Categorical difference between pipe and cigarette tobacco?

[Irfan]

So, is there really a fundamental difference between pipe tobacco and cigarette tobacco?

Before I get a blast of responses about the vastly wider range of types of tobacco, different aromatics, latakia, perique, ancient cured virginia, etc ..... yes, I get that, for sure. But you also hear some tobacco reviewers who complain that some pipe tobaccos, usually OTC burley-based aromatics, "Taste like a cigarette." So IS there really a difference between tobacco of that sort, and tobacco used in cigarettes? Except, of course, that it's cut differently? I read the Wikipedia article, and got something about "sun cured" tobacco being used for cigarettes .... but not for pipe tobacco?

There was also something about the chemical composition of pipe tobacco smoke being different, which allowed for absorbtion through the lining of the mouth. Apparently, much less nicotine is absorbed through the mouth with cigarettes.

One of the reasons that I ask about this is that I live in Indonesia and plan to make a trip to the island of Lombok, a little bit to the east of Bali, where a lot of tobacco is grown. It's usually grown by smaller holders, and there is a vast array of different types and variations, with simple classification as "burley" or "virginia" impossible. I remember seeing big piles of tobacco in the markets there, some of it of very high quality, but suited to rolling cigarettes (the locals always say that the big cigarette companies, such as BAT, only buy the low grades for general production!). In particular, there is one district, called Senang, which has become a bit of a "holy grail" for local enthusiasts, but mainly for those who like roll your own. The tobacco from that district has a very limited production and is therefore priced at about ten or fiteen times more than other local tobaccos.

What are the chances that a tobacco used for cigarettes such as that would also be suitable as condiment tobacco for blending?

I should point out that I remember a very devoted tobacco enthusiast once said he'd only ever had disastrous results with experiments like this. Haha. But going out to tobacco growing villages on a remote island on a quest like this still seems irresistible.

[Tashaz]

Yep, you answered your own questions. Virginia tobacco is used by and large in cigarettes & also used in pipe tobacco. The difference is that 486 chemicals are not used in pipe tobacco.

[Andrewdk]

Cigarettes contain both burley and VA I believe, in varying quantities depending on the brand.
The real different is cigarettes are nasty little dried out sour sticks of doom that deliver nicotine fast and strong. Pipe tobacco on the other hand is tasty and good for the soul, mind you knowing this I still smoke too many damn cigarettes.

At the end of the day a cigarettey tasting pipe baccy still tastes better then an actual cigarette.

[ChronoB]

Most cigs are burley, virginia, or a combo. Still others, like Camels, include some oriental leaf. A long time ago many blends were cut so that they would work rolled in cigarette paper or in pipes, and they were advertised that way (Prince Albert, for example). As a result you get some aroma/taste similarities. A few times I've smoked blends that just taste ashy, and those reminded my of the few cigarettes I've ever had.

Aside from using the some of the same tobacco varieties, modern cigs have almost nothing in common with pipe tobacco. One, I doubt they are using the highest quality or most thoroughly cured leaf like most pipe tobacco blenders. And two, this is how modern commercial cigs are made (with the exception of a few brands like American Spirit):
What's inside a US blended cigarette? - YouTube

That crap better not be in my pipe tobacco. I don't know how anyone can smoke a cig after watching that.

[Irfan]

Most cigs are burley, virginia, or a combo. Still others, like Camels, include some oriental leaf. A long time ago many blends were cut so that they would work rolled in cigarette paper or in pipes, and they were advertised that way (Prince Albert, for example). As a result you get some aroma/taste similarities. A few times I've smoked blends that just taste ashy, and those reminded my of the few cigarettes I've ever had.

So, I wonder what the Wikipedia article was going on about when it said that pipe smoke is chemically different from cigarette smoke, so nicotine is absorbed more readily through the lining of the mouth with the pipe tobacco? It sorta seems to be true, I certainly don't inhale my pipe tobacco but I get a good nicotine kick out of strong tobacco! Sorry, can't find the article now.

[ChronoB]

So, I wonder what the Wikipedia article was going on about when it said that pipe smoke is chemically different from cigarette smoke, so nicotine is absorbed more readily through the lining of the mouth with the pipe tobacco? It sorta seems to be true, I certainly don't inhale my pipe tobacco but I get a good nicotine kick out of strong tobacco! Sorry, can't find the article now.

