G. L. Pease Montgomery

Virginias, Virginias, Virginias! Several grades of wonderful flue-cured leaf, from soft yellow to deep red, are combined with just a touch of dark-fired Kentucky for a little added richness. A special process, recovered from ancient archives, provides the finishing touch to this wonderful blend. Naturally sweet, and possessing subtle complexity, Montgomery presents delightful new dimensions for the lover of sophisticated Virginia blends.
Notes: Montgomery was released in March, 2005.


Brand G. L. Pease
Series Fog City Selection
Blended By Gregory Pease
Manufactured By Cornell & Diehl
Blend Type Virginia/Burley
Contents Kentucky, Virginia
Cut Ribbon
Packaging 2 ounce tin, 8 ounce tin
Country United States
Production Currently available


Mild to Medium
Extremely Mild -> Overwhelming
None Detected
None Detected -> Extra Strong
Room Note
Unnoticeable -> Overwhelming
Mild to Medium
Extremely Mild (Flat) -> Overwhelming

Average Rating

3.18 / 4





Please login to post a review.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 13 Reviews
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Nov 27, 2015 Mild to Medium Extremely Mild Mild to Medium Pleasant
I am an unabashed fan of G.L. Pease tobaccos. When Montgomery debuted as a Pease Virginia offering some ten years ago in the Fog City Collection, I purchased it with high hopes. I was mildly disappointed. My lack of enthusiasm came not from discovering Montgomery to be a mediocre pipe tobacco. Rather I was disappointed in not rating it as outstanding.

Opening the tin I discovered a mostly mahogany colored ribbon with a natural smell not unlike that of Orlik Golden Sliced. Many tinned tobaccos are overly moist upon opening. I rated the moisture level of Montgomery as ideal. It lit easily, and was easily kept going with the sipping puffing style favorable for Virginia based smokes. Virginias can present a tongue bite problem, but a gentle puff rate will suffice to keep bite negligible for most smokers. Those with sensitive tongues may find it bitey, but not to a degree different from other Virginia based blends.

The red and lighter Virginias produced a grassy with citrus overtone taste that was perfectly fine. With the Virginias alone, the taste would be light. But Montgomery also has a Kentucky (smoked burley) element that ups the taste to a point squarely between light and medium. The room note is pleasant, natural tobacco, and will offend none but the anti-tobacco Nazis.

Montgomery offers a pleasant smoke, on the lighter side of the spectrum, with a very low nicotine presence. It burns to a very light grey ash, and leaves negligible dottle at the conclusion of the smoke.

So what is wrong with Montgomery? Not a thing! The only reason I award it only two stars is that there are a myriad of other Virginia based pipe smokes I like even better. Such as? Orlik Golden Sliced, Hamborger Veermaster, Dunhill Flake, Samuel Gawith Best Brown Flake and Full Virginia Flake, a bevy of Fribourg and Treyers, and an even larger contingent of McClellands.

I have smoked Montgomery several times since first trying it a decade ago. My judgement remains the same. Montgomery is a very fine light to medium Virginia offering which suffers only from comparison to a considerable number of other blends.
13 people found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Oct 13, 2017 Mild Mild Medium to Full Pleasant to Tolerable
A sweet, quick-burning, fine short ribbon with fruit overtones from a casing or topping (the "ancient archives" part). The tin note is peach, berry, and a bit of raisin, not much of the typical grass and hay you might associate with a Virginia. It is well made and easy smoking but can also bite easily like any tobacco of this type. In all aspects it seems practically identical to the Dunhill Three Year Matured Virginia from the 1970s and 1980s (I haven't tried the current one). That tobacco is what immediately popped to mind when I opened the tin, although I hadn't smoked it in over thirty years. Montgomery also has a touch of dark fired Kentucky, which seems pointless to me because it is so minute as to be undetectable. Overall a good example of a moderately cased/topped ripe Virginia in the English style. Add Perique to this and you'll get Dunhill Elizabethan.
Pipe Used: small billiards and dublins
Age When Smoked: fresh from tin
5 people found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Oct 18, 2009 Mild to Medium None Detected Mild to Medium Tolerable
I don't get along well with Old Monty. You see, I met him by accident. He showed up at my door in place of Mr. West, who I've been looking to meet for several weeks now. I was agitated by his presence from the beginning, and swore that I wouldn't even bother introducing myself. After two days, realizing that he wouldn't leave (and an assurance that Mr. West was on his way), I decided to get acquainted with Monty.

