Tag Archives: Kenneth Lieblich article

New Life for a NOS French Churchwarden

Leave a reply

by Kenneth Lieblich

Next up is a charming apple churchwarden that I found in one of my bins and it piqued my interest. It’s got the typical shape and feel of a regular churchwarden, but this one is a bit smaller – and perhaps a bit more manageable. It’s hard to know how old this one is, but it feels old and it has certainly seen better days. I’m looking forward to this one.

Frankly, this one didn’t look like it had been smoked at all. It was certainly filthy, but that seemed to be from questionable storage rather than smoking. The only markings were on the left side of the shank: Bruyère [over] Garantie which translates to ‘Genuine Briar’. The words Bruyère Garantie on a pipe are the bane of my pipe restoration existence. They are found on a plethora of different pipes, usually without any other identification. Ugh. One comment on the old Pipes Magazine forums confirms exactly what my meagre research has uncovered:

“Lots of French and German pipes, even pre-war ones, were given the label “Bruyere Garantie.” At least the ones I’ve seen for sale were listed as being from the 1920s and 30s. But I suspect that is a genuine date for those because many of them had horn stems, which are much rarer in post-war pipes and some of them definitely had an Art Deco/Art Nouveau look about them as well as old-fashioned rounded buttons.” — pitchforkThis pipe doesn’t have the old orific button, but it might date from just after that time period. Anyway, time to get to work! I started by sending the stinger for a soak in some lemon-infused isopropyl alcohol. I let it sit for several hours, cleaned it off and gave it a quick polish. Good as new!The shank had a lovely, thin band around it – but it was quite encrusted. I removed it, looked closer, and saw that there was rust! Interesting – the band must have some iron in it. I dropped the band in a little plastic bowl of plain white vinegar and let it soak overnight. I scrubbed with some 0000-grit steel wool and that worked a treat. Gave it a quick polish with my Micromesh pads and it looked good as new.Next, I went to work on the long stem. It appears to be acrylic – definitely not vulcanite. I gave it a good wipe-down with some soap on cotton rounds and that helped. As mentioned earlier, I don’t think this pipe was smoked and, though I can’t be sure about that, the stem’s insides had dust-type filth rather than tobacco debris. Regardless, I cleaned it out with pipe cleaners and 99% isopropyl alcohol. It wasn’t too dirty.Fortunately, the stem was in good enough shape that it didn’t show any tooth marks/dents. So, I skipped the cyanoacrylate treatments and jumped straight to the Micromesh pads. I used all nine pads (1,500 through 12,000 grit) to bring out the lovely black lustre on the stem. I also used Obsidian Pipe Stem Oil in between each pad scrubbing (from 3,600 onward).Now for the stummel. As the photos show, the finish on the wood has crackled and/or degraded somewhat over the years. It looks terrible and I’ll have to address that. First, I decided to ream out the bowl – but there wasn’t anything to ream! This is another clue that suggests an unsmoked pipe. It was certainly dusty inside – very. I cleaned out the insides with pipe cleaners and 99% isopropyl alcohol. I also cleaned the insides with some soap and tube brushes. It was nice and clean after this.Now to deal with the finish on the stummel. I grabbed some Murphy’s and rubbed the surface to clean things up. This did precious little. Since there was a fill that also needed to be fixed under this finish, I took some acetone and thoroughly cleaned the surface – that was the best decision I made! The pipe looked so much better with the old finish removed. There was actually some very nice wood under there.I examined the nicks in the briar. I took my iron and a damp cloth to try to raise them. The hot and moist steam can often cause the wood to swell slightly and return to shape. This worked well – I was pleased with the results. However, some lumps and bumps remained on the rim and a big fill to boot. In order to safely remove the marks on the rim, I “topped” the pipe – that is to say, I gently and evenly sanded down the rim on a piece of 220-grit sandpaper. This effectively removed the damage, without altering the look of the pipe. Then, I made a mix of cyanoacrylate and briar dust and filled the fill. I sanded the repair down with 400-grit sandpaper, then proceeded to use the Micromesh pads over the whole thing. Oh boy, it really looked good. I glued the band back on the shank and applied some Before & After Restoration Balm. I let it sit for 20 minutes or so. It does lovely things to the wood. I polished it with a microfibre cloth and it shone. Wow – the pipe really looks lovely.

Off to the bench polisher I went. I applied some White Diamond and a few coats of carnauba wax and they added the finishing touch. This old Bruyere Garantie churchwarden was in need of a new lease on life. I am pleased to announce that this pipe is for sale! If you are interested in acquiring it for your collection, please have a look in the “French” pipe section of the store here on Steve’s website. You can also email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. The approximate dimensions of the pipe are as follows: length 7⅜ in. (185 mm); height 1⅛ in. (28 mm); bowl diameter 1¼ in. (32 mm); chamber diameter ⅔ in. (15 mm). The weight of the pipe is ¾ oz. (23 g). I hope you enjoyed reading the story of this restoration as much as I enjoyed restoring it. If you are interested in more of my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or send me an email. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

A Portland Pipe from my Grandfather

Leave a reply

by Kenneth Lieblich

Next on the chopping block is a very personal pipe – and one that is staying in my collection. The pipe you see belonged to my late grandfather. It is this pipe’s restoration that I am recounting today. I have blogged here about some of my grandfather’s pipes before, but I haven’t done one in a while. In this case, I do not know where my grandfather acquired it (or under what circumstances), but I suppose it does not ultimately matter. My grandfather was an enthusiastic pipe smoker and I am definitely looking forward to cleaning this one up. It has a value well beyond dollars – especially because this is actually the first pipe I ever smoked. Unsurprisingly, I didn’t know what I was doing it with it, so any damage you see is almost certainly from me! I don’t remember why I picked this pipe of his to try, but it definitely worked well. The pipe is a classic billiard shape with a lovely, long stem. What a handsome pipe! I do not know the exact date of the pipe, but, knowing what I do about my grandfather and his pipes, it seems likely to be from the 1950s or 1960s. On the left-hand side of the shank, the pipe’s markings read, First Call [over] London. To the right of that is the number 69 – presumably a shape number. The right hand side of the shank also has markings, but they are more worn. They read, Portland Pipe Product [over] Made Wholly in England. I wasn’t familiar with these names, so I did some digging.I began my research with José Manuel Lopes’ book, Pipes: Artisans and Trademarks. As the photo shows, there was a little information, but not a lot.The connection with Barling was interesting, so I also checked Wilczak and Colwell’s book, Who Made That Pipe? From the photos below, you can see that First Call refers me to the Portland Pipe Co. and that they both make a connection to Barling too.Time to check online. Pipephil had a similarly brief write-up (included here).Pipedia was a bit more helpful. Their page on the Portland Pipe Co. includes the following information (the typos are in the original and are NOT mine):

Portland Pipe Company was an English pipe maker, and appears to have started in the 1930’s, and went out of business in 1962. It’s though they had ties to Barling pipes from the 1930’s. They might have been a sub-brand or “second” which was separate from, but fully owned by Barling’s all along. It also thought that after Portland closed down, and during Barling’s corporate era (BB&S), Barling picked up some of the Portland brand (Londoner, Cragmoor and Portland) and made them for a while. WILCZAK & COLWELL in their book “Who Made That Pipe?” acknowledge the brand as from England, though some have been made in Italy as well (see Pipephil.eu). The Brand John Peel is a pipe which has the stamping: JOHN PEEL, A PORTLAND PIPE, MADE WHOLLY IN ENGLAND. I have a model with is also stamped SPECIAL, it’s a stack design with shape number 801. This pipe might have been made either by Portland or Barling. According to a 1940 price sheet, the following models were offered, along with the correlating prices:

Vintage (10/6)
Exchange (7/6)
Londoner (7/6)
Mosaic (7/6)
Portland Super (7/6)
Crustor (5/6)
Diploma (5/6)
Port Royal (5/6)
Port-de-Luxe (5/6)
Portland Patent (5/6)
Souk-el-Arba (5/6)
Times (4/6)
British Sovereign (3/6)
John Peel (3/6)
Jubilee (3/6)
Sirdar (3/6)
Campaigner (2/6)
Dandy (2/6)
First Call (2/6)
Knobby (2/6)
Topsall (2/6)
Topsall Comfort (2/6)
Portman (2/-)
British National (1/6)
Ruf Kut (1/6)

This seems to confirm that this pipe is in the lower range of Portland Pipes AND that it likely comes from before 1962. However, there are a few other tidbits of information. The PipesMagazine.com forums include an interesting comment from Barling expert Jonathan Guss:Finally, over at the Very Keen on Pipes website, a reader commented on one of their posts by saying:

“… Portland pipes make up one of the great mysteries of London pipe making. No one knows when Barling bought Portland but most of us barling guys believe it was mid to late 30’s. I saw a reference once online using the year 1936 but this cannot be confirmed. Next, John Peel was for a long time thought to have been a shop but there is no evidence proving that. However, John Peel pipes were almost certainly made by Portland. What most of use want in a pipe of this type is a pipe made before 1962, when the barling family was let go by the new owners and the brand went into a downward spiral quality wise. Re Portland, a number of them have recently turned up as a result of a “garage find” of a batch of pipes from the Toronto Canada area and they were mixed in with other wood from the 50’s and that seems to indicate a 50’s date of manufacture. Note: in those days several of the larger pipe makers made pipes or just bowls for other brands and these were mostly Charatan, Comoy and other makers such as Orlick. What is almost certain is that never did barling make / sell any pipes that were not carved by barling carvers untill after 1970. So, Portland and Peel were never actually barling made, these pipes were either made by Portland in house or, in later years past 1962, by Charatan and others. Also, if one looks at the style of the bits it evident that Portland and Peel pipes were not made that long ago, probably 50’s and 60’s unless there is a BB&S stamp which indicates post 1970 age (the & symbol being the give away since B.B.S was used in the older pre 1962 era.) Just some info for you to keep in mind… “

Let’s tie it all together. By inference (and some educated guesswork), this pipe of my grandfather’s was made in England, prior to 1962, and that the Portland Pipe Co. who made it was owned by Barling. As for the “69” shape number, I do not know what to say – this doesn’t correspond to Barling, so I suppose Portland had their own numbering system. It’s a nifty pipe – however, it was not without its issues. The stem had plenty of tooth chatter and was pretty oxidized. The stummel was actually in pretty good shape, except for the rim. I burned it pretty darn thoroughly. It had some minor wear, but nothing too tricky. The stem was first on my list. I wiped down the outside of the stem with Murphy’s Oil Soap on some cotton pads. Then, I cleaned out the insides with pipe cleaners and isopropyl alcohol. Then it went so soak in the deoxidizing fluid. After that, I wiped it down with some cleanser and removed the rest of the oxidation. Once clean, I built up the nicks and dents and scratches on the stem with black cyanoacrylate adhesive and let it fully cure.I then sanded the adhesive down with my grey pads to bring the repairs to the level of the stem. I ensured that the stem kept its shape and looked like it should. I then used all nine Micromesh pads (1,500 through 12,000 grit) to emphasize the beautiful black of the stem. I also used Obsidian Pipe Stem Oil in between each pad scrubbing, after 3,600. On to the stummel, and the usual cleaning procedures were in order for this pipe. I used the KleenReem to remove the built-up cake, and followed that with 220-grit sandpaper to remove as much as I could. I wanted to take the bowl down to bare briar to ensure there were no hidden flaws in the walls of the bowl. Fortunately, there were none. I then proceeded to clean out the insides of the shank with cotton swabs, pipe cleaners, and isopropyl alcohol. There was quite a bit of filth inside this stummel – it took many pipe cleaners et cetera to clean it out. I decided that a de-ghosting session would be a good idea. I thrust cotton balls into the bowl and the shank and saturated them with 99% isopropyl alcohol. I let the stummel sit overnight. This caused the oils, tars and smells to leach out into the cotton. The bowl was nice and clean after this.I followed that up by cleaning the insides with some dish soap and tube brushes. I then moved on to cleaning the outside of the stummel with Murphy’s Oil Soap and some cotton pads. Because of the extensive burning to the rim, I sanded away the damage on my topping board and it looked much improved. Now, it was time to sand down the stummel. I used all nine Micromesh pads (1,500 through 12,000 grit) to wet/dry sand everything smooth. After that, a light application of Before & After Restoration Balm brought out the best in the stummel’s grain. What a difference that made! There is some beautiful wood there! Then it was off for a trip to the buffer. A dose of White Diamond and a few coats of carnauba wax were just what this pipe needed. The lovely shine made the wood look absolutely beautiful.This is a beautiful pipe that has a very elegant feel to it. I hope the final product is worthy of my beloved grandfather’s memory. Obviously, this is one pipe that I am keeping for myself and adding to my collection. The approximate dimensions of the Portland First Call are as follows: length 6⅓ in. (160 mm); height 1¾ in. (44 mm); bowl diameter 1¼ in. (32 mm); chamber diameter ⅔ in. (17 mm). The weight of the pipe is 1 oz. (30 g). I hope you enjoyed reading the story of this pipe as much I as I did restoring it. If you are interested in more of my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

De Profundis: Rescuing a Peterson 301

Leave a reply

Blog by Kenneth Lieblich

If this pipe could talk, surely it would say, “Out of the depths I have cried unto Thee, O Lord…”. This great pipe has truly come from the depths of … who knows where. It’s a handsome, rugged Peterson 301 System rusticated bent pot with a P-lip. As is often the case, this pipe (and the others in the photo below) came from an old gentleman, now deceased, who lived on Vancouver Island. The first two pipes below are both 301s and the third is perhaps/maybe a 317 (not sure yet). I have no idea what he did with these pipes (dropped them down the mines perhaps), but boy-oh-boy, these are pretty rough. No problem – it’s my job to sort things out.The only markings to be found on this pipe are the 301 found on the underside of the stummel, the K&P [over] Peterson on the nickel ferrule, and the double-stamped, stylized P on the stem. That’s annoying! Mark Irwin of Peterson Pipe Notes has written a few good articles about the 301s on his blog and I recommend reading one here and another one here. Of course, Steve has also written restoration blogs about the 301, including this one and it contained an important tidbit of information that I quote here:

I learned previously that the shape 301 was not introduced until 1975. Considering the Republic stamp, this one would likely date between 1975 and 2000.