You trust a wikipedia article? I don't think there's any evidence that nicotine from pipe tobacco is absorbed more easily anywhere in the body than nicotine from cigrarette tobacco. Now, you'll certainly get more volume of smoke from a pipe or cigar, and you're more likely to sit and smoke those for longer periods. More smoke and more smoking will deliver more nicotine, but don't forget that modern cigarettes are little more than nicotine delivery devices. Everything about them is designed to deliver as much nicotine as possible for as little cost as possible. Add the fact that most if not all cig smoke goes into the lungs (the only was to better absorb a drug is to shoot it in your veins), then pipes/cigars can't compete in the nicotine department.

[freestoke]

Add the fact that most if not all cig smoke goes into the lungs (the only was to better absorb a drug is to shoot it in your veins), then pipes/cigars can't compete in the nicotine department.

Freebase nicotine

This rapid method of nicotine delivery also leads to a rapid removal from the system. Note that the total nicotine content does not change, merely the ratio of freebase nicotine to the base level of the tobacco. Cigarette tobacco generally has a low overall nicotine level, like the mild tobaccos of the pipe world. I'm not sure they still contain the same types of tobacco as yesteryear, but brands like Lucky Strike, Camel and Chesterfield unfiltered cigarettes once were quite strong. I doubt they are as strong today.

In any case, pipe smokers lead the field in nicotine blood levels, by a substantial margin over cigarette and cigar smokers. There's not the "rush" you get from those, but the actual amount of nicotine is apparently greater, just not in the rapidly absorbed freebase form.

[TommyTree]

Once upon a time, tobaccos like Prince Albert and Five Brothers were marketed for pipe and RYO. Cigarette companies generally grow the same plant as pipe tobacco companies. There is one major difference. The cigarette companies are about quantity, and the pipe tobacco is about quality. Whether all you cigar guys want to admit this, I've had knowledgeable friends say pipe tobacco uses only the highest quality tobacco leaf. Cigars are a close second, but the standards for the leaf used is not quite as high a quality as pipe tobacco. At least if you believe the people I've talked to. What I'm sure we can agree on is that cigarette companies don't care how good their tobacco is, how it's stored, etc., as long as they're making the proper profit margins. Additional factors include the massive amounts of chemicals added to cigarettes, their excessive dryness, and that horribly crappy paper.

The issue has gotten cloudy lately. RYO tobaccos, trying to escape exorbitant taxes, have rebranded their product as pipe tobacco. Here's the guiding principal (at the moment), if it's in a prepackaged bag, it's RYO. If not, smoke it in your pipe.

[HugSeal]

I guess one thing that could explain the difference between the cigars and pipe-baccy is that cigarleafs have to be large enough and the wrapper has too look good enough. pipe tobacco is shredded so when picking leaves you don't need to consider looks on top of the "quality"

[freestoke]

Once upon a time, tobaccos like Prince Albert and Five Brothers were marketed for pipe and RYO.

You made me curious, Tom. I stopped the cigs this summer (thanks to ProbateGeek and his cigars!), but I was rolling my own there for a while. I decided to roll a 5B cigarette and see what would happen. Considering its strength as a pipe tobacco, just how different would smoking it as a cigarette be? I'm smoking it as I type. It reminds me of a stale Lucky Strike, sort of. I remember they gave me a headache if I smoked a full pack during a poker game or something, so we'll hope I can survive one stinking 5B cigarette...toke tock toke tock...I should add that a cigarette as I've rolled it (and my skills are not trivial, having learned at the hand of my Uncle Chester at the tender age of 11) contains a Bari Dana acorn/apple of 5B...toke tock toke tock...nope, nothing spectacular happening. I would hazard that the 5B has not had "freebase" treatment, so I derive no more nicotine from it than in a pipe. I would extend the conjecture that RYO with 5B would be a healthier smoke than Marlboro, although insulting the lungs in this fashion cannot be good for you, period.

I would have smoked slightly more of it in a pipe, because there would have been no dottle, aka cigarette butt. All in all, about like an old Lucky Strike, a bit stronger, more in the direction of Gauloises. (Michel Jazy, the great French miler, trained smoking Gauloises cigarettes, then would stop some time prior to an event, probably a similar angle to training by running in sand.)