Discussion in 'Pipe Tobacco' started by David Emond, Jan 2, 2012.
Do companys make pipe tobacco the same way as cigarette tobacco?
Good question, Dave. I believe there are substantial differences in the way the leaf is processed once it's cured, and I think to some extent there are parallels in the type of leaf used for cigarettes and pipe tobacco, but that's about all I've got. I await a more detailed answer from one of our more knowledgeable and/or experienced members.
There are a number of chemicals in cigarettes, to control the evenness and speed of burning for instance, that do not go into pipe tobaccos. The nicotine content is not artificially pumped up. In fact, some of the production processes remove part of the nicotine from some varieties of pipe tobacco. Some producers do add chemicals to keep pipe tobacco from drying out. I tend to avoid those if I am aware of it.
I too await those who know more about it.
There are reports that have proven that most cigarette companies add chemicals to the tobacco to make it more addictive. I've never heard of a pipe tobacco processed that way. I've heard that cigarette tobacco is mostly made from Burley, but it doesn't smell like any Burley pipe tobacco I've ever smoked either.
I would like to hear from someone with first hand knowledge or research as well...
I've always wondered about the aroma too. Even the taste is different from a burley to a marlboro.
I read that nicotone requires an alkaline environment for it to be released quickly and with the highest degree of potency. Therefore, some companies are purported to add ammonia to ensure an alkaline environment and release the nicotine more fully.
One taste difference is due to inhaling cigarette smoke as opposed to not inhaling pipe smoke. The act of inhaling will definitely degrade and weaken the flavor.
This is true in the U.S. Most Euro cigarettes do not contain this chemical.
I've also heard that this chemical is imbedded in the cigarette paper rather than the tobacco itself. I'm not sure if this is true but I do know that the flavoring in menthol cigarettes largely comes from the paper being treated with it rather than the tobacco.
I've only smoked 1 cigaretted in my life, and I did not inhale. It tasted nothing like any pipe tobacco I've ever tried. The scent of a burning cigarette is nothing like any pipe tobacco I've ever smelled either, so there have to be some pretty substantial differences on top of the inhale effect.
The potassium nitrate is in the tobacco and probably in the paper as well. Aka salt peter, traditionally used to reduce sexual desire in males. Smoke that for a while.
The fact is that tobacco is tobacco. A cigarette made with predominately burley should taste and smell like pipe tobacco that is predominately burley. In fact, many pipe tobaccos of the past were also cigarette tobaccos. Same tin could produce either or both.
So... something occurs in the manufacture of machine made cigarettes these days because I agree with your taste and aroma assessment... and quite honestly, we'd have to talk to an insider to find out what that something is... and they are not likely to divulge what causes the differences.
I was married for 9 years to a woman that could accomplish that feat better than any cigarette or chemical.
Almost all tobacco have additives, like nicotin. But chemical additives are used in cigarettes.
Most pipe tobacco manufacturers do not use chemical additives, with the exception of PG (propylene glycol). Of course they use additives such as flavorings, sugar, etc. PG is non-toxic and used as a preservative. It is also used in food.
I found this:
- - the smaller tobacco companies that blend their tobaccos are by and large sticklers for purity. - - One Big Tobacco company has an online guide to their pipe tobacco additives, and I haven't seen anything remotely dangerous on their list.
Quote is from here:
Here is one declaration from Swedish Match (importer of an Orlik Company) to New Zealand authorities. Additives list is down below, mainly these additives are also in food:
Nicotine as an additive? In cigarettes, yes, but I'm not familiar with anyone adding nicotine to pipe tobacco except by adding a high nic baccy to a blend. Of course, just because I don't know about them doesn't mean they aren't there.
Re PG, non toxic does not mean safe for long term consumption. A number of people have an unpleasant reaction to it. I will not buy any tobacco that I know has PG in it. What does it become when burned??? The fact that something is allowed as a food additive does not mean you want to consume it or smoke it. The FDA is not free from commercial influence, not at all.
I'm not insisting that PG is unsafe. I do not know. But I don't want to smoke it. I do believe that all tobacco producers should be required to reveal ALL non tobacco additives. I don't want them to reveal their exact formula but to reveal all additives. Marketing pressure can corrupt the very best of people.
Oh yes, I've know a couple of those. Didn't marry them but stuck around long enough to experience the effect. Ugh.
Ive neve seen someone walk up to a cigarette smoker and told them hey your cigarette smells good hehe. Im happy to read that there is indeed a big difference in the production of pipe tobacco.
I also understand that many of the cigarette companies take the tobacco and make it into a reconstituted sheet much like paper. That reconstituted sheet is then shredded to make up the filler in most cigarettes. It is very easy to add additives, chemicals, etc to that sheet. Here's and excerpt from an article on this. It came from tobacco university.
-During the 1930s, the cigarette industry began developing homogenized forms of tobacco which could be manipulated to deliver consistent taste and smoking qualities at an economical cost. The result of this pursuit was reconstituted tobacco sheet, or RTS. The manufacturing of RTS initiated and enabled unprecedented manipulation to the cigarette and its constituents. RTS consists of tobacco scraps as well as stems, ground up and mixed with additives, flavorings, cellulose (for adhesion), and other potential ingredients. This unnatural concoction is then formed into thin sheets and chopped up to be used as cigarette filler. Today, most cigarette manufacturers use some form RTS in their products and only one major manufacturer, Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co., refuses to use it at all.
By the 1950s, a similar method of homogenization was developed which could be used on cigars. This tobacco-like product ushered in a new era of inexpensive, machine-made cigars.
Thanks for the post. The product sounds pretty nasty. I wonder how the Santa Fe ones differ in content, taste and smell though?
Dang, I hope I never smoke another cigarette.
They don't. Well, except for the black ones that contain perique. The perique alone makes them different. The others smell like your basic Marlboro.