[the iron horse]

I was once a Marlboro smoker. It was my brand.

In the 1990s I started to notice a change in the taste.

It seemed to be different.

My wife even told me the smoked smelled skunky.


It eventually led me to switching brands.


Is it just me or have you noticed a difference in Marlboro cigarettes the past three decades?

[the iron horse]

I know,

I'm bumping my own thread.

Just thought I would get at least one reply.

[ianus]

I don't know if we are talking about European Marlboro Reds here but I can also confirm that "skunky" as your wife put it smell. But only sometimes, and it isn't always that way.
I think it started to be that way when the had to lower tar & nicotine to 0.8 & 10, maybe 5 years ago.
I still smoke it since it is a good cigarette, and besides local brands it is the most accessible brand of cigs found on the local kiosks.

[bobbyT]

There is definitely a difference in "musk" if you will, but my guess is that has more to do with the additional chemicals they've added to marlboro cigarettes over the years to either comply with fire safe cigarette paper requirements or to make them more addictive, either way, I'm sure that the second hand smoke, if properly analyzed between today's marlboro cigarette and a marlboro cigarette from 30 years ago wold show a substantially different chemical composition....thoughts?

[ianus]

I think it is a combination of different factors. Since fire compliance is not an issue in Europe (at least not yet) I think it has more to do with tar & restrictions (Reds as well as most full flavor cigarettes are now 0.8/10 before that they were 0.9/12 for a long time) which they had to somehow subsidize with different additives to retain the strength and flavor and the fact is less and less tobacco goes to cigarette each year so back to additives.
But I do agree that a any cigarette brand now and not 30 years ago but 10 years ago is simply not the same. I've noticed that since cutting on tar and nicotine many brands changed their blend of tobacco a bit (Kent, Dunhill, Winston and Benson & Hedges to name a few).

[cooljay788]

Matlboro Reds have changed for sure as FSCs. But at least they don't go out on their own anymore as a person smokes a FSC Red. The original FSC Reds used to go out on their own.

I see no difference in taste with a Marlboro Light from 20 years ago and a FSC Marlboro Light in modern times. Marlboro Lights still taste good for a light cigarette.

[shipma2]

my grandpa also smoked marlboros he did for quite a while before he passed in a non smoking realted symptom. he said that the tasted the same even with everything that has changed

[motleydan1]

The reds definately changed when the fsc thing came about.I smoked them for 20 years and had to quit smoking them.The flavor changed so much and they were giving me migraines.They seem bland now and have no zing to them.I believe they removed the salpeter from them as they dont spark anymore like they used too.That may have something to do with the taste.I switched to Lucky Strikes and Marlboro 27.Thats the only Marlboro I can enjoy smoking now.Dan

[rhonda489]

Originally Posted by cooljay788 Matlboro Reds have changed for sure as FSCs. But at least they don't go out on their own anymore as a person smokes a FSC Red. The original FSC Reds used to go out on their own. I see no difference in taste with a Marlboro Light from 20 years ago and a FSC Marlboro Light in modern times. Marlboro Lights still taste good for a light cigarette.

I agree with "coojay788" on the Marlboro lights. I've been smoking them for more than 28+ years and I don't taste any difference. I just get annoyed at the new papers they use, other than that...I don't notice a difference from 1981 to now....