OTC's Burleys - any good? A summary...

[Capn Jimbo]

It's no secret that here at the Project, we take particular satisfaction in finding good if not great spirits that are priced for we commoners...


An excellent example would be any Seales' product or Barbancourt. World class but at truly affordable prices. Can the same be true for OTC tobaccos? Let's take a look. First, I'll try to summarize tobaccoreviews for what seem to be the main ones:

Sir Walter Raleigh

Blend Type: Burley Based
Contents: Burley
Flavoring: Anisette, Sweet / Sugar
Cut: Coarse Cut

The above from TR. Overall, SWR gets a 2.6. From the reviews we learn that what you get is an easy packing/lighting/burning cut, no drying required. A gravity load with a very light tamp does it. Lightly nutty, with some mild chocolate frequently reported. Although SWR is cased, it must be awfully light as few reviewers notice any casing at all, though a few mention just a hint of anisette (less than Carter Hall). A sipper, unless you like sourness in the bottom half.

One old timer who has been smoking it for 50 years noted that the blend has not changed at all since 1950, which speaks well of it being consistent from batch to batch. It is said to be a good mixer and extender as well, good to bring a pipe used for latakia or aromatics back to neutral. In comparison to PA (Prince Albert) and CH (Carter Hall), one experienced piper stated that SWR has no metallic or chemical aftertaste.

In sum: burley forward nuttiness, bit of dark chocolate, deep light sweet, easy smoking. Not really aromatic. Scoop and pack lightly and go, no drying necessary. The cut has been called "granola". Can benefit from being rubbed out (more flavor) but not necessary. A true old codger classic, pleasant and predictable. Some comparisons:

PA: SWR is nuttier, sweeter, less negative aftertaste
CH: SWR is more interesting, not perceived as aromatic as CH
GR: compared to Granger, SWR is not monochromatic.

Of course, some would disagree. My own impression: opens mild and with the aforementioned very light chocolate, then simply smooth and mild thereafter, sipped only and lightly which required a few relights, no big deal. Based on a number of reviews that warned of sourness if overpuffing I decided to sip very gently. Doing so, one other reviewer nailed it for me: mild and easy smoking but not much happening either positively or negatively, with an occasional lovely nutty/toasty whiff, ie it smells much better than it tastes. Rather non-descript. I then took a chance and decided on a more aggressive (yet still moderate) approach, and voila! The SWR came alive - still gentle, but now more flavorful. Nice with my cup of coffee.

Still, I'd prefer more of a good sipper...


Addenda: Tried another half bowl this am, and my appreciation is increasing. Lovely mild burley, smooth, nice aftertaste. This blend is moving more toward the Carter Hall (a fine smoke). In terms of pure burley, start with Granger, then PA, then this Sir Walter Raleigh. It is well to remember that these are all OTC's (except the J-4, to follow), thus the burleys are simply not going to be the best. Decent, yes, nice yes, but not the best. It follow that a very light casing is in order and in a strange way, make the burley more attractive and creamier. That is not a bad thing, particularly in that enjoyment - not necessarily absolute purity - is the goal, nicht vahr? In this sense I'm moving up SWR a notch or two.

[Capn Jimbo]

Next up:


Granger OTC, as per TR:

Blend Type: Burley Based
Contents: Burley
Flavoring: None
Cut: Coarse Cut

At TR this OTC earns a 2.6. The reviews indicate that of the others (PA, CH, SWR, H&H,) Granger is the cleanest, simplest, straight aheak burley forward. Little if any casing and no detectible flavor. This causes some to call it "monochromatic" - a one-note Charley. And it is. You will absolutlely "get" the burley nuttiness, and yes it can lead - like other burleys to a burley sour - but that's your move. Whatever "sourness" you get is because it is fermented using their "Wellman" processs, whatever that is.

A straight ahead good nutty burley, some say bit of sweetness and chocolate. Maybe, but the toasty nutty burley can be wonderful. It's burley focus also makes this a blender/extender so for the first time, I added a pinch of 1-Q to my pinch of Granger and voila! A whole new ball game! More than a few find blending a PA or Granger with 1-Q to result in a nice burley forward aromatic that is really quite exceptional, and economical to boot.

I concur. I might add that careful lighting and light, light sipping adds immeasurebly to the enjoyment. Careful lighting takes time - a one second light with one puff, then pause for 10 seconds, then another, repeat for perhaps 5 intermittent quick lights, before your final light with maybe 2 or 3 good puffs. Then very light, slow sipping. Tamping is very, very light, just to break the ash, but not to really compress. Light, light and slow. Fast lighting, long lighting, fast puffing and heavy tamping will ruin any bowl.

