Scandinavian Tobacco Group (STG) Sir Walter Raleigh Aromatic
(3.01)
A unique blend of aged tobaccos moistened with imported French and Dutch liqueurs for a rich aroma and a mellow, comfortable smoke. Our unique combination of tobaccos is aged just long enough to ripen to maturity. Then, it is lightly sprinkled with three imported liqueurs to provide this blend with its distinctive aroma and a satisfying taste.
Notes: Production in the United States was moved overseas in 2021.
Details
| Brand | Scandinavian Tobacco Group (STG) |
| Blended By | Scandinavian Tobacco Group |
| Manufactured By | Scandinavian Tobacco Group |
| Blend Type | Aromatic |
| Contents | Burley, Virginia |
| Flavoring | Alcohol / Liquor |
| Cut | Coarse Cut |
| Packaging | 1.5 ounce pouch, 12 ounce can |
| Country | United States |
| Production | Currently available |
Profile
Strength
Mild
Extremely Mild -> Overwhelming
Flavoring
Mild
None Detected -> Extra Strong
Room Note
Pleasant
Unnoticeable -> Overwhelming
Taste
Mild to Medium
Extremely Mild (Flat) -> Overwhelming
Average Rating
|
3.01 / 4
|
Reviews
Please login to post a review.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 12 Reviews
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2014 | Mild | Medium | Mild | Pleasant |
Presentation is thin ribbon, almost a RYO/shag cut- very different than SWR regular, which is more of a traditional OTC crimp cut.  Pouch note is of dried, candied cherries, with some chocolate undertones and the slightest hint of aniseed. I get no liqueur in the pouch note. The tobacco was very dry, which may have just been a function of the age of my particular pouch, ie. how long it sat on the shelf. As such, it took a match well and a single light was all it took to get it going. There was no ritual of charring light followed by true light given how well this blend ignited.
The initial light brought a flavor very similar to the pouch note: a touch of sweet cocoa, a touch of candied cherry, a hint of aniseed, and something I can't quite identify but would characterize as a stereotypical, old-timey, "grandpa's pipe" flavor.  As the bowl progresses, the flavor takes on a slightly sour and vaguely unpleasant note akin to cherries and chocolate past their expiration date.  What I'm picking up here, similar to Half and Half, is some potentially interesting flavoring agents applied to some poor quality tobaccos.  There's a funky chemical taste to this blend that does nothing to improve upon the original. I am somewhat skeptical as to the "imported French and Dutch liqueurs". And I detect no liqueur, European or otherwise, on the palette.
Mrs Perique approved of the room note, though I was less than pleased with the flavor. Overall, I was unimpressed with this blend, even when ranked among its OTC peers.  The thinner ribbon causes this blend to burn fast, and the chemical agents cause it to burn hot. The smoke and the flavors are very thin, with no mouth-feel to speak of.  Sir Walter Raleigh regular is, in my opinion, a better blend.  But with the vast sea of American-style aromatics out there, it's hard to rate either very highly. SWR Aro, unfortunately, ranks below SWR regular, itself a two star blend (though a decent OTC). I cannot, however, recommend the "Aromatic" version. The only positive thing I can say is that it didn't bite.
Update: this blend is improved by mixing roughly 50/50 with Sir Walter Raleigh (regular).
The initial light brought a flavor very similar to the pouch note: a touch of sweet cocoa, a touch of candied cherry, a hint of aniseed, and something I can't quite identify but would characterize as a stereotypical, old-timey, "grandpa's pipe" flavor.  As the bowl progresses, the flavor takes on a slightly sour and vaguely unpleasant note akin to cherries and chocolate past their expiration date.  What I'm picking up here, similar to Half and Half, is some potentially interesting flavoring agents applied to some poor quality tobaccos.  There's a funky chemical taste to this blend that does nothing to improve upon the original. I am somewhat skeptical as to the "imported French and Dutch liqueurs". And I detect no liqueur, European or otherwise, on the palette.
Mrs Perique approved of the room note, though I was less than pleased with the flavor. Overall, I was unimpressed with this blend, even when ranked among its OTC peers.  The thinner ribbon causes this blend to burn fast, and the chemical agents cause it to burn hot. The smoke and the flavors are very thin, with no mouth-feel to speak of.  Sir Walter Raleigh regular is, in my opinion, a better blend.  But with the vast sea of American-style aromatics out there, it's hard to rate either very highly. SWR Aro, unfortunately, ranks below SWR regular, itself a two star blend (though a decent OTC). I cannot, however, recommend the "Aromatic" version. The only positive thing I can say is that it didn't bite.
Update: this blend is improved by mixing roughly 50/50 with Sir Walter Raleigh (regular).
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Sep 24, 2009 | Mild to Medium | Medium to Strong | Medium | Overwhelming |
I'm a big fan of aromatics and I a fan of SWR regular. I am NOT a fan at all of SWR aromatic. It smells interesting in the pouch. Loads well, lights well no relighting necessary. First light the flavor was ok but after the initial puff it was one of the weirdest flavors I've ever encountered. To me it has a musty, mediciney flavor. Kind of like somebody dumped Nyquil on some burley and kept it in a warm damp space for a few years. Further I smoked the flavor turned to SafeGuard soap. I'm glad I smoked this with a corn cob and not one of my briars. I'll stick to regular SWR. This one just isn't for me.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 2008 | Very Mild | Mild | Extremely Mild (Flat) | Pleasant |
Weak , tasteless , boring. Gave the rest away.