This was significant because, due to the markings being almost entirely worn on this pipe, there was nothing on the wood other than the number 301 – and I couldn’t tell an age from that. Charles Lemon from Dad’s Pipes also has a post about a 301, which he describes as coming from the “1970’s era”. Now, what’s interesting about Steve and Charles’ pipes is that the patch of briar which shows the marks is quite different from mine. Below are Steve’s, Charles’, and my pipes, respectively. The first two are sort of freeform oval-ish shapes. Third (mine) is a rectangle and I wonder if that indicates a different era. I don’t know, but any of you reading this do, please let me know!  This pipe is filthy beyond description – but must have been smoked frequently and with great affection. The stem has dirt everywhere, severe toothmarks aplenty, and calcification as I have seldom seen. Meanwhile, the stummel looks as though oily dirt has been rubbed into the surfaces of the rustication. The rim is coated in lava, the front edge of the rim is bashed, and the bowl is clogged with cake. Some spots on the rustication are really worn – the old fellow must have really loved his pipes. I began by cleaning some of the calcification on the outside of the stem. I took a blade (an old butter knife, actually) and began gently scraping at all that build-up. Obviously, I took it easy, as I did not want to damage the stem’s vulcanite any further. The butter knife worked quite well and I got a good amount loose. I followed that up with some Murphy’s on some cotton rounds to try and scrub the rest away. I broke out the isopropyl alcohol and pipe cleaners, and got to work on the inside of the stem. Predictably, it was unbelievably dirty and I went through a good number of pipe cleaners in order to clean it up.As I mentioned, there were quite a few dents in the stem. Some were obviously tooth marks, but other dents looked like blunt force trauma! Time to break out the BIC lighter to see if it could raise some of them. Quite frankly, it did not do much – this repair was going to require some considerable sanding etc. Before that, however, the stem went for an overnight soak in the deoxidizer. The following day, the oxidation had migrated to the surface and would be fairly straightforward to remove. I scrubbed vigorously with SoftScrub to remove the leftover oxidation. At this point, I painted the accidentally-duplicated P on the stem, as it was pretty rough – just like everything about this pipe.

Once clean, I set about repairing the dents. Before I moved on to the Micromesh pads, I built up the dent damage on the stem with black cyanoacrylate adhesive and let it fully cure. It turned out that this was not as straightforward as I had hoped. It took more than one application of adhesive to sort this problem out. I sanded the lumps down with my needle files and my grey pads, to make the stem look sort of normal. I then used all nine Micromesh pads (1,500 through 12,000 grit) to bring out the lovely black lustre on the stem. I also used Obsidian Pipe Stem Oil in between each of the last five pads. On to the stummel – this is where the lion’s share of the work was. The insides (both bowl and shank) were overwhelmed with cake and tar and anything else you’d care to mention. The bowl really needed to be reamed, so I used the KleenReem to scrape off as much built-up cake as possible. Generally, I prefer to sand the chamber down to bare briar. When restoring, it is important to ensure that there is no damage to the briar under the cake. There are a few situations when I might leave some cake in the bowl, but not today. There were definitely some craze lines in the briar on this pipe. I’ll come back to that later. Just like the bowl, the shank was absolutely disgusting. It had never been cleaned – or, not for many decades. I started cleaning the inside with isopropyl alcohol, Q-tips, and pipe cleaners. This took a while. The inside was very dirty and required and extraordinary number of Q-tips and pipe cleaners. Eventually some cleanliness came to it.I threw the stummel in my alcohol bath in the hope that it would loosen some of the ground-in filth on the outside of the bowl. After 24 hours, this worked a bit, but not enough. I added some scrubbing with Murphy’s and a toothbrush. This made things much better, but it’s a case of two steps forward and one step back: sure, it’s clean, but lots of the stain in now gone too. I decided to de-ghost the pipe despite what I had just done with the alcohol bath. I thrust cotton balls into the bowl and the shank and saturated them with 99% isopropyl alcohol. I let the stummel sit overnight. This caused even more oils, tars and smells to leach out into the cotton. The bowl was nice and clean after this.On to the ferrule – which was bashed and discoloured from years of mistreatment. Somewhat to my surprise, the ferrule came off very easily and required no special effort. I began by cleaning the metal with some SoftScrub on cotton rounds. This was quite good at removing the unsightly bits. I used some of my MicroMesh pads (only 3,600-12,000) to eliminate some of the minor scratches on the metal. It also gave a nice shine which clearly hadn’t been seen for decades. I used a jewelry cloth to give the final polish to the nickel. This ferrule would always retain some small dents etc. from its hard life, but it looks much improved. And this is where I stopped for a looooong time. It occurred to me that the amount of work involved in this pipe was tremendous. I was torn about how invasive I wanted to be in my pipe surgery. What about the damage to the rim? What about rematching the stain? What about the heavily worn sections of the rustication? Perhaps my temperament didn’t suit this pipe too well. I freely admit that I set aside the pipe for nearly six months before coming back to it. That sounds absurd, I know, but it was either that or chucking it in the fireplace.

Back in the present day, I began by working the rim back into shape. I sanded it down on my topping board so that it was level (it wasn’t before). I used some tools, including my Dremel and some modified screwdrivers, and re-rusticated the rim. It looked great, but too sharp. So, I sanded the sharp bits to add some softness to the rim. At this point, six months on, I couldn’t remember what cleaning I had and had not done to the pipe. I dragged out some soap and some tube brushes and scrubbed the insides. I’m glad I did – it still needed it.I wanted to have another look at the underside of the stummel for any sign of markings. I used a piece of chalk and pretended this was an old gravestone rubbing. The 301 came out more clearly, but, sadly, nothing else was revealed. It was worth a shot.I knew I had to stain the stummel, but I wanted to address the heat crazes inside the bowl first. I prepared some heat-resistant epoxy and filled the cracks and gouges, ensuring that the epoxy was evenly spread throughout the bowl. Of course, I did plug the draught hole with a folded pipe cleaner (coated in petroleum jelly) to make sure none of the epoxy made its way up there. Once done, a good 24 hours was needed to ensure that the epoxy was properly set.Having completed that, it was time for staining. This would require more than one colour and some finessing to get right. I applied black leather dye with a cotton dauber to colour the recesses (or valleys, if you like) of the rustication. I flamed it with my BIC lighter and let it set. This dye is alcohol-based, so I used isopropyl alcohol to wipe down the pipe and remove excess stain. This wasn’t sufficient, so I also used some 0000-grit steel wool. I coated it again with cordovan leather dye, flamed it again, and let that set too. As before, I wiped it down with alcohol to provide depth, nuance, and variation to the colour. I was pleased – and would be more pleased soon. At long last, I was off to my bench buffer to put the final touches on this pipe. I first gave it a thorough going-over with Red Tripoli. This may seem strange, but I needed to lighten the colour of the high points of the stummel. Then I used the White Diamond compound. Following that, several coats of conservator’s wax created a beautiful, glossy seal on the pipe and moved closer to closure for this long and involved repair.At this point, I glued the ferrule back in place. Then I gently sanded the inside of the bowl to provide a rough surface for what was to come next. I thinly coated the entire inside of the bowl with a mixture of activated charcoal and my wife’s homemade yogurt. Once hardened, this provided a good, slightly rough surface for a new cake to build.This rugged and handsome Peterson 301 System rusticated bent pot has come out of the depths and is back to life. I am pleased to announce that this pipe is for sale! If you are interested in acquiring it for your collection, please have a look in the “Ireland” pipe section of the store here on Steve’s website. You can also email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. The approximate dimensions of the pipe are as follows: length 5¾ in. (145 mm); height ¾ in. (45 mm); bowl diameter 1½ in. (38 mm); chamber diameter ¾ in. (20 mm). The weight of the pipe is 2 oz. (60 g). I hope you enjoyed reading the story of this restoration as much as I enjoyed restoring it. If you are interested in more of my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or send me an email. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

