Peterson My Mixture 965
(3.18)
Peterson's My Mixture 965 is for the connoisseurs of full bodied tobacco. Choicest small latakia imparts a rich nutty flavor and coolness. Macedonia bright is added for sweetness. Brown cavendish completes this blend beloved by English mixture aficionados.
Notes: From its inception and until 1981, it was produced by Dunhill of London.Production was then transferred to Murrays in Belfast who like Dunhill were owned by Carreras Rothmans. Murrays produced it until late 2004 when BAT, who by that time had taken over Rothmans International, closed the Belfast factory.
Since then it has been produced by Orlik, Denmark, part of the Scandinavian Tobacco Group.
Pipe Tobacco Hall of Fame Inductee.
Formerly known as Dunhill My Mixture 965, STG bought the rights to some Dunhill blends and changed the brand name from "Dunhill" to "Peterson".
Details
| Brand | Peterson |
| Blended By | Dunhill |
| Manufactured By | Scandinavian Tobacco Group |
| Blend Type | English |
| Contents | Cavendish, Latakia, Oriental/Turkish, Virginia |
| Flavoring | |
| Cut | Ribbon |
| Packaging | 50 grams tin, bulk |
| Country | Denmark |
| Production | Currently available |
Profile
Strength
Medium
Extremely Mild -> Overwhelming
Flavoring
None Detected
None Detected -> Extra Strong
Room Note
Tolerable
Unnoticeable -> Overwhelming
Taste
Medium to Full
Extremely Mild (Flat) -> Overwhelming
Average Rating
|
3.18 / 4
|
Reviews
Please login to post a review.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 47 Reviews
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 06, 2017 | Medium | Extremely Mild | Medium to Full | Tolerable to Strong |
Once upon a time 965 was a blend I puffed at least three times a week for many years and I smoked my last can of ancient vintage in mid-2017 after experiencing a tin of the new stuff I'd recently bought. I was tempted to buy more than one tin of the new by the reviews of gifted writers from the recent crop of pipers. I am relieved that I didn't even though my Dunhill bin is down to the last few dozen tins blended in the 1980s and 90s.
I haven't typed a blow-by-blow compare of the contents and pleasures of my last tin of 3o year old Dunhill 965 with the most recent tin as that would've been too lengthy but I will say that although old and new 965 has a vaguely similar tin aroma and still requires a bit of airing to pack well and combust readily, the similarities end about there. Now I admit my mouth is old and probably unable to note the finer nuances of taste and smell that younger pipers can and though my ability to describe a smoking experience is not wondrous fair, after almost a half century of pipe smoking I believe the 2017 version of 965 is nothing more than a counterfeit - and a bad one at that. To me it's almost devoid of the finer qualities it once had.
I could not smoke a complete bowl of the new 965 as I found little in it pleasurable and a lot that provoked me. It's a harsh, pungent smoke that often crossed my line of tolerance for heat, sourness and nasty aftertaste. I can't promote this 'Scottish Blend' to any pipe smoker let alone a Scot.
I gave up on Dunhill about 2005 after some not-so-subtle changes to my Dunhill favourites. These changes were all to the worse and likely caused by many things such as small tobacco farms in faraway lands forced into government control that dictated what leaf was planted and how it had to be grown, harvested and cured, as well as the end of so many traditional family tobacco farms by educated sons and daughters who moved to the city in pursuit of better education and a modern lifestyle. Perhaps these things were inevitable but what's truly maddening was the utter destruction of so many worthy old brands and blends caused by the insatiable desire for market control by monolithic, soulless corporations propelled solely by greed. Other changes to the pipe tobacco landscape have been brought about by the fast times we live in and the image consciousness of recent generations who've chosen the quick and nasty stogie over the slower and more skillful craft of the pipe.
My Mixture 965? Move along here... this is not the tobacco you want.
I haven't typed a blow-by-blow compare of the contents and pleasures of my last tin of 3o year old Dunhill 965 with the most recent tin as that would've been too lengthy but I will say that although old and new 965 has a vaguely similar tin aroma and still requires a bit of airing to pack well and combust readily, the similarities end about there. Now I admit my mouth is old and probably unable to note the finer nuances of taste and smell that younger pipers can and though my ability to describe a smoking experience is not wondrous fair, after almost a half century of pipe smoking I believe the 2017 version of 965 is nothing more than a counterfeit - and a bad one at that. To me it's almost devoid of the finer qualities it once had.
