]

[intricatethakid]

So after trolling the boards for a while, I've noticed some mentions of Dutch joints, American joints, etc.

What are they?

[Twichaldinho]

American style, to me anyway, just means without a filter/roach tip.
Dutch style just means that it has a filter/roach tip, and is rolled slightly like a cone.

If I were to generalise, which I hate to do, I would say European style joints/spliffs tend to be in the dutch style, but mixed with tobacco. Thats probably a habit that desends directly to the fact most Europeans were able to get Hash alot easier than weed back in the day.
This is just my opinion though.

[Clayman]

i roll very american joints. pure, 1.25 zig zags, cigarette sized papers, straight tube no cone, grab some tweezers and lets do this shit.

[Ash333]

American style, to me anyway, just means without a filter/roach tip.
Dutch style just means that it has a filter/roach tip, and is rolled slightly like a cone.

If I were to generalise, which I hate to do, I would say European style joints/spliffs tend to be in the dutch style, but mixed with tobacco. Thats probably a habit that desends directly to the fact most Europeans were able to get Hash alot easier than weed back in the day.
This is just my opinion though.

Yes, in europe we use a roach/filter/tip (any of those names is interchangable) it refers to the piece of card that we roll up to make a mouthpiece, and to roll around. Tobacco is irrelevant, I use a roach if my joint is pure or mixed.

American joints are similar to the Rasta joints that my jamaican dealer rolls, you generally prefer small papers as opposed to our king size preference, and use no tobbacco or filter.

and toke...

[geoffk]

Once I tried a joint with a tip, I'd rather not go back. Although being a half assed roller, I tend to get the pre-rolled and then pack my pure weed in there. Saves me time, and I can get a gram in there nicely. My biggest complaint is I think the pre-rolls have a thicker paper, but I could be wrong. I tend to prefer Elements or Clubs (can be hard to roll, no gum) if I'm gonna roll my own.

I'd recommend getting a grinder too. Never used one until I went to Amsterdam, now I use one, not just for joints but bongs too.

[Paco]

Dutch style for me but with less baccy....

[Clayman]

oh yah grinders are a must for me. get one with 3 levels so you dont have to clap it and make a mess, and catch the kif powder, after a few months you can even make a crappy hash out of it. but i prefer to just pack bumps of it on top of bongloads.

and i started using tips last september, but i cant roll with them in, so i roll a tip very tight and jam in into the end

[Twichaldinho]

I'd recommend getting a grinder too. Never used one until I went to Amsterdam, now I use one, not just for joints but bongs too.

Excellent advice. An essential piece of kit!
Sticky fingers suck.

[OneForTheRoad]

Dutch style for me but with less baccy....

Oh yes, it's the way I like them. With just s sprinkly of baccy and a filter and lots and lots of green...

[FlyByNite]

You are taking it way to seriously. If it smokes it's fine.

Wanna get fancy?

http://www.weedfarmer.com/joint_rolling/index.htm <---Clicky

Enjoy
FlyByNite - Travel preference, not business practice

Coffeeshop Frog Hollow <--- Clicky
home of the
Whos In Town <--- Clicky
and
Coffeeshop Menus <--- Clicky
pages.

[StonedSince67]

I'd recommend getting a grinder too.

Excellent advice. An essential piece of kit!
Sticky fingers suck.

i can understand the usefulness of a grinder, but in using my fingers to prepare the weed for rolling pure i learn a lot about the weed i am about to smoke

my fingers tell me how wet or dry it is, how well does it break apart and is the structure of the bud what i expect it to be or is there something odd about it, how sticky are my fingers getting, what aromas am i getting from breaking up the buds, etc.

so for weed i know well i use a grinder, for weed that is new to me i use my fingers

[Ingwey Gooblebogger]

American style, to me anyway, just means without a filter/roach tip.
Dutch style just means that it has a filter/roach tip, and is rolled slightly like a cone.

If I were to generalise, which I hate to do, I would say European style joints/spliffs tend to be in the dutch style, but mixed with tobacco. Thats probably a habit that desends directly to the fact most Europeans were able to get Hash alot easier than weed back in the day.
This is just my opinion though.

In my experience, that's pretty much it.