Ok, this makes no sense. Short story, my order of Westminster was switched out with Montgomery by mistake. In the end, this turned out to be a free tin of tobacco, so I shouldn't be complaining. But..

When I decided to crack the tin, I was underwhelmed. There was a grassy like odor emanating about (it's alright, I like that), the tobacco itself composed of blond strands with a spattering of dark leaf (I'm guessing the Kentucky falls in at less than five percent). The tobacco was uncharacteristically damp for a Pease blend, leading to packing, lighting and biting issues. The smoke was unexciting, to be blunt. Nothing terribly wrong here--good leaf, wonderful presentation. Just rather ordinary, which is not something I've come to expect of Pease.

I don't know. I guess I've grown accustomed to Virginias in flake form. It seems proper. The ribbon is straightforward, but with a small component of condimental leaf, it's hard to include a balanced amount in any one pinch that fills a bowl. Not that the Virginia in Montgomery depends upon the Kentucky...it's tasty enough on its own, but tame. The Fog City series is all about the Virginia, and that's exactly what this is, so I'd be a bit of a jackass to suggest something is missing (Syrian).

Now curious, I read the Briar and Leaf Chronicle on Montgomery. Greg stressed its potential for aging (very true), and defended himself against those who called the tobacco "green". Well, I didn't see any green tobacco, and I picked around in that tin for a few good minutes. It wasn't young, or sharp, in my estimation, though this blend was dated August, 2009.

Mr. Montgomery isn't all that bad. But I'm not sure I'd introduce him to my friends. They're horrible people.

Three of Five.
3 people found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Mar 23, 2007 Mild None Detected Mild Pleasant to Tolerable
I looked forward to trying this blend and I cracked open a tin that was a little over a year old. Like a couple of previous reviewers, I found Montgomery to present ?upper register VA flavors.? However, also like a couple of previous reviewers noted, this blend lacks strength / nicotine. As a consequence, I futilely and perhaps unconsciously puffed faster and harder than I normally do in an attempt to extract some strength that this blend does not offer. This left me frustrated and made for a most unpleasant smoking experience. I also didn?t care for the occasional ?nasal passage tingle? that some pipesters like. If you like or wish to try a mild and sophisticated ?light tea? Virginia, Montgomery is definitely one of them in this genre? and one you will probably enjoy. If, however, you like VAs with more strength, you are best advised to fill your pipe with something else. Because of the lack of strength and ?tingle? factors, I cannot give MONTGOMERY the ?FULL MONTY? (four stars), I can give it only a ?HALF MONTY? (two stars).

A cigarette is to be smoked. A cigar is to be enjoyed. A pipe is to be savored.

I rate this blend 7.6 out of 10.
3 people found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Nov 22, 2012 Mild to Medium None Detected Mild to Medium Unnoticeable
I had a tin of this at the same time I was smoking a tin of 2003 Christmas Cheer. CC was much better so I lost interest in Montgomery half way through the tin. I remember liking it some but obviously not enough to smoke the whole tin. To be fair, I might oughta give it a shot again sometime.
2 people found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Jul 08, 2011 Mild to Medium None Detected Extremely Mild (Flat) Pleasant to Tolerable
This has been the only G. L. Pease blend that has been a truly dissapointment. Acquire this tin on one of my virginias phases, hoping to find a rich and tasty experience. What I got was an insipid smoke.

Upon opening the tin you will find a fluffy light brown blend. It has very mono-tone tobacco ribons. The smell on the tin is delicous: bread, hay and a hit of dried ruits (date?). That was probably the best part of this tobacco.