I could not smoke a complete bowl of the new 965 as I found little in it pleasurable and a lot that provoked me. It's a harsh, pungent smoke that often crossed my line of tolerance for heat, sourness and nasty aftertaste. I can't promote this 'Scottish Blend' to any pipe smoker let alone a Scot.
I gave up on Dunhill about 2005 after some not-so-subtle changes to my Dunhill favourites. These changes were all to the worse and likely caused by many things such as small tobacco farms in faraway lands forced into government control that dictated what leaf was planted and how it had to be grown, harvested and cured, as well as the end of so many traditional family tobacco farms by educated sons and daughters who moved to the city in pursuit of better education and a modern lifestyle. Perhaps these things were inevitable but what's truly maddening was the utter destruction of so many worthy old brands and blends caused by the insatiable desire for market control by monolithic, soulless corporations propelled solely by greed. Other changes to the pipe tobacco landscape have been brought about by the fast times we live in and the image consciousness of recent generations who've chosen the quick and nasty stogie over the slower and more skillful craft of the pipe.
My Mixture 965? Move along here... this is not the tobacco you want.
Pipe Used:
Half & 3/4 Bent Dunhills, Saveneliis
PurchasedFrom:
United Cigar, Canada (long extinct now)
Age When Smoked:
23 years (more or less)
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Feb 22, 2014 | Medium | None Detected | Mild to Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
Regardless of the famous provenance, this current interpretation is not good, muted, bland, and frankly boring. No further purchases required and I'm not taking the chance of this being an off-batch.
Quite a shame really, I was hoping it might bear some vague resemblance since I adored the Murray's and pre-Murray's versions, purchased in bulk from the Duke street shop. My late pipe-mentor Uncle and I combusted lorry loads of the stuff.
If one is keen to recall the days of yesteryear Compton's York Full Mixture is infinitely better, worth the price and wait at least for me. Old Limey Bastard is superior too, although it does not have the 'transporter' qualities of Compton's.
Quite a shame really, I was hoping it might bear some vague resemblance since I adored the Murray's and pre-Murray's versions, purchased in bulk from the Duke street shop. My late pipe-mentor Uncle and I combusted lorry loads of the stuff.
If one is keen to recall the days of yesteryear Compton's York Full Mixture is infinitely better, worth the price and wait at least for me. Old Limey Bastard is superior too, although it does not have the 'transporter' qualities of Compton's.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Oct 21, 2020 | Medium | Extremely Mild | Mild to Medium | Tolerable |
I really wanted to enjoy this blend and trust me I gave it about 5 years before I posted this review. I tried it new. I aged it a bit. Then I aged it more. Then I aged it a whole bunch. IE, I am currently smoking a jar from 2014. (this review is in 2020.) Honestly, I am still underwhelmed. If this was a blind taste test, I would swear this is a VaPer. The grassy overwhelms any of the supposed English components. This one is bland, biting and just not satisfying for me. I am not a Dunhill or Pete hater. This blend is just not that great. Any, and I mean ANY blend in the GLP lineup blows this away. I am a fan of Nightcap and I like (but dont love) EMP, but I see no reason to have this blend in the rotation. I will not be reupping this one. I have over 100 blends in my library at this point and am on a quest to whittle it down to less than 10 before I retire (quite some time away LOL) so this one is done for me. Once the jar is done, it will never be purchased again. I gave it the old college try, again and again and it just did not make the cut.
Pipe Used:
All
PurchasedFrom:
Yes
Age When Smoked:
All
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Nov 15, 2015 | Very Strong | None Detected | Very Full | Very Strong |
Your Mixture 965, because I want nothing to do with it. I saw this was an all time favorite of Hacker's in his 21st century guide to Pipe smoking, but I found it harsh and abrasive. Perhaps the blend has changed? I tried to cut it down by mixing in some lighter tobaccos. I even named the blend "Handsome Lake" after the famous Native American. But it is still awful, and I have dishonored the name of this important historical figure. All in all, this purchase was a tobacco catastrophe for me, lending me new respect for the art of blending (I'll leave it to the experts), and the knowledge that someone's trusted favorite is not necessarily to be trusted. No thank you.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 19, 2009 | Medium | Extremely Mild | Mild to Medium | Pleasant |
A classic blend, so it seems: so many accolades, and now a Hall of Famer... I just had to try this blend.
