McClelland Virginia Woods
(3.00)
Formulated for a smooth, rich flavor with an incomparable woodsy aroma. Blended from finest matured red cake, stoved black Virginia, wide-cut bright Virginia and other premium tobaccos. Virginia Woods offers one of the ultimate experiences in fragrant matured Virginia blend smoking.
Notes: Community note: There is some debate about whether this blend is an aromatic or Virginia (straight or otherwise) offering. There is definitely a noticeable top-note, and the blender admits such. Most reviewers find the fragrance and taste obvious, so classification as an aromatic may make sense.
Details
Brand | McClelland |
Series | Craftsbury Series |
Blended By | McClelland Tobacco Company |
Manufactured By | McClelland Tobacco Company |
Blend Type | Straight Virginia |
Contents | Virginia |
Flavoring | Other / Misc |
Cut | Ribbon |
Packaging | 50 grams tin, 100 grams tin |
Country | United States |
Production | No longer in production |
Profile
Strength
Mild to Medium
Extremely Mild -> Overwhelming
Flavoring
None Detected
None Detected -> Extra Strong
Room Note
Pleasant to Tolerable
Unnoticeable -> Overwhelming
Taste
Medium
Extremely Mild (Flat) -> Overwhelming
Average Rating
3.00 / 4
|
Reviews
Please login to post a review.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 Reviews
Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 14, 2014 | Mild | Mild to Medium | Mild | Tolerable to Strong |
I know it is a matter of personal tastes and here's just my opinion about that blend. When opening the tin you smell only ketchup, vinegar and barbecue sauce... I was a bit confused but curious. The tobaccos is for sure of great quality. Packs well but needs few relights along the way. It really tastes what it smells; a tobacco taste completely overwhelmed by ketchup, vinegar and barbecue sauce. This is definitely not for me. 1 star.
Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12, 2013 | Very Mild | Strong | Very Mild | Tolerable |
very disappointed and confused. it has an overly-artificial top flavor. Similar to a captain black offering. Not quite as prevalent, but present enough to be an absolute turnoff to anyone who dislikes the artificial and chemically taste of that style of aromatic. BE WARNED! check out some of the older reviews of this blend, and you'll find several others who feel the same way. One reviewer mentions a very wet bowl post-smoke. Another clear indication of too much chemical additive. You'd think McClelland knows their audience. I don't know what they were thinking with this one.
Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2004 | Mild to Medium | Mild | Mild to Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
This is obviously a quality tobacco. Considerable drying time is required and there is very little bite. Although I enjoy a number of the McClelland virginias, there's something about this one that I just can't get my head around. It tastes like 5100 (I like 5100), it tastes like Dark Star (I like Dark Star), but somehow the combination of the 2 just doesn't work for me. The sweetness of the blend is too distracting for me. Still it's a quality product and worth a try....tastes being subjective.
Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 21, 2006 | Very Mild | Medium to Strong | Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
I found a 50g tin of this which was six years old. The tin aroma was a strange combination of the McCleland's acidic additive and a vanilla (or some aromatic sweetner) casing. Bizarre, I think. Sweet and sour additives? None of these "flavorings" are mentioned on the tin, which leads one to believe that this is a natural virginia blend, which it is not.
The room note is that of a mildly sweetened aromatic. It would be nice for the non-smoking crowd.
A good quality tobacco with a mild taste and nice burning qualities, but I don't like sweetend aromatics and wouldn't have purchased it had I known what it was. After smoking my third bowl of this, I tossed it in the trash because I simply had no use for it.
If you like aromatics, this might be a good choice.
The room note is that of a mildly sweetened aromatic. It would be nice for the non-smoking crowd.
A good quality tobacco with a mild taste and nice burning qualities, but I don't like sweetend aromatics and wouldn't have purchased it had I known what it was. After smoking my third bowl of this, I tossed it in the trash because I simply had no use for it.
If you like aromatics, this might be a good choice.
Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 04, 2005 | Mild | None Detected | Very Mild | Tolerable |
A beautiful name for a tobacco. Nice label.
My tin is three years old. Upon opening I detect only the faintest trace of the infamous McClelland aroma.
The moisture level is perfect. Packs great. Lights very easily, producing voluminous clouds of pale grey smoke. There is a citrus like tang to the aroma. The smoke has very little body. The flavor is grassy, dry, and bright, with hints of lemon. The flavor is quite thin. The smoke is very consistent. The blend burns cool and dry.
I could see this as a blend to puff on while reading, or otherwise distracted, or perhaps as a warm weather smoke for those who don't like burley. Nothing here to bring me back.
My tin is three years old. Upon opening I detect only the faintest trace of the infamous McClelland aroma.
The moisture level is perfect. Packs great. Lights very easily, producing voluminous clouds of pale grey smoke. There is a citrus like tang to the aroma. The smoke has very little body. The flavor is grassy, dry, and bright, with hints of lemon. The flavor is quite thin. The smoke is very consistent. The blend burns cool and dry.
I could see this as a blend to puff on while reading, or otherwise distracted, or perhaps as a warm weather smoke for those who don't like burley. Nothing here to bring me back.
Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 19, 2005 | Mild to Medium | Very Mild | Mild to Medium | Tolerable |
As a McClelland Virginia lover, I expected this to be wonderful. BIG disappointment. I found this to have a cigarette-like quality, with a cloying, almost-MacBarenish note that gave me a headache and made me vaguely nauseated. Well, guess I'll just have to be satisfied with the other 8 Mc VAs that I love!
With the exception of the flavors mentioned above, this has very little flavor. There is a winey note that doesn't go away, and while it could potentially meld well with other stronger flavors, here it just stands alone.
With the exception of the flavors mentioned above, this has very little flavor. There is a winey note that doesn't go away, and while it could potentially meld well with other stronger flavors, here it just stands alone.
Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 17, 2005 | Mild | Extremely Mild | Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
This my first blend in the McClelland line, and I must say I am disappointed. For a Dane like me, the vinegar smell is very strange, and something I do not fancy at all. The tobacco is beautiful in the tin, but there are so many stems in it. I had to go through the whole tin and remove them.
As Eulenburg said, the moisture-level (artificial I believe) is too high, and even when dried out, this tobacco is almost incendiary. There is some weird topping added; very discreet, and very foul. I am sure this does not go for all McClellands blends, and it has not scared me from trying more of them. The leaf is of very high quality, but it burns like a sunny day in hell. Nicotine content is too low for me also.
Jakob Kiilerich, Denmark
As Eulenburg said, the moisture-level (artificial I believe) is too high, and even when dried out, this tobacco is almost incendiary. There is some weird topping added; very discreet, and very foul. I am sure this does not go for all McClellands blends, and it has not scared me from trying more of them. The leaf is of very high quality, but it burns like a sunny day in hell. Nicotine content is too low for me also.
Jakob Kiilerich, Denmark
Reviewed By | Date | Rating | Strength | Flavoring | Taste | Room Note |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 06, 2003 | Mild | Very Mild | Mild to Medium | Pleasant to Tolerable |
The name is so right, because the tobacco is comprised of so many stems I nearly sent it back to the manufactuer to ask,"what the hell". I mean really, its like somebody sat down to strip the leaves and put the stems in this can. The tobacco that is present here is ribbon red virginia,and maybe some burley there too.It does have some broken black stoved cake Va also. The taste (if you can find one) is bland and you'll burn your tounge so bad you'll be looking for the number to the Shriner's burn center in Galveston,Texas!