Bottom line: fermented burley that does best with a slow sipping. Go slow and dig the burley; speed up and get some fermented sourness and a a light tolerable bite. No real casings or toppings, making it a great blender, did very, very well with 1-Q.


Addenda: tried it again this am, this time without the 1-Q, and was impressed with its all burley, all the time presentation. Lovely medium burley, no complaints at all. Nice.

[Capn Jimbo]

Next up...


Half & Half, per TR:

Blend Type: Aromatic
Contents: Burley, Virginia
Flavoring: Anisette, Cherry, Licorice
Cut: Ribbon

I'll be blunt. No way. Allegedly a blend of Burley with Virginia, but seems the opposite. An initial light produces a nutty Burley that lasts perhaps two puffs, then a bitey Virginia takes over no matter how careful I was, quickly followed by whatever flavoring shit they add. Burns fine, but so what, and much of that burn is my hard palate to produce a non descript, cigarette type experience laced with whatever.

Couldn't finish it, wouldn't even think of blending it. Perhaps something to toss on a bonfire, who knows. Even a dram of Appleton 12 didn't help.
No mas! No mas!

[Capn Jimbo]

And now for one of the "biggies"...


Prince Albert, per TR:


Blend Type: Burley Based
Contents: Burley, Cavendish
Flavoring: None
Cut: Ribbon

It appears to me that PA - which rates a rather credible 2.9 at TR may have earned that rating due to its 100 year history, family tradition, Grandpa, and price. It's alleged to be a straight burley, but at its price the quality of the leaf can't be that great. Very easy, gravity pack with a finger press, old fashioned load, easy light, easy burn. Like all burleys sipping is recommended, enough "N" to be noticeable, and not at all bad, but well, not at all that good. Call it burley lite and as such will make a good blender. Quite smokable, but you won't get an erection.

Also promoted as a tobacco for the roll-yer-own crowd, and I see why. Allegedly a bare touch of cacao, but that's just burley. Frankly, SWR - even with a little topping - does better in every regard, so does Granger. I don't dislike Prince Albert, but I don't really like it either. It makes a smoke that kinda, sorta is a clean burley, and very affordable. Wouldn't buy again, too bad. But as a blender? Maybe....


Addenda: Another half bowl this am, this time right after Granger. Although Albert is supposed to be the most forward burley of the bunch (and it may be slightly so insofar as the CH is concerned), it's more on the lighter side of Granger. PA does may have a bit more N, but then again, I'd just finished the Granger. Yes the PA has its toasty burley nutty whiffs, but overall the burley is isn't as "there" as the Granger, as Mind you these are small but discernable differences. Granger wins in the burley department.

[Capn Jimbo]

And now the other "biggie":


Carter Hall, per TR:

Blend Type: American
Contents: Burley, Virginia
Flavoring: None
Cut: Ribbon


Carter Hall and Prince Albert are the two big sellers, and at 3.0 CH beats out PA by 0.1 in score, so consider them a tie. The difference? CH has been blended with enough Virginia to add some sweetness and smoothness that oddly also makes the burley nuttiness even a bit more apparent, if not creamier. It's easier to smoke, and the Virginia also does away with any burley sourness. Still, like all the rest this one should be sipped and lit with care. The smoke is creamier and thicker and overall Carter Hall is a more pleasant experience. Also used as a blender, perhaps the best blend to cake a new pipe and absolutely reliable. I believe the PA lovers are into the slightly more edginess of it; personally I prefer the Carter Hall. Easy light, good burn, nice.

Would buy this one again.

[Capn Jimbo]

And last:


Sutliff J-4 Mild Burley, per TR:

Blend Type: Aromatic
Contents: Burley
Flavoring: Vanilla
Cut: Ribbon

What can I say? The J-4 is not really an OTC, but rather a Sutliff quality bulk and it shows. Better burley, and yes with a decent vanilla (but no Cavendish) and rated 2.6. Some how the vanilla adds a roasty warmth to the beautifully rich and nutty burley. Very nice. Both the tobacco and vanilla are of good and natural quality and I even occasionally pick up just a whiff of fruitiness. Opens with a delicious rich mild burley, but then the creamy vanilla takes over.

I have to be honest and admit I smoked this without the drying it really needs which resulted in a bit of a palate burn, and caused the blend to be more vanilla forward as the bowl progressed. I did read that with some significant DGT or even overnight drying will greatly improve this one and bring the burley out more. This is a better blend than I've reported here, so I'll redo this one later, but I expect a much better result...