It started off poorly, dry and hot like a sunstroked meadow, and it was downhill from there.
There were a few draws that somehow slipped into my mouth that were sorta smooth and pleasant and almost made it seem like tobacco, but most of the time, from my very first puff on, it's been a savagely hot, unpleasant experience. All the notes I was getting from this thing were nothing more than painful noise: any subtle undertones were, for me, smothered by overtones of smoldering rubber or plastic.
I've tried several bowls of this stuff, and this blend is just not for me. I honestly don't know how it's for anybody. Indeed I dislike this blend so much I don't think I'm going to try any other Dunhills, because obviously they're doing something very wrong by my standards. This blend just proves how variable and subjective a thing is taste, because I actively hate this blend. I'm amazed it's in the Hall of Fame (at least for all the wrong reasons 🙂 ).
I seem to be on a radically different page than every other smoker on this one. Since I don't like mysteries in my personal life I will continue to try it once in a great while just to see if I can divine how almost everyone else can possibly enjoy this straw.
UPDATE 10/15/10: I tried it several more times since I wrote my original review, and my experience with it never improved. Indeed I don't know when I've ever hated a blend as much as this one. I gave the tin to another smoker who loves 965 and he said it was fine. Go figure. I don't get it. And yet, having just read denversixstring's review of 10/01/2010 I wonder if that accounts for my experience of this blend since his experience of it ("Horrible. Flat. Nearly tasteless. Hot.") coincides with mine. Maybe he and I were just victims of an errant batch. I don't know. But once bitten, twice shy -- I steer clear of anything with the name Dunhill on it.
It started off poorly, dry and hot like a sunstroked meadow, and it was downhill from there.
There were a few draws that somehow slipped into my mouth that were sorta smooth and pleasant and almost made it seem like tobacco, but most of the time, from my very first puff on, it's been a savagely hot, unpleasant experience. All the notes I was getting from this thing were nothing more than painful noise: any subtle undertones were, for me, smothered by overtones of smoldering rubber or plastic.
I've tried several bowls of this stuff, and this blend is just not for me. I honestly don't know how it's for anybody. Indeed I dislike this blend so much I don't think I'm going to try any other Dunhills, because obviously they're doing something very wrong by my standards. This blend just proves how variable and subjective a thing is taste, because I actively hate this blend. I'm amazed it's in the Hall of Fame (at least for all the wrong reasons 🙂 ).
I seem to be on a radically different page than every other smoker on this one. Since I don't like mysteries in my personal life I will continue to try it once in a great while just to see if I can divine how almost everyone else can possibly enjoy this straw.
UPDATE 10/15/10: I tried it several more times since I wrote my original review, and my experience with it never improved. Indeed I don't know when I've ever hated a blend as much as this one. I gave the tin to another smoker who loves 965 and he said it was fine. Go figure. I don't get it. And yet, having just read denversixstring's review of 10/01/2010 I wonder if that accounts for my experience of this blend since his experience of it ("Horrible. Flat. Nearly tasteless. Hot.") coincides with mine. Maybe he and I were just victims of an errant batch. I don't know. But once bitten, twice shy -- I steer clear of anything with the name Dunhill on it.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Feb 13, 2014 | Medium | Extremely Mild | Mild to Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
At first I gave this two stars because I thought there would be some redeeming quality's if I jarred it for a while, but now I have had enough of this rubbish.
I do not know how people can enjoy this, it's harsh on the back of your throat, the flavour is wishy washy and thin and all in all it's a blemish on the good Dunhill name compared to the masterpieces like Nightcap, London mix and Navy Rolls.
I do not know how people can enjoy this, it's harsh on the back of your throat, the flavour is wishy washy and thin and all in all it's a blemish on the good Dunhill name compared to the masterpieces like Nightcap, London mix and Navy Rolls.
