|
Three Year Matured
| Brand: |
Dunhill |
| Tin Description: |
A medium blend consisting of Red Virginia and Oriental Leaf, lightly flavoured with mixed fruit essence. |
| Country of Origin: |
UK |
| Curing Group: |
Air Cured |
| Contents: |
Virginia
Oriental
|
| Flavoring: |
Fruit / Citrus
|
| Cut: |
Ribbon |
| Packaging: |
50g Tin |
|
Images are temporarily disabled.
|
Average Ratings
|
| Strength: |
Mild to Medium
|
| Flavoring: |
Mild to Medium
|
| Taste: |
Medium
|
| Room Note: |
Pleasant to Tolerable
|
| Recommendation: |
Somewhat Recommended
|
|
|
|
Please log in to add or edit a review. If you do not have an account
yet, you can sign up for one here.
|
Showing reviews 41 through 56 of 56 reviews of this tobacco
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
BrittPark
|
06/13/2003 |
Medium to Strong
|
Very Mild
|
Medium to Full
|
Pleasant to Tolerable
|
|
| In the tin: This is a mixture of mostly dark strands with just a strand or so of a lighter leaf. The aroma is sweet and generically fruity, but also smells of fermented Virginias.
Packing and Lighting: This packs easily and well and lights up easily and stays lit.
Taste: It may be laced with fruit essences but I don't taste much fruit, just the satisfying sweet/sour note of aged Virginias. Produces nice thick substantial smoke, very little steam as far as I can tell. Consistent throughout the bowl except that towards the end the smoke becomes richer and more flavorful.
For the aromatic smoker this would be something good to try if you're looking for something a little stronger and a little more complex. For Virginia smokers, don't be put off by the idea of flavoring. Flavored it is, but the bulk of the smoking experience is pure matured Virginia.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
oldgbd
|
04/22/2003 |
Very Strong
|
Very Strong
|
Very Full
|
Very Pleasant
|
|
| Don't think of this as virginia. Don't think of this as an oriental blend. Instead you should think of it as an incredibly strong aromatic.
It is wonderful! I like tobaccos with a strong nicotine kick, but alas, so many of them lack the civility needed to be smoked in public. Those that have impeccable public manners are as limp as overcooked pasta. This is the tobacco to choose if you want something that people around you will like and still satisfy you. When smoking this in a public place without fail someone will come up to me and tell me how wonderful it smells- it does have a magnificent aroma for the non-smoker. And for you, the smoker, you won't have to contend with that question that I get after smoking so many other aromatics: "Did I just smoke something?" No, you'll know that you did, your wobbly knees will speak volumes.
What this blend does have in common with virginias is that to really enjoy it you need to smoke it slowly. While it doesn't bite too badly because of the orientals in it, if you puff too hard you'll lose the remarkable flavor of this blend. Slow smoking will release a constant stream of berry flavor (raspberry/blackcurrant/whatever) into your mouth and into the room around you. It comes very close to tasting like it smells.
