I wasn't expecting R.S. to be this good. I bought this along with a few other strictly 'budget' blends out of curiosity; how good could a blend that's been made with saving money in mind actually be? Well, this is a surprise!
I was expecting it to be a fine shag cut, but upon opening the pouch I found more of a mid-sized ribbon blend. The moisture's great, and there's not much to report about the pouch-note: a simple VaBur one.
I get my Pete' lit and straight away think to myself how this would cost a lot more money if it were from a company like Peterson or Sam Gawith ; it's better not to think about how much Davidoff would charge! The flavour's great: the Burley seems to be of a lot higher standard than the word 'Budget' suggests. In all fairness, I can taste a far higher proportion of the Burley in comparison to the Virginia: that's not bad though, it's a wonderful nutty/toasty taste.
The nicotine's around medium, and the room-note's exactly as you'd expect from a VaBur!
For a straight up virginia/burley/firecured tobacco with no added favouring this is a pretty marvellous tobacco and one I can happily live with.
Opening the pack it is a little moist but it doesn't take long to air out and I find with this the drier the better, co tents are as described above.
Packing and lighting are the utmost ease and although it is a quick smoke it is a satisfying one as it is deceptively stronger than it looks.
Like I have saod the drier this tobacco is I find the better it gets the natural flavours are actually amplified And it is just a simple no nonsense smoke. It doesnt change very much during the smoke, sweetness and smokeyness here and there with a nice nuttiness from the burley.
If you treat this right and smoke slowly it is very rewarding and satisfying and one I can't see me getting bored with.
On a final note, i think Stevie made a very good point, it does make me wonder if this was put in a tin, given some fancy blurb and manufactured by the likes of Dunhill, Mac baren or Davidoff how much more of a premium one would pay? Quite the interesting thought indeed.
Rather an odd name for a pipe tobacco; but I suspect that the true purpose of this tobacco is to be used for RYOs, and it's marketed as a pipe tobacco for tactical (i.e. revenue dodging) purposes. Smoked in a pipe, it's not at all bad, with a pure, natural, pronounced burley taste - nutty, toasty, smoky - that surprised me a bit: it's definitely not like smoking dismantled cigarettes, which is what I assumed it would be, and it seems to be free from added flavours and gimmicks. As a shag cut it needs to be packed tight and sipped slowly, or it'll burn away quickly and get hot. This is an uncomplicated, honest tobacco with no airs and graces. I wouldn't queue in the snow to buy it, but it's all right as a 'budget' smoke.
I almost passed this one by because nothing about the description enticed me. However, it was a GH blend I had not tried yet, so I gave it a go.
The bag note was earthy and odd. There was hay, but something else...what was it? Then it hit me: chicken coop! Yes, it was reminiscent of a chicken coop! Now, if that sounds like a turnoff, please note that Presbyterian tin note has been likened to mucking out a horse stall, and yet Presbyterian is a great blend.
The cut is fine shag, suspiciously like an RYO blend. It came a bit moist, but drying was easy, as was packing. It lights well and -being a shag - can burn quite quickly if not sipped. However, it does not burn hot, the fast burn simply adds to the strength. Even paper dry, it smokes quite well.
The flavor is most reminiscent of GH Dark Birdseye, with DB's somewhat rough and raw edges. It is straightforward and unpretentious - just good, honest tobacco flavor that has a fullness to satisfy.
There is a peppery note on the tongue which would make me swear there is some perique in this, but the description says otherwise. In any case, this is both a satisfying and relaxing blend with a credible strength that I find myself reaching for again and again.
Individual reviews are the opinion(s) of the
contributor and don't reflect the opinion(s) of Tobacco Media Group. Published review content of
this website is considered the copyright intellectual property of the reviewer and Tobacco Media
Group and may not be reproduced in any manner without the expressed written consent of Tobacco