Samuel Gawith 1792 Flake

This tobacco is strong in both flavor and nicotine content. I am not sensitive to nicotine so I don't get a gurgling stomach or a light head, but a small pipe leaves me satisfied.

Don't listen to the ridiculous claims that this tobacco tastes like manure and smells like the street on England in 1792 with a hint of lumberjack's armpit. That's just hogwash. Another ridiculous claim is that people who smoke this don't smoke it for the taste, again, hogwash.

This tobacco tastes like a strong rope with a very strong cigar character. It's obvious that it is cased, but the Tonka is barely noticeable. Most of what you taste and smell is strong, good ol' fashioned tobacco. Fairly one dimensional, but good, very good.

As many have stated, this tobacco needs drying time, and it is still a pain in the butt to keep lit, but with some practice you can do it. I would ssuggest that, during the first few bowls, you have enough matches handy, or use a lighter.

If you are an aromatic smoker, a newbie pipe smoker, or a 20 year old hipster, this is NOT for you. If you enjoy TOBACCO flavor and can tolerate nicotine reasonably well, you'll love this.

I don't know what a tonquin bean is and I don't care. I also don't give a rip if this is lightly or heavily cased. What I do care about is never running out of this stuff. It's addicting, and I don't mean the Nicotine. I crave it, I love it, I want to be buried with it.

This is one consternating tobacco. Let me say up front that I did not like it. It was tough to keep lit, it was too strong for my taste and the tonquin flavor was objectionable, as was the smell. However, it is definitely a tobacco that is of high quality and it is a fun tobacco to experiment with.

Stoving the tobacco (fancy word for heating it in the microwave) definitely changed its taste, but not necessarily for the better. The tonquin gave way to a heavy-bodied maduro cigar flavor, which I also did not care for. It sort of tasted like a Hoyo de Monterey double maduro robusto with a trace of spoiled egg spilled on it, if that makes any sense (which it probably does not!). A simple drying out of the tobacco for 3 hours worked ok and the tobacco tasted its best after about 3 weeks of sitting around in an unsealed tin. The tonquin was still noticeable but was a bit more subdued. If that is indeed what tonquin tastes like, it's definitely an acquired taste I did not acquire. I'm going to keep some around for blending purposes.

This is something all pipesters should try. There is enough dissension in the ranks that it could be something you'd love. Or it could be something that makes you vomit.

I have grown very fond of this flake over the years and it has become my go to morning smoke, a ritual I will never tire of, it was made to be smoked while sipping on a hot cup o' joe. The added Tonquin flavoring couldn't compliment the natural flavors of the leaf any better as it just perfectly enhances the Dark Fired and Virginia leafs. This is a true, olde worlde British tobacco and one of the finest on the market. I would not consider this a Lakeland scented tobacco as I don't pick up on any floral or perfume notes whatsoever. I buy this stuff by the box and I like to lay all the flakes out and dry them for a couple of hours before properly packing them into ball top jars for immediate rotation. If I'm wanting to cellar it, I prefer to keep the flakes moist as I think they age better in that state. The nicotine is in the brilliant range (high) and the smoke is heady and stout but also smoooooth as velvet. If you tend to like olde worlde style flakes and you have yet to try this bad boy, than look no further. It doesn't get any better than this my friends.

100% Essential!!!

1792 Flake

Star Rating = 4.00

Rating Scores - 10 is the Best and 0 is the Worst

Pouch Note = 10

Room Note = 10

Flavor = 10

Bite = 10

Burn = 10

After Taste = 9

Raw Score = 59

Rated Percentage = 98%

Comment = Smooth, nice Strong Full Body Flavor, high Nicotine content, white ash Burn, this is a wonderful smoke but you better be sitting down when you light-up, because this blend is going to kick your butt, ya it's that strong. But oh boy what a delightfully enjoyable smoke this one is.