Restoring a 1914 BBB Pencil-Shank Billiard

Leave a reply

Blog by Kenneth Lieblich

For those of us who hunt for lost pipes, there are always peculiar tales of acquisition – but this one might be my most peculiar location of acquisition. A couple of weeks ago, my wife was out shopping with one of my daughters and they decided to go into an old-time ice cream parlour. While there, my wife spotted a jar for sale on the counter that read ‘Jar with parts + pipes’. That seemed quite odd for an ice cream joint, so she texted me the photo below and asked if I wanted it. It was very inexpensive, so I said, ‘Sure’. What an unusual spot for a jar of pipe parts!Well, there were some interesting bits and bobs in the jar – including a couple of items that particularly caught my eye. This lithe and comely pipe is one of them – and it will enter my pipe collection. As the title says, it is a 1914 BBB pencil-shank billiard with a sterling silver band and vulcanite, tapered, orific stem. How do I know it is from 1914? Well, let us take a closer look at that sterling silver band.Amidst the heavy tarnish, we can see three distinct marks. From left to right, they are an anchor, a lion passant, and a letter ‘P’. What do these marks mean? The anchor is the city mark and indicates the English city of Birmingham. The lion passant is the silver standard mark and indicates sterling – that is to say, 92.5% pure silver. The letter ‘P’ is the date letter and, as shown in the chart below, indicates the year 1914.That information was definitive in establishing a time period for the pipe. The other marks are perhaps slightly less helpful. The left side of the shank, the left side of the stem, and the silver band each have the recognizable logo of BBB inside a diamond shape. There are no other markings – although the absence of a model name etc. tells its own story. Read on. Let’s learn a bit about BBB. The article on Pipedia is bizarre insofar as the vast majority of the text is an egregious translation (from the French) of a good history of BBB on the Fumeurs de Pipe website. I speak French and the Babelfish translation that Pipedia uses is not helpful to anyone. I intend to make my own translation of that history one day. In the meantime, here is the non-translated text at the start of that article:

The initials once stood for Blumfeld’s Best Briars after Louis Blumfeld, who took over the management of the Adolph Frankau Company in 1856. After his death, the BBB gradually became known as Britain’s Best Briars. Soon to be the oldest English trademark in current use and the first pipe ever to have a registered trade mark. “Britain’s Best Briars”, often called BBB, is one of the oldest brands still in production and has always been the most popular foreign brand in Denmark. Earlier pipes included a metal rondel with a diamond shape including BBB imbedded in the stem top, and later post-Cadogan went to a stamped on logo, similar to the GBD pipes.

One detail that is of note from this time period of BBB pipes is that they only had two grades/models of pipe. One was ‘BBB Own Make’ (which later became BBB Best Make) and the other being simply ‘BBB’. This pipe is clearly in the latter category. Below is a page from a 1910 Harrods catalogue, showing some BBB pipes for sale. I have circled the one that most closely resembles the pipe I have and showed a close-up of it. Let us move on to the restoration. This pipe is 110 years old and I suppose it has fared well in that time. Certainly, I have seen much newer pipes in much worse condition. As I mentioned earlier, this stem is tapered, made of vulcanite, and concludes with an orific button. For more information on the orific button, please take the time to read Steve’s interesting article on the subject. As you can see, the stem is coated with calcification and oxidation. It has a few tooth marks, but nothing too serious. Sadly, however, the stem’s tenon has broken off inside the stummel’s mortise. More about the tenon in a bit. The stummel is in rougher shape. The wood shows wear and tear, including the odd nick and a significant gouge at the rim edge. The bowl is pretty thoroughly coated with cake and lava has erupted on to the rim. There is also some evidence of burned wood under that lava. I will have to excavate to learn more. Fortunately, this stummel does not look over-smoked (which was a real possibility), despite it clearly being a favourite of the previous owner. The sterling silver band (as you have already seen) is in fairly good physical condition, although it clearly has been heavily tarnished.I began my restoration of this pipe by cleaning the stem. I wiped it down with some oil soap on some cotton rounds in order to remove some calcification. I then cleaned the insides with pipe cleaners and 99% isopropyl alcohol. Although it was a bit dirty, it was much cleaner than I had expected after all these years.In order to address the oxidation, I dropped the stem in an oxidation removing fluid and left it to sit overnight. This mixture tends to draw the stem’s oxidation to the surface, where it can be more easily removed. When the stem was done soaking, I scrubbed the stem with some surface cleanser squirted on cotton rounds. This worked very well at removing the unsightly oxidation.I took a closer look at the diamond-shaped logo – it had been heavily worn over the past century or so. I hemmed and hawed about adding gold paint back to the logo on the stem. In the end I did it and figured that I can always remove later if I so desire.In my desire to keep original components wherever possible, I perfunctorily decided to not replace the tenon at this time. I knew that I could superglue it back in place – but I also knew that that would not hold in the long term, due to its poor shear strength. This would only be a cosmetic solution. Ultimately, however, I will replace the tenon at a later date. For now, I just want to see this thing restored!

In order to smooth and shine the beautiful black surface of the stem, I used my nine Micromesh pads to sand everything down gradually and delicately. For the last five of these pads, I also use some oil, both as a lubricant and as a method of inhibiting the return of oxidation. It is a lovely stem and it complements the stummel perfectly. On to the stummel – and my first task was reaming the cake out of the bowl. This was surprisingly challenging work, as the cake had become very hard over the years. There was a lot of debris and the narrowness of the bowl made it all the more tricky. I was also conscious of not wanting to crack the briar as I was doing this. In the end, a lot of carbonized material came out and the bowl remained perfectly intact. Next, I wanted to address the thick layer of lava on the rim. I put some oil soap in a shallow, plastic lid and soaked the rim in it for about a dozen minutes. This softened things up and I attacked it with a toothbrush. This allowed me to clean the rim very well, also using a piece of machine metal as a gentle scraping device. There was still damage, but it was much improved. As with the stem, I cleaned the insides of the stummel with pipe cleaners and 99% isopropyl alcohol. It was among the dirtiest pipes I have ever dealt with. Wow. The filth seemed as though it would never end. Obviously, it did at some point and I put the pipe down for a while – I was sick of seeing it!Of course, I came back to it and used some cleaner and tube brushes to scrub the insides clean. My efforts had not been in vain however, as the pipe looked so much better when I was done. I removed some of the burn marks on the rim with an aqueous solution of oxalic acid. I took some cotton swabs and rubbed and rubbed. The burns did improve but never fully disappeared. I took solace from the fact that the burns were superficial and did not affect the structural integrity of the wood. Alas, I neglected to take photographs of this step.

I also opted to leave the large wounds in the briar without filling them. They are part of this pipe’s long life and I am happy for them to remain as they are. The sanding will soften the edges of these wounds and that is sufficient. With that in mind, I set about sanding the stummel with my Micromesh pads. With each pad, the wood got smoother and the pipe got prettier. One product that always makes things better is the restoration balm that I use on the wood. It provides protection and revivification to the wood grain. I applied the stuff lightly but thoroughly, and then let it sit for 15 or 20 minutes. I then buffed it with a microfibre cloth and set it aside. What a beauty! After the Micromesh pads, but before the restoration balm, I cleaned up the sterling silver band. I worked very hard and very gingerly to remove the tarnish without damaging the antique silver. I reglued it in place, back on the shank, and finally buffed with my jewellery cloth.