I realize that the dedicated Virginia smoker would probably find this far too heavily flavored for his tastes. I realize that the English smoker would find it far too sweet. But for those of us who have a palate that ranges far and wide, this is one tobacco that shouldn't be skipped.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
raynine
|
04/13/2003 |
Mild
|
Extra Strong
|
Mild
|
Tolerable to Strong
|
|
| Dissapointment plus! Rather than going the way of a type of fruit in the description of this tobacco I'd prefer to go the way of perfumes. 3 year matured was to be a high point in my smoking career. the idea of a Dunhill pure matured virginia sent me into realms of fantasy only Tolkien could have devised. This made the let down so much greater. Immediately upon opening I knew something was wrong. Had my wife secretly emptied a full bottle of OPIUM scent into round flat tin? NO she wouldn't have, and there was that wonderful characteristic whhup as the air enters the tin for the first time. Poisonous stuff me thinks. My mouth was charred. My heart saddened as I tipped 25gms intot he flower bed! Expensive fertilizer.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
CJ
|
12/15/2002 |
Mild
|
Mild
|
Mild
|
Very Pleasant
|
|
| This blend is not as bad as I have been lead to believe. It definitely has a fruit flavoring which to me is Raspberry. If it is smoked moist, the flavoring is all that I taste. I can take enough out of the tin for a bowlfull. I let this completely dry out until it is bone dry. I then pack a Meerschaum (I would not smoke this in a briar), and rehydrate it by blowing through the bowl until it has the proper moisture. Now I can taste the underlying tobacco with just a hint of the Raspberry. Yet, the room aroma leans towards the Raspberry. The base tobacco is quality, and probably would have been best left alone. For 35 years, when smoking a new blend, I ask my wife what it smells like. The answer is almost always "pipe tobacco". This time it was "fruit". After a heavy meal, smoking this without letting it dry out is like having dessert. The tobacco has a lot less calories than a Raspberry Tart. While this will not be a regular for me, it sure beats goopy aromatics and would be a step up for smokers of those blends.
Update. After a few more bowls, I think that the flavor is more like Black Currant than Raspberry.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
BriarPuffer
|
09/29/2002 |
Very Strong
|
Medium
|
Very Full
|
Pleasant
|
|
| Okay, my current production tin is two years old and as I popped it I was greeted by a strong whiff of the topping. I know exactly what it is -- it's blackcurrant! I loved it in French soap, but was bitterly disappointed by the Twinings Blackcurrant Tea which I found too cloying. I might revisit that, since I haven't tried it with honey, which makes a world of difference. But this is neither here nor there.
The tobacco was delightfully fresh; the moisture was just right, and the dark shreds of leaf were streaked with sugar crystals. I was able to scrape my first 2/3 bowlful from what had adhered to the paper disc without difficulty and pack it into the smooth Stanwell billiard I'd chosen for it. The charring light gave me the impression that the topping had indeed been increased a hundredfold from the original version, but was nevertheless essentialy the same blend. I also had the impression it would more closely resemble my 40-year old sample if it were dried out for some years and then rehydrated (which is what happened to my old sample). The main difference, I find, is that this current stuff is strong -- not the flavor, but the nicotine hit. By the time the top was charred and I was reaching for my tamper, the garage was starting to sway a little. Upon relighting, I decided that breath smoking was the way to go. From then on, it was much the same as the old stuff. I did notice that the sugar crystals gave the smoke a certain quality that I've only encountered with similarly aged C&D Blockade Runner, a sweet, musty, silky smoothness that brings on a temptation to puff harder and more often. But giving in to this is inviting tongue bite and a hot, wet smoke and as it was, the tobacco burned to a very clean, dry white ash.
In short, I was a bit disconcerted and apprehensive about the apparent heavy-handedness with the topping. But once I settled into the main smoke, I found it a faithful successor to the original. I wouldn't have either the original or the new production as an everyday or all-day smoke, but it is a great change of pace smoke, very pleasant. Too bad winter is just about gone, this would be great on frosty nights with a nice steaming mug of Darjeeling tea or apple cider.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
Dwise
|
09/14/2002 |
Mild
|
Strong
|
Medium to Full
|
Pleasant
|
|
| Fruit Loops in a can. In fact, the only differences between Three Year Matured Virginia and that beloved Kellogg's cereal are: A) Three Year Matured Virginia burns slightly better than Fruit Loops, and B) Fruit Loops are less dishonestly named. (Seriously, what kind of drugs were the Dunhill folks on when they dreamed up this blend? "Matured" is in particular a misnomer: here's a pipe tobacco for the kid in all of us!)
The Virginia component is, I imagine, of good quality, but for the life of me I can't taste it beneath all the fruity toppings. This might be a good step up for the piper who's accustomed to those godawful "cherry cordial" drugstore blends. Other beware.