I am a longtime R&L Wingfield lover and a flake fancier ever since I started pipe smoking in my early twenties in the late 70s. I often obtained my favourite tobaccos from J.J. Fox. One of my favourites was the flake sold there, a pressed bar tobacco packed in the small rectangular tin the same size of Dunhill flake tin in those days. The tin bears the label of the familiar R&L design, which I believe must be one of Robert Lewis products. Akin to Dunhill flake in quality, however, this flake smelled sweeter and tasted milder, seemed more mature than Dunhill flake. Soon, they stopped selling this flake, at least at J.J.Fox. Ever since, I have been seeking for my legendary flake, even time-slipped through the days when people began to enjoy Internet, my search continued, but to my chagrin I haven't been able to find it out up to this date. Through many compromises and deviations, I found myself an addict to Samuel Gawith's 1792 flake. Is this the one I dreamed of and sought for, after a long journey of my dream flake? No, this is far from it. In every aspect, nothing matches the flake I bought at J.J.Fox. I cannot explain what kind of turn of mind or what kind of perverse deviations of my pipe life made me an intermittent repeater of Sam's 1792 flake. The body odour of “Mr Ugly” as coined by some reviewer … . One idea is that a smoker's taste is vulnerable to change through a vast space of time. Figuratively, the smell of “the armpits of coalminers”, as mentioned somewhere, has joined the league table of my likings ( literally speaking, as I haven't got any acquaintance among coalminers, I have never had the opportunity to smell it in my life and, of course, if I had, I would never wish to do that for the rest of my life). I could not find an appropriate phrase in my word inventory for the scent of S. Gawith's1792. Some say it is ugly but others say flavorful. I think there is a hair's breadth between the two.

Like a fiendishly smoky peat-taste whisky, Gawith's1792 chooses the smokers. If Dunhill Flake, Holger Danske's Royal Navy Flake, Samuel Gawith's flakes such as Golden Glow, Full Virgina can be a textbook standard for VA flakes, Sam's 1792 flake largely deviates from that. Anyone who got bored with the textbook VA, Go for it!

My view on tasting: Slow-burning does not necessarily depend on moisture. Pre-smoking drying out is a must. As usual with most cases, the manufacture's secret skills of cutting and slicing tobaccos also account for pleasant cool smoking. In the light of that, Samuel Gawith's1792 is the work of art, which enables me to play with silky creamy smokes smouldering from the muddy, earthy dead leaves, along with its subtly stinging and tingling sensations on the tongue like the first touch of a hard-core single malt.

The best advice is: Do not spew a lot of smokes all the way through the whole mouth with the open velum that may allow the smokes to freely tingle the nasal path. So, smoke it in a small bowl. Try not to let the smokes get as close as to the velar part near the windpipe because that makes you coughing and even getting sick. It's like swallowing Ardbeg like draft beers, and the result will a hell. I am sober in writing this.

Presentation is a punch, an epihany: The nose delivers a mélange of soap, garam and delectable vernal grass. When light it first, a soapy smell arrogantly asserts itself with a hint of garam cigarette. On the palate, I get a piquant, peppery kick in the tongue, which is enjoyable like a swig of peaty single malt. As to casing, I do not detect whisky topping; tonquin is salient and ubiquitous. The flake does not light very well but retains its original piquancy to the last puff. This flake reminds me of Sam's other range such as Black xx and Brown No.4 ropes. Patience is needed to get it going to the last burn.

Gawith's1792 flake may not fit with anyone ensconcing oneself in the cozy couch in the ultra-hygiene modern life recommended by health fascists. The flake comes from the 19th century England, in which everything was sooty as in Dickens' world, along with a variety of smells of life and horses' dung at every roadside at the low level of public hygiene as some reviewer mentioned adequately. So, changing the mindset is of the essence when you time-travel to enjoy the 1792 flake. I often smoke it with my small Dublin in the mouth, and sometimes it perks me up, other times consoles me, by the time-travel into the 19th century human world.

I put 7 stars in 10 scales. Before meals, this flake punches me in the stomach like a nasty body-blow, so it has never become the tobacco for all-day smoking. What's more, smoke this in a decent bar or in a posh restaurant, I guarantee the staff will ferret you out. And yet, unforgettable, unputtingdownable tobacco I often get back to.

I have read many of the reviews for this and have even smoked a few bowls of the bulk variety and found it to be rich and satisfying. The tonquin flavoring of this tobacco took my breath away and the nicotine hit was staggering you definitely need to be seated for this smoke. Even with these experiences I never added this to my regimen for I have many VA/burly flakes that I enjoyed just as much if not more than 1792. The other day I happened to be rummaging through my cellar offerings only to find a tin of this blend that I dated July 7 of 2005.

