste hours after smoking.

If offered another bowl on down the trail (as in way down the trail), I'll accept.

My rating is "somewhat recommended" because it's not as bad as I thought it would be. And, it's not a nicotine bomb though it could make those who aren't too used to nicotine break out in a sweat.

Not bad, better than most of the twists if you're looking for something with that "flavor" but again, very one dimensional.

Update 11/05/2006 Too strong in both flavor and impact for frequent consumption. Three stars if you like strong flake-type tobaccos.

Opening the bag reveals a unique flavor, some others describe it in these reviews, but whatever it is, its strong enough to make me pull my bag from my face.

It comes a little moist to my liking, so I rub and crumble tiny pieces and let sit out for 10-15 mins before smoking.

Lighting it is a different story - very rich flavor, extremely strong nicotine punch. I find myslef not able to finish a bowl yet, usually leaving a 1/4 inch of unsmoked material in the pipe. (unlike petersons blends that I finish down to fine ash)

Very sweet yet robust taste - no bite - little bits of sour as you get to the end. The price and smoking experience make it worthy of a daily smoke, however I havent warmed up to it entirely yet. I find myself smoking it more for the punch (I just switched from ciggarettes) to calm cravings than anything. Will update as we get more closely aquainted.

this here is a long one, for me at least. So git yer readin' glasses handy, or drinking glasses if you'd rather. . .

I've had both the plug and the flaked 1792, but I've smoked much more of the plug, so that's the one I'm reviewing. If the two are different animals, they have the same mother, in fact, they're twins. First off- What's Tonka smell like? Well, before this the only Tonka I'd experienced was in truck form, as in toys, and I can't remember smelling them. But 1792 smells like rootbeer, possibly Birch beer, of high quality. (Yes, Birch beer.) My mother, wonderful sniffer of all things pipe tobacco, agrees with me on this one.

The flavor at lighting is just the same as the smell, although stronger and (at the risk of being really stupid) emotional. Hmm, emotionally flavored?? Yup that's it. 1792 is emotions for the nose and a trip for the tongue. A little vanilla, yes, quite cool, and dark dark Virginia. I say a little vanilla, but there is a lot of scented flavorish topcoat, of an English sort. And loads of wholesome tobacco goodness. No soap. Like other Lakeland tobaccos this has some strong additive(that's a bad word these days, eh? I don't care, that's what they are) smells and tastes. I still don't think of it as aromatic, though.

This can get harsh and rope-like in a puffing fit, so go slowly. It's not so strong in nicotine as I'd expected, but tastes both huge and refined. Enough. Smoke it if you can get it.

As a side note: I've noticed a lot of reviewers describing both Gawith and Gawith Hoggarth tobaccos as cool smoking. I noticed it first with Bob's Square Cut and since then with every tobacco from either of the two companies. The smoke is cool. Is this possible? I definately don't taste menthol, but how else, but with a tiny touch, could they get hot smoke to seem so cool? Just wondering. happy smoke, I gotta go ice down my fingers.

I'm about a quarter of the way through my first pound of Cob Plug, so I'm hardly an expert. It's a wonderful tobacco that is fun to prepare different ways. One bowl I will slice thin and rub out a lot, and the next I'll slice thicker and fill the bowl with unrubbed thick slices. Each preparation seems to yield a different smoke. I enjoy the tonka flavor and effect, but Cob Plug seems to have less tonka than 1792. I don't feel as compelled to dedicate pipes to Cob Plug, as the tonka is subdued. Cob Plug seems to have more of a medicinal flavor, IMO.

I wonder if the differences we find between 1792 and Cob Plug are variations in batches or true differences between the blends? Anyway it's fun to contemplate and talk about. The bottom line is that I love both Cob Plug and 1792, and I hope to always have both around. They are great tobaccos, and we are lucky to have the folks at Samual Gawith still dedicated to producing their fine products.