That much said, I will freely admit this _is_ a fun tobacco to fire up now and then in a corncob, when I feel like smoking a bowl of Frankenberries.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
Inquisitor
|
09/01/2002 |
Mild
|
Mild
|
Mild
|
Pleasant to Tolerable
|
|
| This blend is interesting because it is so uninteresting. My tin was about two years old when I first opened it, and maybe that was why I did not experience the fruit overload of previous reviewers. Some light raspberry flavor in the tin, very little in the smoke flavor. It wasn't a sweet raspberry. The real lack here is flavor of any kind. It is just smoky, somewhat ashy, as if all flavor had just been sucked out of the leaf. Cut in a cigarette shag format, it might be something a roll your own cigarette person would like, because though it isn't great, it is still a few steps above ciggies. Yawn! Another blend to add to the "trade for anything else" box.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
Eulenburg
|
08/10/2002 |
Mild to Medium
|
Strong
|
Medium
|
Pleasant
|
|
| The essence of fruit!
English aromatics are like English cuisine: something to be made fun of, without actually committing the mistake of trying it out. But every-so-often a family member who ought to know better passes the Dunhill store in Park Ave, and buys My Highness a tin of something?after all, don't I smoke a pipe?
Model family love, my selfless sense of duty to TobaccoReviews, perhaps a lingering tendency or penchant for masochism, prompted me to try this Three-Year object. It is not bad...it is just so weird. Trevert was utterly correct in associating it with unknown galaxies.
Undoubtedly matured in a secure, undisclosed location, sort of like our vice-presidents, THREE YEAR adds to the etiolated douceur of cavendished Virginia, à l' Anglaise, a trowelled topping that makes ERINMORE taste like ERINLESS. Think blancmange dolled out with fermented elderberries...
The result is neither cheap nor, God knows, humdrum: I would call it, well, hallucinatory.
When Wagner's Siegfried, who has never seen a woman before, finally meets one, he cleverly cries out, rather enthusiastically, "This is not a man!" Likewise, if I were an alien from Planet Mongo and had never experienced FLAVOUR before, I would know I had experienced flavour after smoking this! Not tobacco flavour, no, but...weeeee...it is, like, psychedelic, yeah.
How could one resist it, my fellow boomers?
PS./ Smoking this whilst strumming a guitar strikes me as exquisitely apt.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
Tantric
|
08/09/2002 |
Mild
|
Mild to Medium
|
Very Mild
|
Pleasant to Tolerable
|
|
| Perhaps I am getting it all wrong, but to me this one is a close cousin of Peterson?s Sherlock Holmes, except that the latter has a dryer, more watery taste. TYM is certainly a Virginian tobacco but different in essence or spirit. It smells sweeter than most Virginias, yet the aroma does not entirely reflect in the taste. A slow burning product, it is very easy to pack and keep lit. I have tried this a number of times in the last year. I am not a fan of this blend but for some odd reason I keep going back to it. It may be because it is not a ?distracting? blend in the sense you can be smoking it whilst strumming a guitar or leafing thru a magazine without paying much attention to your pipe.