In the 1970's - 1980's, in some areas of North America, where, hash was the dominant (or had a a very high presence, i.e. Montreal, Eastern Seaboard, etc) compared to grass, like in europe, tobacco and hash (or hash oil) joints were often smoked. I found this to be true in Europe as well. Indeed, on my first trip to Amsterdam, in the early 1980's, Holland was still primarily a hash dominant place. (I mean I did not travel thousands of miles to smoke grass, that I could get back home, but the astounding varieties of exotic hashes is what made amsterdam exciting for me.) However, North Americans, generally do NOT mix baccy with grass.

Mixing grass with tobacco, is uncommon in North America, but it is much more common in Europe and other places like Jamaica. (I hate tobacco, and would never smoke a marijuana baccy mixed joint.)

For me, an American (or North American) joint is a non-tipped, pure cannabis, single-paper tubular (or elipto-tubular, i.e. tubular but tapered at both ends) joint. A European joint is a conical joint, with a tip/filter, that may or may not have tobacco mixed with the cannabis. The key distiction for me is that the "euro joints" are conical and have a tip/filter/roach.

Note: In Europe the "roach" is the tip or filter part of a joint, while, in North America, the "roach" refers to the end of a smoked joint. For example, if you smoke 5/6ths of a joint and put it out, the last 1/6th would be the roach. Usually, if smoked down to the end, then only the smallest remaining part is called the roach.

[intricatethakid]

Thanks for all the posts. And Ingwey, very informative.

Has this board ever considered co-authoring a book? I mean honestly, the whole culture of marijuana has to be very accurately covered if one took the time to completely search this forum. If anything, a very good "How-To" book could be written.

[Ingwey Gooblebogger]

Thanks for all the posts. And Ingwey, very informative.

Has this board ever considered co-authoring a book? I mean honestly, the whole culture of marijuana has to be very accurately covered if one took the time to completely search this forum. If anything, a very good "How-To" book could be written

Thanks.

If the book was about simple "how to" things like "how to roll a joint", "how to make space cake", and so on then that type of book might be do-able. However, people can have their unique ways of doing these things, so they would have to be limited to general how to issues.
IMO, the best way to learn how to roll a joint is to practice. Compare this to a book on origami. Unless you practice origami, then having a book with all the pictures and descriptions, without doing practice, will not make you good at it.

Also, I would be wary of showing people how to do some things, like making oil, etc, because, many folks (usually kids, but not always) do NOT heed the safety warnings, and then get hurt. Not a month goes by, where I don't read that some tool has blown up their house and themselves because they were making oil indoors and the fumes combusted. There is no way to "idiot proof" something like that because idiots can be surprisingly good at their craft.

When it comes to an "accurate" book on Marijuana culture, in my opinon, one problem with writing that type of a book is that much of the "cannabis culture" is mired in myth, or non-confirmable histories. By that, I mean there are tons of bullshit stories (a.k.a "urban myths"), which, over time, have become woven into the fabric of the culture. Since much of this stuff is unconfirmable, any book on such will be fraught with bogus information and, hence, inaccuracies. On the other hand, if appropriate caveats were put into the book, then the authors could let the reader be forewarned and could decide for themselves which parts in which they choose to believe.

And to confound the issue further, all books on history are written from a particular perspective (and often for a particulaur audience), so there could be potential "inaccuracies" from other perspectives.

[intricatethakid]

All very true Ingwey. I just feel that stoners are absolutely enriched with marijuana knowledge whereas the average person is absolutely clueless. I feel that this is why marijuana is often able to be stigmatized, stereotyped, and scapegoated: lack of knowledge.

Now this isn't much of an issue for Amsterdam, but I believe you mentioned residing in the Northeast of the good 'ole US of A? Well I'm from Jersey, and I find the fact that many of our fellow citizens are imprisoned for something as simple as marijuana use to be quite disturbing.

I suppose I just feel that as the knowledge of marijuana spreads, as will marijuana acceptance. And therefore more honest and realisitc marijuana laws in countries such as the US. For instance, the % of people in the US who felt that marijuana should be legalized in 1969 was somewhere near 12. Now? Around 44%. I hope that with time, and the sharing of knowledge and culture, we can reach a majority where marijuana legalization can no longer be ignored.

P.S. I know. I know, I just hijacked my own thread lol