Last step: off to my bench polisher! Here, I gave both the stem and stummel a thorough going over with the White Diamond compound and followed that up with a coat (only one this time) of carnauba wax. The pipe is absolutely beautiful and is truly reminiscent of an earlier time.All finished! This is a wonderfully crafted pipe and has a very jaunty feel to it. It took some work, but I am proud of it. It retains some wounds from battle, but, as Steve would say, they are part of this pipe’s story. This is one pipe that I am keeping for myself and adding to the ‘Lieblich Collection’. I am sure that I will be enjoying this one for many years to come. The approximate dimensions of the pipe are as follows: length 6 in. (153 mm); height 1½ in. (37 mm); bowl diameter 1 in. (27 mm); chamber diameter ⅔ in. (17 mm). The weight of the pipe is ⅝ oz. (18 g). I hope you enjoyed reading the story of this pipe as much I as I did restoring it. If you are interested in more of my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

Restoring a Beautiful Savinelli Punto Oro

Leave a reply

by Kenneth Lieblich

Next up on my restoration adventures is this Savinelli Punto Oro 915 KS. I acquired it from an older gentleman in Vancouver. He said he bought this (and the other pipes I got from him) more than “fifty years ago” – his words. That would date it to the early seventies, which fits with the style of the pipe. This is an unusual shape, to be sure. Savinelli calls it a Dublin – and so it is – but it has a luxurious, hourglass look to it as well. It has an elegant, elliptical shank and tapered, vulcanite stem. Perhaps I’ll call it a clessidra di Dublino. It’s a wonderful pipe and it deserves to be part of someone’s collection again. This pipe promises to be a great smoker. Let’s look at the markings. The top side of the shank reads Savinelli [over] Punto Oro. Savinelli, of course, is an Italian company, and the words Punto Oro mean literally, “gold point”. On the underside of the shank is the lovely Savinelli crown, next to which are the marks 915 KS [over] Italy. Naturally, the number refers to the shape and KS means “King Size”. Finally, there is a gold-coloured dot on the stem (made of brass) – a very nice touch.Savinelli is one of the most recognized names in pipe smoking and they have a long and storied history. You can read about them from their own website or from Pipedia’s article about them. However, I was particularly interested in learning more about the Punto Oro line. Sadly, Pipedia had nothing on this subject. I checked with Pipephil and they did have a bit of information, which I display below.I also found a bit of information on the Punto Oro line from Savinelli’s own website. They write:

PUNTO ORO pipe was the first pipe created by Achille Savinelli after the opening of the factory in 1958; a pipe that has always distinguished the Savinelli brand, its elegance, reliability and tradition. It is a top quality pipe with a wonderful grain. It is important to know it is very difficult to find a briar piece suitable to become a PUNTO ORO: just 1,2% of the whole choice is selected for this series, therefore not all our shapes are always available for these pipes.This was a well-loved pipe – and it shows in the best way. The stem on this pipe definitely shows signs of use. There were quite a few scratches in the vulcanite. There was also some calcification and oxidation. The stummel looked elegant, but tired. There were indications of lava on the rim and plenty of cake in the bowl. Also, the briar had a few little nicks along the rim from the years of love of its previous owner. Most concerning though, was a field of nicks on one side of the briar. Eek! More on that later. Well, the usual cleaning procedures were in order for this pipe. I started on the stem by wiping it down with some Murphy’s on a cotton round. Then, I cleaned out the insides of the stem with pipe cleaners and lemon-infused isopropyl alcohol. It wasn’t too dirty.Once that was done, the stem went for an overnight soak in the Before & After Hard Rubber Deoxidizer. After soaking, I cleaned off the de-oxidizing fluid with alcohol, pipe cleaners, et cetera. The oxidation had migrated to the surface and I used SoftScrub to work it off.Before I moved on to the Micromesh pads, I built up the tooth damage on the stem with black cyanoacrylate adhesive and let it fully cure. I used my miniature files to take down the majority of the dried glue. I then sanded it down with 400-grit sandpaper to meld seamlessly into the stem. I then used all nine Micromesh pads (1,500 through 12,000 grit) to bring out the lovely black lustre on the stem. I also used Obsidian Pipe Stem Oil in between each pad scrubbing. This also really made the brass dot pop! Putting the stem aside, I moved on to the stummel. I used both the PipNet Reamer, the KleenReem, and some sandpaper taped to a wooden dowel to take the bowl down to bare briar, as I wanted to ensure there were no hidden flaws in the walls of the bowl. Fortunately, there were none.I then proceeded to clean out the insides of the shank with Q-tips, pipe cleaners, and isopropyl alcohol. There was an enormous amount of nastiness inside this stummel and – boy-oh-boy – it took a lot of cotton to get this thing clean! A de-ghosting session seemed like a good idea. This de-ghosting consisted of thrusting cotton balls in the bowl and the shank, and saturating them with 99% isopropyl alcohol. I let the stummel sit overnight. This caused the oils, tars and smells to leech out into the cotton. Finally, a relatively clean and fresh-smelling bowl emerged. I then moved on to cleaning the outside of the stummel with Murphy’s Oil Soap and some cotton pads. What a difference that made! I also cleaned the insides with some soap and tube brushes. I examined the vast range of bumps in the briar. I dug out my iron and a damp cloth to try to raise them. The hot and moist steam can often cause the wood to swell slightly and return to shape. This worked incredibly well – I was absolutely delighted with the results. I took a close look at the rim. In order to save as much of the rim as possible, I used a piece of machine metal to very delicately scrape away as much lava as I could. I do this before automatically jumping to my topping board. This worked well and the topping board was not needed. Instead, I filled in a couple of nicks and used a wooden sphere and some pads to even out the top side and make it beautiful. After this, I used all nine Micromesh pads (1,500 through 12,000 grit) to make everything smooth. I applied some Before & After Restoration Balm and finally saw the beauty of my work. Off to the bench polisher I went. I applied some White Diamond and a few coats of carnauba wax and they added the finishing touch. This Savinelli Punto Oro 915 KS clessidra di Dublino was in need of a new lease on life. I am pleased to announce that this pipe is for sale! If you are interested in acquiring it for your collection, please have a look in the “Italy” pipe section of the store here on Steve’s website. You can also email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. The approximate dimensions of the pipe are as follows: length 5⅞ in. (150 mm); height 2 in. (51 mm); bowl diameter 1⅝ in. (39 mm); chamber diameter ¾ in. (20 mm). The weight of the pipe is 1½ oz. (46 g). I hope you enjoyed reading the story of this restoration as much as I enjoyed restoring it. If you are interested in more of my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or send me an email. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

