Dunhill Three Year Matured Virginia

The latest incarnation of Three Year Matured Virginia (first introduced in 1923) is another successful reintroduction of one of Dunhill's classic blends. The blend was discontinued after the 1970s, and reappeared late in the Murray's production run, only to disappear again in 2007. But once again, Three Year Matured is back.

The earliest description I could find reads, "A fine old Virginia tobacco, matured for three years, mild and mellow though rich in flavour, the ideal of the true pipe smoker" (1925). The new description reads, "A medium blend consisting of red (and other) Virginias, a pinch of Oriental leaf, and a very, very subtle fruit essence, leaving the flavors of the tobaccos themselves clear and intact. A classic now returned after a long absence."

The latest version approximates the original version, with a couple of minor changes--but the essence of the blend still centers on the matured Virginias. If you're worried about the addition of a "fruit essence," don't be. It is truly as "subtle" as promised. I only noted its presence occasionally in the side-stream aroma and find it enhances rather than detracts from the overall impression. Three Year Matured is not on the sweet VA side but has a matured dryness like a good Chianti or single malt scotch. There's the taste of dark, heavy bread and oats, along with an herbal spiciness, which I suspect is due to the presence of a "pinch of oriental leaf."

Three Year Matured burns cool even in my most finicky pipes and is gentle on the tongue. I sometimes smoke a little too voraciously, and Three Year Matured has never bitten me. Having only had a chance to sample a fresh tin, I look forward to trying this after it has been aged a bit.

I am a lover of Dunhill blends and this is one that I had been putting off because of some of the poor reviews. When I opened the tin, my first thought was that the bad reviews were most likely right as the tin had a very strong berry scent. However, upon smoking this blend, the Virginia's came to the front leaving a nice mild berry flavor in the background. Like so many of the Murray's Dunhill offerings, the tobacco quality was high, it had a good kick of Lady N and it smoked cleanly to a nice ash. I was lucky enough to score a few of these old tins and while they won't be part of any rotation, Three Year Matured is a nice change of pace, especially in a cob. Recommended.

Walnut brown ribbons with quite a few stems and a light musty tin aroma. A minor hint of the fruit topping but nothing offputting.

The taste of this was of a dry Virginia upfront, a very mild lighter fruit topping and well to the rear a herbal-sour oriental presence. A fair bit of cigarette notes in this one as well, and with just a hint of sweetness. The name would indicate some sort of depth but I found it pretty simplistic - perhaps they should have matured the tobacco another three years? At any rate, nothing to write home about in the flavor department but it was a medium-to-full bodied smoke. The attribute this most possessed was an overabundance of nicotine. If you worship at the altar of Lady N, give this one a go. It gave me the "niccups" when smoked in my customary large bowls so I had to downsize to a Group 5 to tame the woozies. That said, I experimented with this as a mixer and it was a grand success! It provided body and just a touch of sweetness, along with some nicotine of course. 2.5 stars rounded up to 3 overall, 2 as a straight smoke. This blend, like so many other Dunhill blends of recent vintage, show me that whatever Dunhill may have been in the past, blends carrying that venerable marque are not what they used to be. They have too much competition that better them these days, IMHO... not that my opinion should mean much to anyone else! 😉

This is a decent smoke. Nothing real special, but has some nice flavors. The Virginias and Orientals combine to create a tasty darkish fruit flavor that has some depth and appeal. There is a touch of spice and a mild sweetness. The topping is very mild and, to me, taste of berries. It can and will burn hot and harsh if you aren't careful with your cadence. I'd give it two and a half stars if I could. I'm feeling generous so I'll give it three.

Medium in body and taste. Flavoring is very mild. Burns very well.

Calling this an aromatic is rather pretentious in my opinion. Yes, there may me an ever so slight "fruit" topping on this Virginia blend. But I've had a tin sitting around that I opened a couple years ago. The tin note is nothing but pure tobacco. Stop calling tobaccos like this an aromatic! Yes, we're all very impressed that your palette is so in tune that you would call a traditional cased Virginia an aromatic. But that word doesn't mean what you think it means. Aromatic means that when you smell the room note, you smell whatever the flavor is, be that cherry, vanilla, or whatever. There is not the slightest hint of flavoring in the room note. Therefore, it doesn't translate in the smoke. This is nothing but pure tobacco at some of its finest.

Rich and bready, with a medium note. Darker than, say, Dunhill Flake or Orlik. There is no bright citrus note. Instead, the red Virginias in this blend lend a richer stewed fruit quality. The tin topping is only there to make you salivate upon sticking your nose inside.

Rant over. And no matter anyway, as this one, like all the rest of the famous Dunhill blends, are going extinct. Grab some while you can.

Dunhill - Three Year Matured Virginia.