Pipe Used:
Meer lined Dr Plumbs.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Jul 14, 2015 | Medium | Mild | Medium | Tolerable |
This is my first review.Scary or what! When you get folks round for dinner and you bring out a bottle of really expensive and great wine,the comment is usually the same.When you show them your new guitar and play a really difficult piece,the comment is the same.when you show them your new pipe,same thing! I really hate that word NICE😁 ,so trying to find adjectives for the subtleties and nuances of what really is a dried plant,gives pause for thought. Forty years ago,when I had my first pack of Clan and actually enjoyed it (taste often improves with the passage of time),there was a realisation that after years of smoking that junk,that there must be something better out there. Visiting Dunhill's establishment(shop) in Jermyn St. London launched me into a world where NICE did not exist.trying all of the brands was just superduperfabby etc.the cost of a tin in those days,for me was prohibitive,having just graduated. Dunhill's tobacco,together with Balkan Sobranie,was the treat of the day. The flavour,the duration,the undeniable pleasure that My Mixture imparted to myself and all around was not inconsiderable. Some months ago I ordered some from an American company,whose name shall no be mentioned,a pound of loose 965. Even though cheap(inexpensive), I still can't bring myself to shoving it in the bin,where it belongs.Not an iota of similarity to the Dunhill I used to know and love.Flavorless,weak,unstylish,VERY fast burning and all round unpleasant is how I would describe it. I do believe the tins are of a higher quality and look forward to trying them,but,for now,I marvel at the fact that anyone buys this garbage,manufactured and sold by a company that has the audacity to put the Dunhill name on the packet.Enough for now .There's a bad taste in my mouth.Put that in yor pipe and smoke it. Oh yes,and one more thing,this burns faster than a bullet train,which,for a Scotsman is not good! I guess if you buy this in a tin, it could be satisfactory .Will try some this year
Pipe Used:
Dunhill Amber Root
PurchasedFrom:
They might send the boys round
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Mar 15, 2013 | Mild | None Detected | Medium | Tolerable |
I'm not much of a reviewer but I can't sit back and watch all these 4 star reviews of this crap. I've never had any of the Murray's only the Orlik Dunhill blends and this stuff is clearly the worst, in fact it is the only Dunhill blend that I don't love.
It's bland, boring, flavourless and harsh. It has nothing going on and is one of the all around most unsatisfying smokes I've ever had, I had to struggle to finish the tin. I've had 4noggins Owl's Head which is supposed to be a cheap "replacement" for the Murray's MM965 and its way better than this crap. It's pretty sad when a cheap knockoff is better than the real deal, Orlik really screwed up with this blend.
This stuff is a far below average English blend with a premium price tag, Dunhill should be ashamed to put their name on this crap.
It's bland, boring, flavourless and harsh. It has nothing going on and is one of the all around most unsatisfying smokes I've ever had, I had to struggle to finish the tin. I've had 4noggins Owl's Head which is supposed to be a cheap "replacement" for the Murray's MM965 and its way better than this crap. It's pretty sad when a cheap knockoff is better than the real deal, Orlik really screwed up with this blend.
This stuff is a far below average English blend with a premium price tag, Dunhill should be ashamed to put their name on this crap.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2023 | Mild | None Detected | Mild | Tolerable |
Does it take 965 smokes to like this? This is gross.
I picked up a tin of My Mixture 965 seeing the glowing reviews but was disappointed and couldn't finish the first bowl. Tasted like flat leather. I left and packed another bowl several days later. Tasted like flat leather left in the sun.
I threw these flakes from a leathery belt into a mason jar and shut the cupboard. Right next to my Golden Slices.
I picked up a tin of My Mixture 965 seeing the glowing reviews but was disappointed and couldn't finish the first bowl. Tasted like flat leather. I left and packed another bowl several days later. Tasted like flat leather left in the sun.
I threw these flakes from a leathery belt into a mason jar and shut the cupboard. Right next to my Golden Slices.
| Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Feb 13, 2016 | Medium | Extra Strong | Overwhelming | Unnoticeable |
Nasty stuff, tastes like old biscuits and perfume. never again. An insane blend created by a madman. I can only surmise that this is a "proper english" in which case England can suck it. threw the tin in the trash and promptly loaded a bowl of Macbarren Vanilla cream while gagging at the very thought of smoking this garbage again.
Pipe Used:
crack pipe and a mental rays for lighting
Age When Smoked:
doesn't even matter
target="_blank"