More from the Great Morning Pipe Hunt

Leave a reply

Blog by Kenneth Lieblich

Having read Steve’s run-through of our treasure hunt, I figured I may as well add my finds, for the record. Steve has obviously infected me with the ‘bug’ of hunting down pipes. As he related, we had a great time and here are the six pipes I grabbed:First is a gorgeous black meerschaum billiard with an amber stem (not snapped – Deo gratias) and sterling silver bands around the shank and bowl. And it came with its proper case! I checked the hallmarks and they date this pipe to 1919 – a real old timer. Markings indicate that this is an Adolph Frankau. More on this pipe will come when I do some research.Second is a pipe that we thought was from Preben Holm – but isn’t. Doesn’t matter, it’s still a beauty. It’s made in Denmark by Granhill, which was a brand used by an American, Michael Kabik. This is a really well-made freehand pipe with a fine stem and stunning grain all over the bowl.Third is a really handsome rusticated pipe from Edward’s – a storied company from Florida that secretly stashed a bunch of Algerian briar during a time when it was hard to come by. I really like this shape and looking forward to cleaning it up.Fourth is a fascinating Peterson meerschaum Rhodesian. It has really neat colouring on the bowl and looks like it was greatly enjoyed by its previous owner. I assume that this pipe was made in the Isle of Man, as I believe all (or most) of Peterson’s meers were made there.Fifth is a cutty that’s a bit of a gamble. It isn’t fancy in any way, but it is well-drilled and well-fitted. It says KOOTENAY on the shank, which is a word I know from geography, but not from the world of pipes. Why did I buy it? Because the other side of the shank reads “Made in Canada” in a style that strongly resembles the pipes of the great Canadian artisan, Leonard Payne. More research will definitely be needed here.Sixth and last is a handsome French Lovat with no name of note, but a lot of character. It’s a real looker and I think it’s going to clean up really well.

Steve gave you a good overview of the antique fair, so I won’t reinvent the wheel. I had a great time with Steve and I am always indebted to his knowledge and insight. Hopefully, as time passes, some of that will leech its way into me!

Please follow me here on Steve’s website or email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

Experiments with Pipe Mud

Leave a reply

Blog by Kenneth Lieblich

Welcome to another exciting episode of Kenneth Provides Solutions to Problems That Don’t Exist! In other words, it’s another installment of my Pipe Incident Reports. The idea, in general, is to provide a brief write-up – focusing on a particular pipe-restoration-related issue – rather than an entire restoration story. Today I’m conducting a detailed examination of the issue of pipe mud (aka pipe mortar, pipe plaster, pipe cement, etc.). Heretofore, the standard for pipe mud has simply been cigar ash mixed with a bit of water. This is what Steve uses and, undoubtedly, many, many other pipe men have used it over the years. Here is a link to an article Steve wrote about it and here is a link to an article Fred Hanna wrote about pipe mud, back when Adam was a boy.

The pipe ash mud is useful and simple, but could there be better mixtures? Maybe. The Pipes Magazine forums have a very interesting discussion on the use of ash in pipe mud and I recommend reading it here. What I have written below is absolutely not the first word on pipe mud (and it certainly won’t be the last). I am delving into only a small part of the world of mud.

Before we go any further, let’s answer this question for the uninitiated: what is pipe mud used for? There are several uses, but the most common for me include (1) filling in micro-fissures from heat damage in the walls of a pipe bowl, and (2) lifting the heel of a bowl in order to ensure that it’s more closely in line with the draught hole. For these purposes, we need a material that is simple to make, easy to manipulate, and – once it has dried and set – inert, safe, and hard.

I’ve set myself the challenge of testing several different mixes of pipe mud – in this case, only based on plaster of Paris. I also made a batch with cigar ash, as a control. For the engineers and other scientists reading this article, please know that I have no scientific background and I am not equipped to conduct scientifically accurate tests of compressive (or tensile) strength at my home. However, I’ve done my best to eliminate as many variables in the tests as is reasonable, and I’ve attempted to test the compressive strength of the muds by comparison (and without having access to methods of testing through numbers). Given the disparity in results (and, quite frankly, the frivolity of the project), this proved to be quite sufficient for my needs. The idea for testing mud came to my mind after watching a YouTube video with a particular recipe for what the creator called ‘pipe mortar’. I’ve used it once or twice — it was fine, but nothing special. I’ll discuss its contents in a moment, but as soon as I mentioned it to Steve, he had some issues with it. I also chatted with John Young of NebraskaPeteGeek about it and he also had issues.I first set about making the control mud with cigar ash. I burned a small cigar by Schimmelpenninck until it was fully ashen. I then mixed it with a few drops of water to make a paste and let it set. For reference, I used distilled water in all of the muds – not because I think distilled water is required in any way to make this stuff, but just to eliminate a variable in my production. It’s important to know that ‘hardened’ pipe mud (made with cigar ash) is NOT very hard until the pipe has been smoked several times. It is the oils and tars from the tobacco that actually harden this type of mud.I’m not going to belabour my description of the recipes or the results. The first recipe below comes from the YouTube video I mentioned above. I’m giving all recipes a letter name for ease of reference.

A: cigar ash, drops of water (sorry I don’t have precise amounts for this one)
B: 1.0g of plaster of Paris, 0.5g of salt, 0.6g of activated charcoal, 12 drops of water.Recipe B is the one that Steve and John talked to me about. The creator says that the salt helps in strengthening his ‘mortar’. Steve’s concern is that salt isn’t great for the wood. It can cause tiny fissures, etc. to expand – this is also one of the reasons why Steve and I do not use salt in de-ghosting pipes. Anyway, the amount of salt involved is very small, so I don’t know if this has any effect or not. John, who has a background in chemistry, added that the salt wouldn’t be doing much in the hydrated calcium sulfate reaction. His view was that the salt is unnecessary.

Here are the other recipes:

C: 1.0g of plaster of Paris, 8 drops of water.
D: 1.0g of plaster of Paris, one drop of white glue, 8 drops of water.
E: 1.0g of plaster of Paris, one drop of wood glue, 8 drops of water.
F: 1.0g of plaster of Paris, 0.5g of salt (pulverized), 9 drops of water. In case you’re wondering why I tested both white glue and wood glue, it is because I didn’t realize that they were both polyvinyl acetates. Anyway, in producing the four muds above, I didn’t do a great job of keeping the shape of the samples similar to each other. However, I don’t think this had an overly negative effect on the results at this stage. Definitely the worst of the four in compressive strength was F (similar to B). The middling mixture was C. The best were D and E. I’m giving the edge to E overall, but the difference between the two might just be in my head. They both had good hardness and compressive strength. I have some fine results, but there is an aesthetic problem: the best mud is white! It’s not the end of the world, but it doesn’t look great on the inside of a pipe one has just restored. A new test was in order. I made two new batches of E – but I added activated charcoal to one of them. These recipes look like this:

E: 1.0g of plaster of Paris, one drop of wood glue, 8 drops of water.
G: 1.0g of plaster of Paris, 0.6g of activated charcoal, one drop of wood glue, 9 drops of water.
For this test, I made a much better attempt to have the same shape of mud – a sort of cylinder. The result of the compressive strength test here was definitive: E was notably better. This was no surprise to John. He commented that the charcoal would weaken the structure of the plaster, as it would interfere with (rather than adhere to) the crystalline structure.One thing that I did not test – but probably should have – is mixing pipe ash with plaster of Paris and water. However, given the above results, I expect that it would also be inferior to E.

Here is my (slightly strange) conclusion: although E (perhaps along with D) was hardest and strongest, I am not advocating for YOU to use any particular pipe mud. I have my own thoughts on which mud is best for my work, but my opinion isn’t worth a hill of beans. My goal here is to present my amateurish results, hopefully for your benefit – and that’s it. It is your task now to take the results and do with them as you wish. Special thanks to Steve Laug and John Young for their words of wisdom.