The smoking experience was flat all along. Tried different bowl sizes, but got the same results. I was even more wet than I expected. I beg to differ: this tobacco has no "subtle complexity". Just plain subtleness.
2 people found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Nov 22, 2011 Medium None Detected Mild to Medium Tolerable
Very high quality tobaccos with a heady tin note of apples, raisins and yeasty bread. Yum!

The smoke is somewhat sweet, with a bright Virginia taste predominant. Nothing harsh about it. Nice tobacco.

However, this blend is oddly astringent, sort of like strong tea or red wine, but more like sucking on an oak chip - very woody and astringent. From start to finish. And unfortunately this pretty much ruins the blend for me. Maybe your experience will be different.
1 person found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Sep 17, 2005 Mild None Detected Mild to Medium Pleasant
Notes: I smoked about 100g of this in various pipes and found it best in a tall thin billiard.

Appearance: a slightly thick cut ribbon mostly of light golden Virginia with some dark flecks and some ribbon cut burley.

Aroma: Spicy and sharp upon the nose unsmoked with suggestions of cherries, raisins, dried blueberries and honey.

Taste: This is a quite straightforward Virginia blend with some Burley to give it good burning characteristics. The burley does not really assert itself substantially in the flavor except to add a bit of complexity and mellowness. As with the lion's share of Mr. Pease's blends, the tobacco leaf is both top grade and relatively immature. I feel that his tobacco blends are best kept in the tin for the better part of a decade before they can be appreciated. Earlier sampling leads to a harsher smoke with unwedded flavors and tongue bite.

The interesting thing about this blend is that it presents many of the flavors found in VA blends after a few decades of aging. The tobacco flavor is very up front but the blend of leaves is rather complex, with hints of dried hay, elm wood, and berries. While mild, I would not describe this blend as subtle. Mr. Pease's style is frequently for an overpowering "knockout punch" of flavors crammed into a tin of tobacco, and this is no exception. I liken GLP blends to lion tamers at the circus -- they are wonderfully entertaining at the time, but I wouldn't want them in my home on a daily basis. As alluring as GLP blends are, ultimately I find his allure meretricious.

Montgomery is as varied and rich a mild blend as you will find. I personally don't think this is always a good idea. There is also very little sweetness so aging may be disappointing, leading to a flatter flavor. Thus, the blend presents a paradox in that the leaves need time to mature, but the flavor will likely diminish with time.

Comparisons: Not as nutty as Dunhill's Light Flake, not as sweet as Rattray's Marlin Flake. In some sense, a much diminished version of the old Balkan Sobranie Virginia Flake, for those who remember it.

Bottom Line: A blend best smoked within a year or so. If you enjoy straightahead dry Virginia flavors in a mild smoke and have good smoking technique to avoid tongue bite, you may enjoy this one.
1 person found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Aug 13, 2010 Mild to Medium None Detected Mild Tolerable
Subtle indeed - so subtle that I regretted purchasing it for the first several bowls. When the tin was new, it came across as just plain bland and my wife opined that it smelled like cigarettes.

My experience with Montgomery now is that it can be a pleasant smoke - if smoked in a narrow chamber that has been well-seasoned with the smoking of Virginia leaf (seems to fall flat for me in wider bores), in pleasant weather, with a very clear nose. My tin is now about 2 years old and I believe that helped. Smoked slowly, it yields a soft, subtle sweetness with malty, wheat-like notes. The Kentucky leaf is used very sparsely, and I wish there was more of it, as it lends much-needed depth when it does come through. Otherwise, smoking Montgomery is like listening to Charles Mingus with the bass turned all the way down. It is undoubtedly a thing of quality, but I feel there is something missing.
0 people found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.
Reviewed By Date Rating Strength Flavoring Taste Room Note
Jan 04, 2009 Mild to Medium None Detected Mild to Medium Pleasant to Tolerable
This is my least favorite of the Pease blends I have tried thus far. I can't put my finger on it but I think Barbary Coast is a much nicer offering with a bit more Burley. If oyu like a good straight Virginia with just a hint of Burley you will like this. I can't find a way to give it three stars although it has mellowed out in the past couple of weeks, but when I fist got it it was much more harsh. 2.4 stars
0 people found this review helpful.
Please login to upvote this review.