ted
|
my favorite shapesMy golfing friend, who "inherited" my 100 or so pipes, asked me last week about my favorite Grabow shapes. Quite a question.
So here goes....#1, #25 Continental. Great shape and with the 1369s bit it's a comfortable smoke. It's a really great shape that was probably copied from KYM.
#2, #83 Bent Bulldog.
#3, the #42 Continental. Full Bent with a deeper bore than most Grabow's and the 1369s bit, again a very comfortable smoker.
#4, the 84L...Steve'll tell you.
#5, Either the #19 or the #65 quarter bent. Guess I'd rate the #65 higher because of the 1373 bit. It's a bit thinner.
#7, the #11 apple.....
How's that for a list. Cost ya' a fortune on Ebay today.....ted
|
BWThomas
|
looks like an excellent '7 day set'........Sparta.....can you hear me?
|
LokoMac8
|
Re: my favorite shapesFOR READY REFERENCE AND FOR THOSE WITHOUT A SHAPE CHART HANDY:
| ted wrote: | | So here goes....#1, #25 Continental. Great shape and with the 1369s bit it's a comfortable smoke. It's a really great shape that was probably copied from KYM. |
| ted wrote: | | #2, #83 Bent Bulldog. |
| ted wrote: | | #3, the #42 Continental. Full Bent with a deeper bore than most Grabow's and the 1369s bit, again a very comfortable smoker. |
| ted wrote: | | #4, the 84L...Steve'll tell you. |
| ted wrote: | | #5, Either the #19 |
| ted wrote: | | or the #65 quarter bent. Guess I'd rate the #65 higher because of the 1373 bit. It's a bit thinner. |
| ted wrote: | | #7, the #11 apple..... |
|
ted
|
Thanks RJ. All I had on the deck was my memory. They even look better "in person".....ted
|
LokoMac8
|
Re: my favorite shapes | ted wrote: | | . . . asked me last week about my favorite Grabow shapes. Quite a question. |
It certainly is! And coming from this person whose favorite shape is probably whatever I have in my hand at the moment and smoking, I don't see how you got it narrowed down so concisely!
| ted wrote: | | How's that for a list. Cost ya' a fortune on Ebay today.....ted |
It's a great list and one that I am in full agreement with for the most part -- or at least I agree they are great shapes and all well balanced and comfortable good smokers!
And, YES, it has cost me a bit to get those! --RJ--
|
ozark southpaw
|
Missing two of those!! The #25 and the #42.
You need to sneak over there and steal all those pipes back Ted!!
|
LokoMac8
|
Re: my favorite shapes | ted wrote: | | #7, the #11 apple..... |
Now this brings up one of those quirks that I have discovered and that still continues to confuse me. It happened with the APPLE SHAPE and it happened with something else I can't remember offhand.
Anyway, in an "early 1960s" chart (remember, they are never dated it seems), the #10 is shown as a MEDIUM APPLE and the #11 is shown as a LARGE APPLE.
HOWEVER, in the circa 1963 and 1969 charts, the #10 is shown as a LARGE APPLE and the #11 is shown as an EXTRA LARGE APPLE. In these two charts there is another basic apple shape also, which is a #12 being labeled as a MEDIUM APPLE.
I don't know if the actual bowl sizes ever changed, but the designations sure did! Whenever I come across a new apple shape, I am always a bit perplexed trying to figure out if it is a #10, #11 or #12. I think I only have ONE with a shape number stamp on it for comparison.
I am not even going to bring up the SMALL APPLE, which isn't actually on these early charts, or the SLIM APPLE and COLLEGIATE APPLE which are . . . --RJ--
|
ozark southpaw
|
Bushels of Apples !!
|
ted
|
Re: my favorite shapes | LokoMac8 wrote: | | ted wrote: | | #7, the #11 apple..... |
Now this brings up one of those quirks that I have discovered and that still continues to confuse me. It happened with the APPLE SHAPE and it happened with something else I can't remember offhand.
Anyway, in an "early 1960s" chart (remember, they are never dated it seems), the #10 is shown as a MEDIUM APPLE and the #11 is shown as a LARGE APPLE.
HOWEVER, in the circa 1963 and 1969 charts, the #10 is shown as a LARGE APPLE and the #11 is shown as an EXTRA LARGE APPLE. In these two charts there is another basic apple shape also, which is a #12 being labeled as a MEDIUM APPLE.
I don't know if the actual bowl sizes ever changed, but the designations sure did! Whenever I come across a new apple shape, I am always a bit perplexed trying to figure out if it is a #10, #11 or #12. I think I only have ONE with a shape number stamp on it for comparison.
I am not even going to bring up the SMALL APPLE, which isn't actually on these early charts, or the SLIM APPLE and COLLEGIATE APPLE which are . . . --RJ-- |
RJ, you pointed out something that I was not aware of. Didn't know that the description had changed. Ever watch "Dragnet". The names were changed to protect the innocent.
Here is how I know them...
#52...Bantam Apple...as in Lark and Duke.
#72...Slim Apple...available in all lines, but scarce in the "high grades"
#12...Small Apple
#10...Medium Apple
#11...Large Apple
I know the size of the shapes never changed. Must have just changed the description.
If the description of the Apples changed, then the Billiards, Dublins, and Pots probably did also....ted
|
LokoMac8
|
Re: my favorite shapes | ted wrote: | | I know the size of the shapes never changed. Must have just changed the description. |
Once again, I might have misspoken. I got those images from my "master shape chart" project, and they were scanned from the charts dated as mentioned. BUT I just looked through some of my charts and now see that the RJR charts differ from the retail sales type charts over these size designations. That seems to be where the discrepency comes in over these shapes, thought I am still at a loss as to why they would be referred to one way for the RJR charts and another on the other charts. --RJ--
|
ted
|
Remember we (Grabow) wanted to convince the smokers of larger pipes that we had them. The description made them "sound" larger.
The size never changed.....Sell the sizzle, not the bacon......ted
|
Terry292
|
I've been watching some of the Continental shapes on E-bay recently. Haven't pulled the trigger yet, but I'm getting closer.
Terry
|
LokoMac8
|
| ted wrote: | Remember we (Grabow) wanted to convince the smokers of larger pipes that we had them. The description made them "sound" larger.
The size never changed.....Sell the sizzle, not the bacon......ted |
Good point! --RJ--
|
LokoMac8
|
| Terry292 wrote: | I've been watching some of the Continental shapes on E-bay recently. Haven't pulled the trigger yet, but I'm getting closer.
Terry |
I think I have most of the Continental shapes, so I shouldn't be getting in your way when you pull the trigger. Just in case, you might let me know which ones you may be bidding on so I can make sure not to run the price up on you. --RJ--
|
|
|
|