If you make use of these results in your pipe work, please let me know how it goes. I would also be interested to know if you have a different pipe mud recipe you recommend. I hope you enjoyed reading this installment of the Pipe Incident Report – I look forward to writing more. If you are interested in my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

A Brand-New Jima Pipe

1 Reply

Blog by Kenneth Lieblich

Welcome to the wonderful world of Jima! Are you interested in metal pipes? Are you interested in strange system pipes? Are you interested in French pipes? Are you interested in futuristic designs? Well, have I got a pipe for you! One sees Jima pipes from time to time, but it’s particularly nice to see an unsmoked one. Today, I’m putting this new Jima up for sale. Let me tell you a bit about them. The following information is from Pipedia:

French brand created in the 1960s by Mayeux (editor MAHIEUX) , which had a very modern look. This modern look was emphasized by the manufacturer in the promotion material. The slogan speaks of “La pipe de l’an 2000” or “The pipe of the year 2000”. The factory was sold to Chapel Frères & Cie, which became part of the Berrod-Regad group in 1987. The Jima pipe is no longer made.   Although Pipedia says “created in the 1960s”, I can provide the more exact date of 1963. It was marketed until the mid-1970s. The pipe shown in the above ad is actually a much rarer version of the Jima – it has its metal bars wrapped around the outside of the plastic case.Much of what is written in the Pipedia article is, in fact, blatantly ripped off from the website of the Amsterdam Pipe Museum. The original article from which this is taken was in Dutch, but here is their English translation:

A special product of French origin is the Jima pipe, for export also known under the name Garland. It concerns a pipe having a different shape provided with a silver-plated or gold-plated steel metal frame, connecting a plastic mouthpiece with a plastic outer shell that houses the pipe bowl. This plastic pipe comes in different colours, with black and ivory as the most popular. More modern versions are mottled in pastel shades, whose sales stay far below any level. The inner bowl looks like meerschaum but is actually made of pressed white clay. The stem has a specific filter system which consists of a wound spiral, the so-called “filtres serpentins helicoidaux”, which according to the product information is electrostatic. To access the filter the stem can be unscrewed, although in other instances a user-friendly spring system is applied. At the top of the mouthpiece we often read “Breveté France & Etranger” or “Modèle Deposé Made in France”.

Jima was certainly futuristic looking and, by all accounts, they smoke very well. The Smoking Metal website has also has an entry on Jima pipes, which is worth looking at. Additionally, Elie’s Freehand Pipes has several photos – with this particularly useful photo of a partially disassembled Jima:Even more helpfully, there is a French website called PBMI. This stands for Pipes en Métal à Bol Interchangeable, which, in English, means Metal Pipes with Interchangeable Bowls. They have some interesting information for those who read French and many photos for those who don’t. Most interesting of all, however, is a brief article in the French edition of Popular Mechanics in March 1963. I have translated the article for you all here below:

All new in its shape, its technique and the materials that make it, this pipe is like a pocket hookah. The bowl is made of a permeable silica-alumina clay and has no taste. The bowl is cooled during smoking because it is mounted with a radiation ring and housed in a special plastic case. As a result, the air circulates easily, through holes in the bottom and by an annular slit located under the radiation ring.

The pipe is very light and the bowl can be easily replaced, if necessary. It is connected to the tip by two fixed side rods and a removable condenser-radiation tube that can be emptied instantly. This radiation tube contains a newly-developed, electrostatic spiral filter which has many surfaces to trap tobacco tar and condensation. This coil, coated with an insulating aluminum oxide film, suspended by two insulating joints, causes an electrostatic effect, resulting in the quick condensation of nicotine and other alkaloids. The smoke is cooled, to the satisfaction of the smoker and those around him. This newly designed and produced pipe is very healthy.Anyway, all in all, a fascinating piece of pipe history and design. It is bound to be a great smoker and it is available now. If you are interested in acquiring it for your collection, please have a look in the French pipe Section of the store here on Steve’s website. You can also email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. The approximate dimensions of the pipe are as follows: length 5⅔ in. (144 mm); height 1⅝ in. (40 mm); bowl diameter 1½ in. (38 mm); chamber diameter ¾ in. (19 mm). The weight of the pipe is 1¼ oz. (39 g). If you are interested in more of my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or send me an email. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

Restoring a Classic Peterson System 359

Leave a reply

Blog by Kenneth Lieblich

What a handsome pipe! I found this PRE-republic-period Peterson System 359 at a local antique shop and I was charmed by it right away. It’s a handsome devil and the look of it gives one a feeling of comfort. It is satisfying and comfortable in the hand – like a mug of tea. There was a lovely patina on this old timer and I really wanted to get this into the hands of Peterson lover. Let’s have a closer look. This Peterson 359 pipe has the classic “System” look: bent shape, nickel mount, and tapered, army-style stem. Of course, it also had the traditional Peterson P-lip stem. The markings on the left side of the shank are Peterson’s [over] System [over] ③ [over] 359. The underside of the shank showed Made in Ireland in a circle. The nickel mount on the shank had K&P (in shields) [over] Peterson [over] Dublin. There were no markings on the stem. The Peterson System pipes are well-storied among Peterson collectors/admirers. I took the opportunity to read the article on Pipedia, specifically about the System pipes, by Jim Lilley. There is lots of good information there and I encourage you to read it: https://pipedia.org/wiki/A_closer_look_at_the_famous_Peterson_Standard_System_Pipe.Having seen that the words “Made in Ireland” were in a circle, I knew that I was dealing with an older pipe. Precisely how old would require some elementary research. The main Pipedia article on Peterson included a few interesting lines:

“Charles Peterson applied for a patent for an improved tobacco pipe on the 8th of August 1890. He was awarded patent number 12393 on the 16th of June 1891 for Great Britain and Ireland. This came to be known as the famous ‘System Pipe’ patent.”

“Later they stamped their pipes with “Made in Ireland” in a circle format 1945-1947…”

This is awfully helpful in dating this pipe. I can comfortably say that this pipe dates from 1945 through 1947, that is to say, just short of 80 years (at the time of writing).

As usual, I also owe a debt of gratitude to Mark Irwin of Peterson Pipe Notes. He has a very interesting article on the various System shapes and I highly recommend having a look: https://petersonpipenotes.org/146-a-guide-to-system-shapes-1896-2019-part-1-the-300-shape-group/. Here is a screenshot of the relevant bit:In addition, Mark has an article on an older 359 that he picked up: https://petersonpipenotes.org/tag/peterson-359-system/.

