Sutliff Tobacco Company 200 Red Wine

The mild tempered, light-bodied 200 Red Wine bring a sluicing of Bright and Red Virginia with a reserved measure of sweetened Black Cavendish. Very much an entry level-low budget blending, the mixture is matured with what Sutliff has coined a choice California vintage extract. Given the abundance of choices who can rightly say which concentrated derivative was precisely employed.

Based upon general appearances, 200 Red Wine seems to be spiked with a more extensive portion of the Bright leaf to Red but not by much. The nicer Red strain indicates some degree of aged fermentation and extended seasoning. Very conservative on the volume of Black Cavendish with this mesh of twisted and jangled fine ribbon and dissimilar coarse-cut flakes. Projections of light fawn, chestnut, red-gold and red-brown form the palate of coloring. Overall, I will say the conditional texture of the tobacco in some cases looks a little sub-standard. This may suggest some level of leaf inferiority or lower grading/processing, just a speculation on my part, but noted irregularity I think. For an aromatic, the mixture is categorically dry to the touch.

No mistaking the fragrance of rich grape that lies churning within as the aroma permeates the exterior of the bag, it is really that strong. On the other hand, this overbearing essence does indeed possess a sweet aromatic and vibrant nature. With full nosed exposure, the sincere fruitiness within the pouch expresses a more genteel upgrading. Specifically, there is a flower-like quality rendered as if the projections were originating from the succulence of blossoming lilacs, kind of nice and refreshing to be honest. Other than the commanding grape perfume there is a tiny waft of suppressed tartness and dulled ticklish spice that just eeks through with passive enunciation.

So, in swirling the glass what gets reflected upon the tasting? Essentially the mixture’s central character is all about the topping which egregiously sweety-sweet grape. Not to be mean spirited but completely honest, the featured one-colored flavor, concentrated black-skinned varietal, crosses into the harrowing realm of the #1 celebrated grape Kool Aid and that of a grape Jolly Rancher hard candy. Based upon the branded name, I had hoped for something more refined like a nice stylish Merlot or Cabernet flair, silly me.

Red Wine, it seems, is more aligned with I guess that chintzy Two Buck Chuck brand ripple variety at that. Hey, you get what you pay for. This is a universal truth so don’t blame me. The fact of the matter is that there is very little evidence of any notable tannic wine affluence despite Sutcliff’s elegant marketing reference to a smart California vintage source. What little degree of accenting that reads throughs offers a mere tinge of gingery spiciness and fermented dark berry-like fruit. This element has a marginally Syrah-like undertone and with that statement I am being generously polite.

This heavily dominating and dense topping seems to be prevalent for about two-thirds of the bowl then attenuates gradually leaving just a slightly sweetened air for the bowl-ending taste. With that transition, the naturally subdued native tobacco components do experience a short-lived freedom to voice their presence finally within the taste song. Even so, the associated magnitude of the natural strains provides for a weak resonance of melodious tenor.

Primarily, the baseline Virginia sounds a meager restrain of tangy citrus, tartness, but more so a darker floral wood if anything. Whereas the Black Cavendish remains categorically scattered only adding a few infrequent notes of sugary starched woodiness perhaps amplified by a vanilla casing as that remarking seem to be floating within the registered highlights. Short of these quick passing ambiences, the blend finishes with an undistinguishing feel of sugared hot air.

Given the extended Bright content and significance of the applied topping, 200 Red Wine encounters with double whammy of contentiousness. Namely, the blend does harbor a blemish of indelicate roughness in texture, enough to perceivably be construed as disturbing. Most likely the extended sugar content and the heightened heat that is generated necessitates a more reserved cadence or at possession of a leather-clad palate to effectively smoke this one without some level of irritation. Incidentally I found the best smoking results were via a hardwood cob as the blend seem to soften, while opening up a bit more of the flavor as well.

Presumably the room presence of this mixture could be deemed pleasant to tolerable as it projects a big note of candied grape fruitiness of course, but not much else that I could consistently decipher. I will say the clouds of vapors that are produced are nothing to scoff at, as it does stoke fairly well in that regard. So, two pluses on mechanical features goes to the subject test sample.

As 200 Red Wine belted out its standard chorus, however, the voice inside was not soulful enough to sing to, let alone, move me. Unfortunately, my expectation for an appetizing wine-themed blending definitely missed the mark or spilled clumsily I should say. Yet I’m guessing for those pipers out there that like that grape centric experience, you probably would like 200 Red Wine. Do please take a sip if you feel so inclined. This tobacco is just not the vintage I care to fill my pipe with, but you never know on these matters until you try them. And in the thrill of trying, I do find personal pleasure even if it does taste like grape Kool Aid. 2.1 Pipes