Sutliff Tobacco Company Blend No.5

This is a nice middle English, but unfortunately it has the chemical taste of many aromatics. This is cased with vanilla or maple and was quite appealing at first. This burned really well and the smoke was creamy. The Burley and Virginias were very nice and there was a wonderful nutty aroma. Still I could not get past the chemical taste/aftertaste. Probably will be the last time I try and AroEnglish blend...have been disappointed too many times. If you happen to like these types of hybrid blends, definitely try this.

Smoke in peace.

There is a dirty little secret in the cigar world: Many of the major manufacturers will market the same cigar blend under several different labels - and Altadis is one of the major culprits. Frinstance, they might take a rather generic blend and market it as a cigar shop's "house bundles," then market it as another two of three different bundled brands, and then again as two or three different box cigar brands - but give them different bands and packaging. Slightly dishonest, maybe, but they sell a lot of cigars and have a wide range of products to offer to people with wide income ranges.

They now seem to be doing this to pipe tobacco, and I suspect that Sutliff Number Five is one such example. It strongly reminds me of the first English blend I ever tired - some bulk "house blend" that I bought at a shop somewhere near Annapolis, MD, back in 1987. It was called "Lord Limey" or some such silly name. I suspect this is the same blend, only sold in a tin to make it appear "high class." I know I've saw and smelled this blend being sold as a "House Blend" in a cigar shop up in Fort Worth.

That being said, this is not a bad beginner's blend. It's mild, well-behaved, and provides a pipe smoker who is new to English blends with a smoke that is not so rich in Latakia that it sends them repelling in horror. It's actually not a bad smoke - just to bland for my preferences. It is also too expensive for what you get. (I got this for free as a promotional from Altadis, and it will go into my cellar to be used as a fall back if I run out of other English blends).

Since I suspect that Altadis simply "put lipstick on a pig" with this blend, I think the newby English Smoker would be better served to go with a B&M "House Blend" cuz chances are it will be an Altadis Bulk, probably this blend anyway, at about half the price.

I don't think this is a bad blend, but considering that I think it is simply a basic bulk blend that Altadis has canned and doubled-up on the price, I cannot recommend this to anybody.

I was gifted a 1.5 ounce tin of this tobacco this past week. I spent most of the weekend smoking this blend only to get a good review formed. I must admit that I was kind of skeptical of liking this because #1 it is made by Altadis and #2 not being real impressed with the original MM965. But, I have been very pleasantly surprised by this blend. My experience with MM965 was early on in my quest of getting away from the aros that I used to smoke exclusively. So, I chalk that review up to inexperience. Upon opening the tin, it was loosly packed and at the right moisture level for me. This one here seems to have a mild to medium spiceiness in the first 1/3 to 1/2 of the bowl and then the Va and burley seems to calm things down quite nicely. This could very well be an all day smoke for some. The price does seem to be rather reasonable on several online stores. I may have to invest in more of this fine weed.

Right up front, one is confronted with a comparison of Blend No. 5 and Dunhill 965. Are they the same, are they similar, or, are they different? 965 is a four tobacco blend and No. 5 is a three tobacco blend and, that, makes them different. I loaded two pipes that are from the same maker (Ashton Pebble Grains) with identically shaped chambers; placing 965 in one and No. 5 in the other. I smoked them, more or less, simultaneously down to the heels. They performed very similarly in their top thirds; nearly identically. At the crossover point to the middle thirds, they began to diverge. The 965 began a new path that was a softer and more rounded smoke, while the No. 5 continued in a straight line down a very familiar Virginia/Burley/Latakia path that I have traveled many times with many English blends over the years. This divergence continued into the bottom thirds and widened. I enjoyed both smokes and feel that the No. 5 finished with a little more gusto. Oddly, the two blends look very similar in color range with the No. 5 having a rougher cut than the 965. I felt when I reviewed it that 965 was a four star blend. I feel the same way about Sutliff's Blend No. 5 and can easily give it the four stars it deserves. Just for the record; my 965 was a Murray's mid-nineties bulk product and my No. 5 was from a 2010 tin that got misplaced in my local brick and mortar.

This was a weird one to me in the respect that I would rate the first half as a two star blend and the second half as a four star blend. This is just how the blend effected my tastebuds, and as always, YMMV.

It happened this way with every bowl that I had from my tin. The first half was rough and edgy with latakia dominating the show silencing all other ingredients and then, at about the halfway mark, a nutty sweetness developed and it just sort of smoothed the smoke out and made for a highly enjoyable finish.

In terms of rating this blend on the whole is not an easy task, it seems that if you start and 2 and end at four stars then this should rate at 3, but that confounds logic as to what the ratings mean. I would not recommend this blend due to this inconsistency in taste. I did not like the flavor of the first half and there are many other blends that offer a full bowl's worth of the sumptuous flavor I tasted at the end. In terms with the latter thought, I would rather smoke some of Peter Stokkebye's English Luxury than BN5 and that is a very inexpensive bulk blend.

Although I would not recommend this blend the flavor in the second half does earn this one more than one star. Overall, this is not a bad blend, and someone who enjoys shifting flavors may really like this one. It is just not my cup of tea.

I do not see, or taste, the comparison to 965. This is a different animal than Dunhill's 965. This is a nice English/Balkan with some spice. It's not overwhelming in the latakia department. (I am a major latakia-phile, so that's a minus, but it may be a plus for some.)

It's a nice smoke, but did not make a huge impression on me. Probably better for those who are newer to Englishes.

Ok, so, latakia is not one of my favorite condiment tobacco. I've tried a couple of English blends in the past and found them to smell and taste of road tar from the latakia. I tried the Holiday Mixture Match from the same blender and found it to be a very good blend with its hint of latakia--maybe I was missing out on a style of tobacco that so many others seem to love.

My problem with Blend No. 5 isn't the latakia (I've sorta steeled myself to whatever the content level is here) but with the blend itself. Something seems to be missing. The blend isn't necessarily flat. The upper levels of taste are there--it's the bottom that is lacking, like it needs more burley or something to fill it out.

Maybe my palate isn't sophisticated enough to appreciate this blend adequately. The nicotine level is appropriate. There are ocassions I actually want to smoke No. 5. I never come away feeling satisfied though.

Rating this is tough for me. The constituents seem to be quality stuff. The blend has not converted me into a fan of latakia. I'll rate it Somewhat Recommended but it's probably better than that.

I tried this blend based on the output from the company website application to help find my perfect blend. I took the quizzing twice to make sure and then bought a tin of this and Bosphorus Cruise as well.

Some reviewers found no toppings in Blend No. 5. I, however, was immediately reminded of Esoterica's St. Ives as soon as match hit the leaves. I did not like St. Ives at all. The topping here is not heavy but the flavor is nearly (if not exactly) what they put on R Blend. With this blend the heavy Latakia masks the topping, but it's there.

I wish I could post that I just confused Blend No 5 and R Blend, that I ghosted my pipes, that I smoked them too close together in time. But none of that is so. I had long finished my tin of this blend and cleaned my pipes many times before I ever opened the R Blend. Such a shame because sans topping this is a super blend with a wonderful tin note and in well prepared ribbons. I will still give this 3 stars because I know my aversion to flavorings (most of them anyway) should not override a decent blend.

I know Dunhill My Mixture #965. Dunhill My Mixture #965 is a dear friend of mine, and mister your no Dunhill My Mixture #965. Otherwise, OK if that's all that's available at the time.