NEXT!!!
NEXT!!!
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 2015 | Mild to Medium | Very Mild | Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
On the positive side, it lit well and stayed lit. However, I really did not enjoy this smoke. I was a little harsh almost tasting more like a cigarette. I gave up drug store brands several years ago opting for more custom blends, maybe I am turning into a tobacco snob, but I won't even finish the pouch.
Pipe Used:
New Cob
PurchasedFrom:
Local
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Oct 04, 2014 | Mild | Mild | Mild | Tolerable |
It smelled interesting in the pouch, sort of fruity, and brown-sugary sweet. Like raisins in molasses. If only it would've tasted like that.....
After lighting it, my tongue felt like it had been sprayed with hydrochloric acid. This is the 2nd worse tongue-bite I have ever experienced (the worse was Middleton's Apple). After allowing t to settle down, all I got was a cough-syupy taste, and a little cigarette tobacco flavor. The room note was of burned molasses. The tongue bite continued, and was so bad I couldn't finish the bowl.
I would definitely recommend that you buy something else.
After lighting it, my tongue felt like it had been sprayed with hydrochloric acid. This is the 2nd worse tongue-bite I have ever experienced (the worse was Middleton's Apple). After allowing t to settle down, all I got was a cough-syupy taste, and a little cigarette tobacco flavor. The room note was of burned molasses. The tongue bite continued, and was so bad I couldn't finish the bowl.
I would definitely recommend that you buy something else.
Pipe Used:
Missouri Meerschaum Rob Roy Legend bent
PurchasedFrom:
Bi-Lo
Age When Smoked:
55
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Dec 29, 2004 | Mild | Mild | Mild to Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
The pouch I bought was dry and the tobacco smelled of maple and coffee to me. Very pleasant. It was very easy to light. It produced a prodigious amount of light grey smoke, and the flavor was mild and pleasant to start. However, much like its drabber sibling, it turns very sour halfway through the bowl. I can't imagine going through a 12-14 ounce tin of this stuff. But I know there are many who do. If you enjoy sour flavors this stuff might work for you. The room note is nice, and the aftertaste is very much like boiled peanuts.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Aug 02, 2004 | Mild | Very Mild | Very Mild | Pleasant to Tolerable |
At its best, this blend tastes like a dry-cured Henri Wintermann cigar. Often, it's just an unremarkable Burley. Sometimes, it's tingly and bitter and un-fun. It's not bad, though, if something of a weak sister in the flavor department, and for me it doesn't bite. I don't taste a lot of difference between this and the non-aromatic version, and I don't feel any compelling need to smoke it again. If you're stranded without tobacco somewhere, though, and all you can find is drugstore tobacco, this is one of the best of the lot. For me, smokes noticeably better in a meerschaum.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Mar 27, 2004 | Extremely Mild | Extremely Mild | Very Mild | Very Pleasant |
Sir Walter is a classic that I felt I had to try at least once. Once was enough.
The pouch aroma was just so-so. A bit on the weak side. Smelled more like burley than liquor, which surprised me. The ribbon cut packed and lit well.
Lighting was easy, and it stayed lit well. The taste was very weak, but it sure did let me know it was there - it bit like a cornered wolverine. I didn't expect that from a burley blend. I smoke burley a lot, and have never gotten bitten like this.
Left the bowl fairly dry, Subsequent smokes of this blend were about the same as the first try - though I did manage to get the bite somewhat under control.
In the end, it is too much work to keep it from biting badly, and the flavor returned for your efforts just isn't worth it. Many suggest this for the first time smoker. I disagree - it's too quick to bite the unwary.
The pouch aroma was just so-so. A bit on the weak side. Smelled more like burley than liquor, which surprised me. The ribbon cut packed and lit well.
Lighting was easy, and it stayed lit well. The taste was very weak, but it sure did let me know it was there - it bit like a cornered wolverine. I didn't expect that from a burley blend. I smoke burley a lot, and have never gotten bitten like this.
Left the bowl fairly dry, Subsequent smokes of this blend were about the same as the first try - though I did manage to get the bite somewhat under control.
In the end, it is too much work to keep it from biting badly, and the flavor returned for your efforts just isn't worth it. Many suggest this for the first time smoker. I disagree - it's too quick to bite the unwary.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Mar 07, 2014 | Mild | Medium | Mild to Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
I bought a pouch and couldnt finish it, horrid stuff that wouldnt stay lit and burned hot. Id be interested to try it in the large can to see if its any better, i find that tobacco brands can be spoiled in the pouch and are often better in tin or can. This blend certainly has a large loyal following with positive reviews so ill have to revisit it at some point. All i can say is the pouch i got was rubbish.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Feb 09, 2021 | Mild | Mild to Medium | Mild to Medium | Pleasant |
The tobacco is high quality, you can tell that when you open the tin. Unfortunately, it has a licorice flavor in the form of anise which I detest. I am sure, however, that a lot of people like it.
Pipe Used:
Cob
PurchasedFrom:
Local
Age When Smoked:
Fresh
target="_blank"