On to the pipe itself: the stem was in average condition – not especially dirty, but it had been well used. It had a few dents. The bowl was moderately dirty and had quite a bit of lava and plenty of cake. Aside from some small fills, the outside of the bowl was very nice. The nickel mount was in good shape – only some very slight dents. To work! The stem was first on my list – and I couldn’t get it out of the mortise! I grabbed the heat gun and gently warmed up the goo inside until it had softened enough to let go of the stem. I wiped the outside down with Murphy’s Oil Soap on some cotton pads. I also took a BIC lighter and ‘painted’ the stem with its flame to lift the few bite marks and dents. Sadly, however, this did not do much. Then I cleaned out the inside with pipe cleaners and isopropyl alcohol. I used some SoftScrub on the outside of the stem to remove some oxidation. Then, the stem went for an overnight soak in the Pipe Stem Oxidation Remover. The following day, I cleaned the de-oxidizing mess off with alcohol, pipe cleaners, et cetera. The oxidation had migrated to the surface and would be fairly straightforward to remove. I scrubbed again with SoftScrub on some cotton pads to remove the leftover oxidation. I built up the dents on the stem with black cyanoacrylate adhesive and let them cure. I then sanded the adhesive down with some sandpaper to level out with the stem. I then used all nine Micromesh pads (1,500 through 12,000 grit) to polish it and highlight the black lustre. I also used Obsidian Pipe Stem Oil in between each pad scrubbing. Moving on to the stummel, I first decided to ream out the bowl. I used the PipNet Reamer to remove the built-up cake and followed that with 220-grit sandpaper taped to a dowel to eliminate as much as possible. I took the chamber down to bare briar to ensure there were no hidden flaws in the wall. Fortunately, there were none.I used cotton rounds and some Murphy’s Oil Soap to scrub the outside of the stummel and a toothbrush with Murphy’s for the lava on the pipe’s rim. I took a close look at the rim. In order to save as much of the rim as possible, I used a piece of machine metal to very delicately scrape away as much lava as I could. I do this before automatically jumping to my topping board. This worked well.I then proceeded to clean out the insides of the shank with Q-tips, pipe cleaners, and lemon-infused isopropyl alcohol. There was quite a bit of filth inside this stummel, and it took a fair amount of cotton to get it clean. I followed that up by cleaning the insides with some dish soap and tube brushes. I decided to de-ghost the pipe in order to remove any lingering smells of the past. I thrust cotton balls into the bowl and the shank and saturated them with 99% isopropyl alcohol. I let the stummel sit overnight. This caused any remaining oils, tars and smells to leach out into the cotton. The bowl was nice and clean after this.There were a couple small fills and nicks around the bowl. I opted to leave them as they are – they are minor and are part of the history of this pipe. I felt that I had interfered enough and didn’t want to interfere anymore. Then, I used most (but not all) of my Micromesh pads on the stummel to finish it off. This included buffing up the nickel mount to a beautiful shine with my jewelry cloth. I also applied some Before & After Restoration Balm and let it sit for 20 minutes to do its magic. It adds that certain je ne sais quoi to the wood. Then it was off to the bench polisher! A dose of White Diamond and a few coats of carnauba wax were just what this pipe needed. Boy-oh-boy, this is one good-looking pipe! I’m pleased with the results. This Peterson Standard System 359 looks fantastic again and is ready to be enjoyed by its next owner. I am pleased to announce that this pipe is for sale! If you are interested in acquiring it for your collection, please have a look in the Ireland pipe section of the store here on Steve’s website. You can also email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. The approximate dimensions of the pipe are as follows: length 5⅞ in. (149 mm); height 4⅛ in. (105 mm); bowl diameter 1⅓ in. (33 mm); chamber diameter ¾ in. (19 mm). The weight of the pipe is 1⅞ oz. (55 g). I hope you enjoyed reading the story of this pipe’s restoration as much as I did restoring it. If you are interested in more of my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or send me an email. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.

A Book Review – The Book of Pipes & Tobacco by Carl Ehwa, Jr.

Leave a reply

Blog by Kenneth Lieblich

It has now been fifty years since the publication of The Book of Pipes & Tobacco by master tobacco blender, Carl Ehwa, Jr. In that time, there have been few – if any – books that are as enjoyable on the subject as this one. This book only ever had one printing and, nowadays, it is a challenge to find it at a reasonable price. Today, I am offering a feeble (and brief) review on the book – and a copy of the book for sale. My intent is not to provide a lengthy or comprehensive review of Ehwa’s book. Instead, I hope to draw your attention to an important resource and fine reference, which ought to have a place in your personal library.

Carl Ehwa was the master blender of the Fred Diebel Tobacco Company and, in 1977, he and his wife, Mary, founded the famous (and now defunct) McClelland Tobacco Company. He was apparently an interesting character and had a great deal of knowledge of pipes, pipe smoking, tobacco production, et cetera. In 1974, Carl and Mary managed to convince Random House to publish a book on pipes – this was no small feat, as Random House did not normally publish such books.

First and foremost, it is worth mentioning that this winsome book is full of beautiful photographs and other images. The photographs are well-taken, illustrative, and copious. However, this is not merely a picture book for the coffee table. It is an excellent and quite thorough study of pipes and tobacco, in which the writing is perfectly complemented by the numerous, fine photos and illustrations. Ehwa divides his book into four parts, each of which is further subdivided into relevant topics.

Part One – The Remarkable Evolution of Smoking. In essence, this is a history of smoking from ancient times to the present (circa 1974) day. I am a lover and student of history, but I’ve often felt that many books with chapters on smoking history are quite humdrum and make no attempt to draw the reader in. Fortunately, Ehwa entertains and challenges the reader in this section and (pleasingly) makes no attempt to be exhaustive. Instead, his writing is relevant and makes one feel prepared for the information to come.

Part Two – The Amiable Pipe. This section addresses the pipe as a cultural item, as an objet d’art, and as a source of pleasure. Ehwa gives thorough descriptions of pipes of clay, porcelain, various softwoods, hookahs, meerschaum, calabash, and, of course, briar. He provides the fascinating histories behind each of these styles of pipe and allows us to sense the differences and delights of the various materials. Many amusing stories are found here and they are well worth reading. It is, by far, the longest chapter in the book and I learned so much from this section – no surprise.

Part Three – Tobacco: “The Special Herb”. As you might guess, this section describes (in considerable detail) the growing, curing, processing, and blending of tobacco. The entire manufacturing process from planting to smoking is covered in an engaging manor. Of course, it also discusses the different types of tobacco and their numerous cuts. Helpfully, Ehwa also offers suggestions to the reader on the selection and storage of tobacco. This is another terrific read, with particularly useful photographs — I especially like the photos (contemporaneous with the book) of the tobacco auctions in the southern USA.

Part Four – Pleasure of the Pipe. This section is well described by its subtitle: “The art of getting the most from tobacco and pipe”. Ehwa provides advice (1) for the new pipe smoker; (2) on filling and lighting a pipe; (3) on caring for a pipe; and (4) on solving some common pipe-smoking problems. He offers as good advice as you’ll find anywhere, but he is in no way preaching. I found it interesting to compare his advice with other pieces of advice I’ve picked from other books or mentors (like Steve). It is a fine way to close out a fine book.

As you can tell, I highly recommend this book. It is one of the best pipe books ever written in the English language. The book is thorough without being tedious, informative without being condescending, and entertaining without being frivolous. I have seen some comments online suggesting books from Richard Carleton Hacker over this one. Although I enjoyed Hacker’s books, I find his writing to be a bit turgid (and his accuracy to be a bit amiss), and I unhesitatingly recommend Carl Ehwa’s book over the others.

I am pleased to announce that this book is for sale! If you are interested in acquiring it, please have a look in the ‘Pipe Accessories’ section of the store here on Steve’s website. You can also email me directly at kenneth@knightsofthepipe.com. I hope you enjoyed reading my review of The Book of Pipes and Tobacco by Carl Ehwa, Jr. If you are interested in more of my work, please follow me here on Steve’s website or send me an email. Thank you very much for reading and, as always, I welcome and encourage your comments.