I'm smoking a bowl of this as I write this review; I haven't been able to pipe much this last week due to being on holiday so my enjoyment of this may be partly reflective of the fact I've been 'pipe starved' lately!

I think Gentleman Zombie's first line summarizes this blend well: it isn't anything particularly special, but it's still quite nice.

I don't find the topping to be too noticeable, there's a mild fruitiness but nothing heavy or overpowering; it's not like a massive agglomeration of fruit and citrus. The same can be said for the tobacco flavours: they both amalgamate together very nicely, creating a mild taste with an 'age created' sweetness, but there's no sharpness or harshness to the smoke. Personally, I find the nicotine mild from Matured Virginia, very mild to be precise.

This is an enjoyable blend, but as I said: I've been a touch pipe starved this week so I best not let that make me bias with the result! I think three stars is perfectly fair.

Recommended.

Nice tobacco. Fruit essense is noticeable and gives some sweetness to this blend but virginias are definitely in the front page. Orientals gives little spicynes which makes this blend more complex. Good blend which I might buy again.

I guess I am the odd man out here. I first smoked this blend about a year ago (in fairness, a full tin of course) before reading any reviews. I tied it exclusively in an unsmoked Dunhill Shell No. 5 I had bought (lumberman or small canadian) to give it a real test.

I have read in the 1960's it was introduced as a straight virginia, but it is obviously being re-introduced to be different now.

I did not know for sure it was aromatic until I had opened a tin a year ago, but it did smell sweeter or more fruity in the tin than a straight virginia. My memory is that it was slightly sweet, but a much more pleasant blend, to me, than Dunhill's Royal Yacht, which is stronger, etc. I've read since then the three year matured virginia tobacco is sauced with a bit of rasberry. Toward the end of the tin, about two weeks worth of smoking, it started to dry out, so that shows it was not too wet with anything. But if you take more than two weeks to smoke it, you need to preserve it better than just screwing the lid back on. I seldom smoke more than two bowls a day of it (or any blend).

Upon reading these reviews, I opened up another tin (I have two cellared now for about a year). I also read the quite brief review of one gentleman from a fairly recent Ephemeris issue, which was fairly nice, and from the most recent Winter 2001/2002 issue of Pipes and Tobaccos. Their reviewer is harsh on most aromatics, as you know, but his review is most fair to this unusual but sweet blend.

I have recently smoked nearly another tin of this blend in the same Dunhill pipe. This pipe remained unsmoked in the interim (from the last tin). It is a good pipe and most receptive of this sweet blend again. It has over 30 bowls of this blend in the cake now. It will continue to be enhanced with smoking, but I feel I can certainly give a true evaluation of this blend in such a pipe.

To me, it is mild and quite nice, and definitely on the sweet side. But not heavy. A light type of wine-like or fruity sweetness persists. There is a quality virginia underneath. It is very cool, biteless, and though not a real dry smoke, it takes little effort to run a pipe cleaner through my straight stem pipe once or twice in the last half of the smoke. Much dryer than St. Bruno's flake. It is also much better to me still than Royal Yacht, which I know does not say much, but the emphasis is on the word "much".

If you only like straight english, heavy scottish, balkan, or straight virginia/perique blend types, or do not like aromatics at all, this blend is not for you. If you're more flexible and have a sweet tooth at times (and I like the foregoing blend types myself), give it a full tin try in a good pipe. Don't jump to a conclusion by a sniff, a puff, a touch, or by imagination. If it doesn't sound like your cup of tea, don't bother with it at all. A bowl won't convince you in that case. But if you want to try a smoke on the sweet side, something suitable for an occasional smoke over a few weeks of different experience and pleasure, give it a try.

I know I'm going to finish up the last few bowls from my tin before I let this Dunhill hibernate again for a while. This is a special, not everyday treat. I hope Dunhill keeps up this blend in small quantities for us few in the U.S. who will continue to partake.

UPDATE: The 2015 reintroduction is probably closer to the older 1960-70 vintage -- not rasberry flavor but tangy, tart, and rich. (I reduced the flavoring rating from medium to mild to medium.)

Seems closer to a Red Ribbon or Red Cake blend, but more body. Fruit may be cherry-like but lite. SPC may have it right -- between Elizabethan and Royal Yacht. Pretty much for a straight Virginia smoker, but with a flavor enhancer.

Could be a replacement for Royal Yacht from time to time, but, in comparison, Royal Yacht would remain unbeatable. For aromatic smokers, switching to this blend is certainly recommended and would be even considered a very wise and clever move, although this blend can hardly be considered aromatic.

What may escape some's attention is the fact that this blend is very good to be blended with other purely Virginia based blends, where the result would ensure ample satisfaction for the experienced smoker. When aged more, I give this blend three stars.