I opened the 50g tin and was blown away with the tin note and the rich black almost oily appearance of this tobacco. It was velvety soft to the feel and rubbed out and packed to perfection. Upon the first light it was flavor explosion of liquor and leather almost cigar like. After about a half dozen sips my head was awry in nicotine bliss. "Easy boy" i said to my self and set in for a monumental half hour smoke.

I'm sold and ordered five more tins for aging. By no means is this an all day smoke but certainly a smoke suited to top off a nice meal with a vintage whiskey or brandy. Not for the faint hearted or novice smoker. If you're looking for a Va/burly flake that sets its self apart from all others this is your tobacco.

2/19/15 This blend is even better when mixed 50/50 with a nice burley like Carter Hall, Lane Burley Light, or sutliff bulk. 1792 Flake burns better with burley!

I have been intrigued by this blend for quite some time now. As far as Lakelands go, I am more a fan of G&H as there blending style is more in line with my taste than is with SG but I was curious about 1792. I stopped at the local JR which stocks SG tins.

Opening the tin I was greeted with the typical SG rough cut flake that had some sugar crystal bloom on it. They were of a mostly dark brown leak with some medium brown, but not jet black. The tin aroma was not off putting at all. It reminded me of a cough syrup of my youth which I believe was named Ipsitol. It was not quite the same, but it did rekindle my memory of that preparation. I was quite surprised that the tin aroma was not more pronounced given the description of such in many of the reviews. Upon deep inhalation I almost detected the presence of a dark cherry-like aroma way in the background. As is typical of SG tinned tobaccos, the flakes were moist but not as moist as my experience with Best Brown Flake, so 1792 was smokeable right from the tin. I loaded a bit in a small, slim billiard Dr. Grabow Grand Duke that I reserve for Lakelands and testing new tobaccos. I digress briefly here, but it is worth mentioning that I have just shy of a dozen Dr. Grabow pipes out of a pipe collection of over 150, and NEVER had a bad smoke in any of them. They could use a higher class of rubber in their bits, but their briars have never failed me in 37 years of piping - and from the first bowl. For me, they beat out my expensive Dunhills and other medium to high end pipes by a long mile, and I like to support this American institution for as long as I can!

Although 1792 was smokeable from the tin, there was the need for frequent relights, but it didn't interfere with my enjoyment of this fine blend. The initial taste was similar to Revor Plug but not quite as musty as Revor always is for me. While smoking I said that this wasn't all that strong as compared to Irish Flake, one of my favorites and the strongest tobacco I smoke. However, the strength creeps up on you, but not in a leveling way. It provided a nice buzz is all and this was after consuming a sandwich and cup of coffee. However, I conclude IrF to be stronger by way of comparison. There was a very nice chocolate taste that quickly developed that was not over the top and lasted throughout the smoke. There was nothing flowery or soapy with 1792 nor did I experience the dry mouth feel typical with Kentucky leaf. The side stream for me was similar to the room note that Captain Black White gave off when I smoked that well over 30 years ago. My wife and two daughters didn't find the room note offensive at all. One said it was pancake/maple syrup like. No heat or bite as well.

G&H and SG, the two powerhouses of Lakeland style tobacco blending, are very different in their approach to their respective products. This is a good thing as it adds variety to the available products. As stated, I enjoy G&H offerings over the likes of SG, but with 1972, SG has a winner here. Recommended and one that I can smoke every day if need be. Goes great with a black coffee, too. I am very happy I finally tried it and was not disappointed!

UPDATE 3-23-13: With more drying of this tobacco, the tin aroma that I described as "cherry-like" is now more like black-cherry soda, perhaps from the addition of heliotrope?

I have been smoking SG’s 1792 on and off for about four years. There isn’t much to add to the other reviews. If you like hefty dose of tonquin and a nic hit, than this blend is for you. Like just about all SG flakes, it needs to be dried before smoking. As has been mentioned it is a bit earthy and I find an underlying sweetness too, especially with some additional age. As for the strength, I think it is a matter of reference. If you regularly enjoy ropes, you will find this to be medium to strong. If you are coming at it from a different direction, it will be strong to very strong. This is a love or hate type tobacco that offers some complex flavors. 1792 is a dish best served to experienced pipe smokers.