I think the great Eulenburg has nailed it when he refers to this tobacco as "cavendished à l' Anglaise", with a note of elderberries. It is a very subtle and mild smoke (quite surprising for a Dunhill), perhaps redesigned so to meet the flavouring demands/expectations of a would be new generation of pipe smokers?-something which seems apparent with all these new Dunhills in a rectangular tin: Aromatic, Mild and Ready Rubbed. I guess that many of us are used to Dunhill tobaccos as the equivalent of grand symphonies and concertos, and all of a sudden we are presented with these rather insubstantial impromptus that are closer to the Carpenters than to the more structured Brahms or Beethoven. Non the less, I would recommend it for someone new to the pipe smoking experience, or else as a bold change of pace within the Virginia smoking range.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
NEWMAN
|
07/30/2002 |
Mild
|
Strong
|
Medium
|
Pleasant
|
|
| As the outdoor temperature in the Northeast climbed above 90F again, I continued my quest for an enjoyable aromatic. Figured a Dunhill blend would be a good bet but was wrong again. The luscious, fruity tin aroma of the dark brown ribbon cut disappeared after the initial light. Fearing I'd infect my pipes with a foul taste as has occured with other aromatics, I initially dedicated only one to these trials. From the start, I didn't taste the sweetness and with each bowlful, it became more bitter and exceptionally dry. However it was cool and without bite. To salvage the tin, I tried different pipes with better results, smoking only once in each before cleaning. The fruity taste lasted longer but still didn't result in a great smoke. Perhaps an avid aromatic fan would enjoy this blend, but not me. If anything, this tobacco made me appreciate some of the better aromatic blends from CAO/Dan, Germain and MacBaren even more.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
Pipestud
|
04/21/2002 |
Very Mild
|
Mild
|
Very Mild
|
Very Pleasant
|
|
| Now here is a unique blend. It is flavored in the English manner (unobtrusive), and somehow remains cool. The virginia base screams quality, and it is a smooth smoke. It is also very much an aromatic and that is why I think it can help us.
You see, there are many aromatic smokers who do not know any better than to puff away on Borkum and the Captain. Give them a tin of this stuff and they will be confirmed members of the brotherhood. 3 Year Matured is a fun change of pace for me. When I opened the tin, I didn't know whether to reach for a spoon or pipe, but am glad I chose a pipe to load it in. Yummy!
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
Stan
|
02/19/2002 |
Mild to Medium
|
Medium
|
Mild to Medium
|
Pleasant to Tolerable
|
|
| I guess I am the odd man out here. I first smoked this blend about a year ago (in fairness, a full tin of course) before reading any reviews. I tied it exclusively in an unsmoked Dunhill Shell No. 5 I had bought (lumberman or small canadian) to give it a real test.
I have read in the 1960's it was introduced as a straight virginia, but it is obviously being re-introduced to be different now.
I did not know for sure it was aromatic until I had opened a tin a year ago, but it did smell sweeter or more fruity in the tin than a straight virginia. My memory is that it was slightly sweet, but a much more pleasant blend, to me, than Dunhill's Royal Yacht, which is stronger, etc. I've read since then the three year matured virginia tobacco is sauced with a bit of rasberry. Toward the end of the tin, about two weeks worth of smoking, it started to dry out, so that shows it was not too wet with anything. But if you take more than two weeks to smoke it, you need to preserve it better than just screwing the lid back on. I seldom smoke more than two bowls a day of it (or any blend).
Upon reading these reviews, I opened up another tin (I have two cellared now for about a year). I also read the quite brief review of one gentleman from a fairly recent Ephemeris issue, which was fairly nice, and from the most recent Winter 2001/2002 issue of Pipes and Tobaccos. Their reviewer is harsh on most aromatics, as you know, but his review is most fair to this unusual but sweet blend.
I have recently smoked nearly another tin of this blend in the same Dunhill pipe. This pipe remained unsmoked in the interim (from the last tin). It is a good pipe and most receptive of this sweet blend again. It has over 30 bowls of this blend in the cake now. It will continue to be enhanced with smoking, but I feel I can certainly give a true evaluation of this blend in such a pipe.
To me, it is mild and quite nice, and definitely on the sweet side. But not heavy. A light type of wine-like or fruity sweetness persists. There is a quality virginia underneath. It is very cool, biteless, and though not a real dry smoke, it takes little effort to run a pipe cleaner through my straight stem pipe once or twice in the last half of the smoke. Much dryer than St. Bruno's flake. It is also much better to me still than Royal Yacht, which I know does not say much, but the emphasis is on the word "much".
