Dunhill Durbar

My first experience with Durbar was this 1999 tin (so, Murray's), opened in 2009.

This is a delicious, full-strength oriental blend, with occasional cigar overtones and an enveloping richness. At moments, it veers into harshness, given the strength of its oriental tobaccos and its fairly high nicotine level (for an oriental/English).

At 10 years old, this stuff doesn't show any signs of fading.

Highly recommended if you prefer stronger blends; for those who prefer something a bit less forceful, it is still recommended.

I've only smoked the Murray's edition in the early 2000's. It had what I liked about 965 (rich, creamy Virginias, tangy Orientals and a drop dead killer aroma burning), but not 965's detractions (tongue-battering heat, added sweetness). While I consider 965 a Scottish-style Latakia blend, no so with Durbar, which is more a Balkan.

Durbar was tied with London Mixture as my favorite Dunhill tinned blend. I have but one tin left. Hopefully, one day, I'll see an Orlik version to try once Dunhill tobacco starts shipping to the US again.

Rest in peace I will never try to fill your shoes!

This is (was) a very fine blend; tangy, with a hint of sweetness...very smooth. Sadly, it's no longer available. This is very close to 965...perhaps a touch sweeter.

Side by side comparison of Murray's and Orlik. Age difference aside, this is pretty dang close. Either Orlik didn't screw this one up or they inherited some bulk inventory along with the rest of the deal.

Very good Virginia base and quality Orientals. Latakia a bit light, but that's what the blend is aiming for, IMHO. Something to smoke in the tropical heat and humidity. I wonder if Kipling was smoking this when he wrote Gunga Din?

The Orientals do dry the palate somewhat, so care must be exercised during beverage selection, and time of day factored in as well. On a hot afternoon, something sweet and citrusy does it for me. On a sultry evening, something Speyside with a wee drop o' water to open up the pores so-to-speak.

For me a large, wide bowl works best, and at one sitting. DGT brought out some unpleasant sourness and an ashy, burnt toast bitterness that had to be smoked through to reach the pleasant Virginias underneath.

Dang glad I have 20 tins in the cellar.

I got 1 of the last tins available and loved it! A very classic mixture relying heavily on orientals. slightly bitter and very bold. I will be sad when I finish the last of this. 3 of 4 stars.

This review is for a tin of Murray-blended Durbar that is badly dinted.

Tin: smoky smell; brown, light brown and black rough ribbon cut, with some olive. In this dinted Murray tin, the tobacco is barely moist.

Not surprisingly, it stays lit with one match.

Aroma: This is like 965 without brown cavendish, or SM Medium without the VA signature. Durbar smokes like quality stuff, but bland, nothing standing out. It doesn't display much complexity, but again, a mellow, quality tobacco.

Another reviewer described Durbar as flat, insipid, not complex, merely hot and smoky. Again, I was smoking the version blended by Murray, but likewise did not notice any difference between tins of Orlik and Murray-blended Elizabethan that I recently came across.

Taste: Not sweet, but also not harsh, spicey, or tangy either. With absolutely no bite, it has hallmarks of a quality, very smooth smoke. Towards the end of the bowl, a vague hint of a oriental and nutty, woodsy aroma, with no taste.Having recently sampled Rattray's RR, RRR has much more taste and flavor. No latakia blast, less latakia than other Dunhills. Durbar is not full-flavored.

No gurgle, but a slight condensate was left in the stem of the almost dry tobacco from, as of April 2007, an at least 3-year-old tin. Subsequent bowls did produce more moisture.

Nicotine: The tobacconist warned about Durbar being strong stuff. After a bowl, I didn't find it stronger than any other Dunhill, less strong than Elizabethan or Rattray's RR.

Room Note: Light English that soon dissipates.

Overall: Durbar is a very smooth, with no bite, quality tobacco, tending towards bland, with little taste.

This review is for a tin of Murray-blended Durbar that is badly dinted.

Tin: smoky smell; brown, light brown and black rough ribbon cut, with some olive. In this dinted Murray tin, the tobacco is barely moist.

Not surprisingly, it stays lit with one match.

Aroma: This is like 965 without brown cavendish, or SM Medium without the VA signature. Durbar smokes like quality stuff, but bland, nothing standing out. It doesn't display much complexity, but again, a mellow, quality tobacco.

Another reviewer described Durbar as flat, insipid, not complex, merely hot and smoky. Again, I was smoking the version blended by Murray, but likewise did not notice any difference between tins of Orlik and Murray-blended Elizabethan that I recently came across.

Another Dunhill variant. If you like Dunhill in general, you will like it.