McClelland No. 2050 Oriental Cavendish Mix

09/26/2004: A good flavored Oriental with too little punch to hold one's interest. Have used it to tone down other tobaccos that I find too flavored. Would probably make a good mix with a strong Virginia-Perique Blend.

11/27/2006 Update: The only one in this series I couldn't warm up to.

I had to double-check that I was actually smoking a McClelland product once I began puffing on this blend. I cannot understand why such an esteemed tobacco company would place its name on this drugstore mix.

2050 is all about that black Cavendish stuff -- sticky sweet in an unpleasant way -- with the Oriental making a cameo appearance. What Oriental is present finds itself in undeserving company. This blend is a bad idea, and poorly executed. Thankfully I bought only two ounces -- yet I've no idea what I'm going to do with it.

A waste of time and money, and I cannot recommend it to anybody. McClelland sorely disappointed me, and for the first time.

As others have said, this tobacco is only a short step from your typical drugstore cavendish. Cavendish, VA, Oriental, "raisiny" smelling topping. I have an 8 oz bag which I will smoke through, but won't buy more. There is nothing remarkable about this either good or bad, but with so many other fine tobaccos available, there's no reason to buy more.

I got this at an ounce .Im glad i did not buy more.2050 is rather weird at first light the orientals peaked out then slowly goes dowm to a the more cavendish taste . For me the best part of this smoke session was in the middle of the bowl and after before it starts tasting ashy. My wife did not like this to much but tolerated it. the scent is a head scratcher I cant place the smell.but it is 50/50 for me. I will go on to find more tobaccs.

I was attracted to sampling this blend based on its description. Unfortunately, I was disappointed. On arrival, my purchase was over-moist by a long shot, and even after a whole day of drying remained rather sticky and gooey. Too much PG, maybe? The pouch aroma was also unusual, and not too pleasant. Sort of like a fermented prune juice. It's an easy smoke, no bite or harshness, but otherwise just another variety of the ubiquitous black cav aromatic with a sweet and somewhat cloying room aroma. From my perspective, not one I could recommend.

A sample of this was sent along with a larger tobacco order.

It has a very pungent aroma in the bag. It smokes cool, with high notes similar to day old dishwater, with full bass notes reminiscent of rotted chicken fat. Seemed to leave a greasy taste in the mouth.

I tried this on three separate occasions in three different pipes. Never could finish a single bowl. Really not my cup of tea, as they say.

I don't know what made me try this stuff in the first place. I guess I wanted to see how an English/Aromatic crossover tasted without latakia. In short, I hated this blend. It was and still is goopy wet and bit like crazy. The cavendish part was flavored with something I can't figure out and it's not good whatever it is. A waste of Orientals...and money on my part.

Another AROMATIC in disguise. I'm a big fan of the McClelland bulk 2000 series, in general. Bulk 2000 Fragrant Virginia was disappointing for lack of flavor, but 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2035 are stellar, in my book. So as I approached my sample baggie of 2050, I had great expectations. I mean, yummy McClelland Virginias and non-Latakia orientals? Maybe something like Fez? Hardly.

There is very little tobacco, or any other, flavor to this blend. Perhaps the Virginias and Orientals were severely Cavendished, had their flavors sucked out. The next step would have been to load this puppy up with PG, and some undiscernable melange of casings. It smokes cool, smells great in pouch and room, but that's where the blend ends. Even less flavorful than #2000, I traded this.

This is a nicely made, non-biting Cavendish. Nothing less, nothing more.