If you only like straight english, heavy scottish, balkan, or straight virginia/perique blend types, or do not like aromatics at all, this blend is not for you. If you're more flexible and have a sweet tooth at times (and I like the foregoing blend types myself), give it a full tin try in a good pipe. Don't jump to a conclusion by a sniff, a puff, a touch, or by imagination. If it doesn't sound like your cup of tea, don't bother with it at all. A bowl won't convince you in that case. But if you want to try a smoke on the sweet side, something suitable for an occasional smoke over a few weeks of different experience and pleasure, give it a try.
I know I'm going to finish up the last few bowls from my tin before I let this Dunhill hibernate again for a while. This is a special, not everyday treat. I hope Dunhill keeps up this blend in small quantities for us few in the U.S. who will continue to partake.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
Paul Tatum
|
01/24/2002 |
Medium
|
Extra Strong
|
Overwhelming
|
Pleasant
|
|
| Upon opening this tin for the first time I was reminded of the Monty Python skit where the police man goes to the confectioners and complains about the larks vomit . Three Year Matured Virginia would lead on to believe the tobacco to have certain traits . None of which would be the heavy dowsing of fruit aroma . This should definately have a very large label on the front reading "WARNING ! FRUIT FLAVORED!"
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
Nuggsgalore
|
12/04/2001 |
Mild
|
Strong
|
Mild
|
Tolerable
|
|
| It is an insult to call this tobacco. This could be the worse blend I have ever tried in 10 years of pipe smoking. I have run out of tobacco and smoked drugstore blends that are better. I am usually a fan of Dunhill blends, but this is not good. Dunhill promotes it as a 3-year mature tobacco, but I think it was fermented a little to long. Mature is not the word, geriatric maybe. It is very sweet and fruity. The taste is not only bad, but it never goes away. I have cleaned my Stanwell 3 times and I can still taste it. People who peddle kiddy porn should be forced to smoke this blend for the rest of their lives. Avoid.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
gradstudent
|
10/13/2001 |
Mild to Medium
|
Strong
|
Medium
|
Tolerable to Strong
|
|
| I am new to the world of virginia tobacco. My experience is largely founded by trial and error, and limited to a graduate student?s budget. Being that my focus as a student is on literature, the future does not look better, according to job statistics posted on the math department?s entrance. So exited I was about my recent discovery of Dunhill?s Light Flake, that I ordered three tins of their Mature Virginia. After an initial four days since I clicked on the order, I waited like a sniper for the mailman, and entrenched myself in the bedroom with my required reading of Swann?s Way. The smell upon opening the tin was thick of raspberry! Something like an edible Hallmark Card. It is a dark brown ribbon cut with a few individual blondes hairs if you look hard enough. The tin smell was consistent with the aroma upon the lighting. The flavor was obviously fruity, with the intensity of the flavor varying from mild to medium, and the sweetness of it all was definitely too much for my olfactories. I found the tobacco?s body, in other words its effect on my palate, to be a bit overpowering at times. Perhaps my palate hasn?t callused enough for this blend. The smoothness of this tobacco (the relationship between the body and flavor), is subject to individual taste I suspect, and the fact that Dunhill mass produces this blend must mean that many pipe smokers appreciate it. Nevertheless, the body of this blend was not consistent to me. It possessed the overpowering sweetness of a virginia blend that may have been allowed to ferment too long in its own juices. I suppose I should have researched better before I purchased three tins. My girlfriend walked in on me and claimed the aroma was identical to a shower lotion she uses. On a positive note, the tobacco did smoke better in a MacArthur corncob, though there is something sacrilegious about the act.
|
| Reviewed By: |
Date: |
Strength: |
Flavoring: |
Taste: |
Room Note: |
Recommendation: |
|
linuxconf
|
03/16/2001 |
Mild to Medium
|
Extremely Mild
|
Mild to Medium
|
Strong
|
|
| I consider myself to love all VA tobacs. However, this one I can't stand. It has a dry awful taste. It burns my throat, and I can't wait for it to end. I can't even finish the bowl.
|
|
Showing reviews 41 through 56 of 56 reviews of this tobacco
|
|


|