First time smelling and comparing Fahrenheit vintage and reformulated.

PonyBoy

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
Now i will mention that i have smelled fahrenheit at macys on a card before and it smelled nothing like it does now on my skin. I opened up my package from decant shop today of vintage and current fahrenheit juice along with a serge lutens jeux de peau (not tested yet). Let me tell you guys, i just got punched in the face with nostalgia! I tested the vintage first and it brought me back to when i was a kid driving around with my dad listening to acdc and aerosmith. This scent was ALWAYS emitting from him. I am going to ask him if he had this stuff when he gets home, if he says no then he just cant remember! Hahah! Anyway i felt the need to share that. On to my comparison of reform and vintage. Now both reform and vintage have been on my wrists for about 20 minutes now. Vintage takes the trophy by a landslide. No competition here. The current juice smells like i rubbed an ivory soap bar on my wrist. The vintage or id say true fahrenheit smells dark, smoky,a little spicy, i get some florals, for something from 1988 this stuff still smells fantastic atleast in my opinion. Its so nice how a certain smell can bring you back to the past and remind you of good memories. Now i just sniffed the reform again its like I sprayed vintage on and immediately went to wash it off with ivory soap and boom the new reformulated fahrenheit. Now everyone, what is the closest i can get to this vintage stuff? What does the current bottle look like opposed to the vintage or as far back as we can go. To my knowledge the current bottles have Christian Dior written out on the bottle of the bottle and the older ones just have Dior. Correct my mistakes if i am wrong. I need a bottle of this stuff pronto!!! I want to revisit my childhood nostrils!
 

hednic

Well-known member
Oct 25, 2007
What does the current bottle look like opposed to the vintage or as far back as we can go. To my knowledge the current bottles have Christian Dior written out on the bottle of the bottle and the older ones just have Dior. Correct my mistakes if i am wrong. I need a bottle of this stuff pronto!!! I want to revisit my childhood nostrils!
There is some interesting info and pics by a fellow Basenoter here: http://www.basenotes.net/threads/33...-memories-from-the-past-(Christian-Dior-1988)
 
Jul 7, 2012
I wonder where decantshop got vintage Fahrenheit! Wow. I'm tempted to order a sample... but I'm also afraid to. I'd hate to fall in love with it but not be able to buy a bottle. And buying a bottle would be a little scary since there'd be no way to know how well it was stored for the past quarter century.
 

Ken_Russell

Well-known member
Jan 21, 2006
In my opinion- it may just be a subjective impression- the vintage version smelled, in pleasant way, more heavy and pronounced on the woody, resinous and leathery notes, it had additional (in lack of a better word) "dark, brooding depths" about it, very well crafted and balanced.
 

Spoombung

Well-known member
Dec 27, 2010
I am cheered there are also people here who prefer the modern day version over the vintage. I've had both and slightly prefer today's version.
 

JourneymanDave

Well-known member
May 16, 2013
I've got a 2012 bottle and 1988 of Fahrenheit. To my nose they're virtually the same, with the vintage bottle just being MORE.

I have worn them side by side for comparison and they're both great, with little material difference apart from strength. I make up for that by spraying an extra 1-2 sprays with my new bottle and then they wear very similarly. For that reason, I will just buy off the shelf gong forward as the new juice is a relative bargain.
 

PonyBoy

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
yea i also got some leather in there but i wasn't sure if i was smelling that. I don't really get that diesel fuel smell everyone talks about but i can see how the comparison can be made. Is this what is currently on the market? I found and ebay seller selling these bottle
http://www.ebay.com/itm/261347770059?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT
To my knowledge i heard the bottle was changed yet again and now there seems to be another reformulation bandwagon.
 

PonyBoy

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
just a little update everyone! I woke up a few hours ago and sprayed 1 spray on each wrist of vintage and reform. Its been dried down for about an hour and a half. I go into my kitchen grab something from the fridge then go back into my room. My room is very close to the kitchen. My mother comes into the kitchen about a minute after i went into my room and she goes "Whats that smell coming from your room?". So I ask from my room or in the kitchen? She goes i smell it in the kitchen, it smells very familiar... My mom was a flight attendant back in the late 80's and i laughed as soon as she said what she said next. "It brings back memories of some cologne that we used to sell tons of during duty free, people were constantly buying it". Hahahah. I told her to guess but she couldn't quite get it. As soon as i said Fahrenheit she was like WOW i was going to say that and i knew it was designer. Anyway she smelt the vintage first and she goes yea there it is and then smelt the reformulated and was instantly appalled and said "Ohh thats bad!" "Thats definitely watered down" "I can barely smell it". So in my opinion there is no debate on this stuff being reformulated for any of you that might come across this thread in years to come. CASE CLOSED! New stuff is poop!
 

Ghosst

Well-known member
Feb 20, 2014
I think either way, it's poop :) I guess that new vintage stuff is less poopy :) have a nice day, and no hate
 

onethinline

Well-known member
Dec 1, 2011
Comparing two similar fragrances (in this case, two formulations) by wearing them at the same time is not going to give you the most accurate impression of either. You'll run into olfactory fatigue of elements in both, and they'll combine more than you realize. Try wearing each on its own on different days to get a better sense of them.

Also, I agree that the current version is fine. It doesn't have the same rich sweetness I remember from the early-90s version, but it's still recognizably Fahrenheit.
 

Fahrenheit13

Well-known member
Oct 8, 2014
Tried out vintage Fahrenheit for the first time this morning. I was surprised at how different it is to my 200ml bottle of 2014 fahrenheit... I was always skeptical about people here saying how different they are... Now I know what the fuss is about. The vintage seems softer, doesn't have a real sharpness to it like my 2014 bottle.
 

Spoombung

Well-known member
Dec 27, 2010
Here we go again! :)

People who champ the vintage formulation are perfectly entitled to their opinion but I personally think they're talking nonsense. The modern version is brilliant and anyway...nobody is sure what it's supposed to smell of - whether they prefer more leather and florals or more gas and violet. I've owned both vintage and modern and they're both great but I marginally prefer the modern.

Don't let Luca Turin and people moaning about the good old days of Fahrenheit put you off owning the modern version!
 

Navyy8

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2013
I've got a 2012 bottle and 1988 of Fahrenheit. To my nose they're virtually the same, with the vintage bottle just being MORE.

I have worn them side by side for comparison and they're both great, with little material difference apart from strength. I make up for that by spraying an extra 1-2 sprays with my new bottle and then they wear very similarly. For that reason, I will just buy off the shelf gong forward as the new juice is a relative bargain.
+1... Wore Vtg Fahrenheit in the eighties, and remember it being similar to the reformulated version IMO. Reformulated has less of a petrol smell opening, which I'm okay with . Wearing it now as my SOTD. Flat out spectacular. BTW, recently decided to made a change, and now only use unscented soap and deodorant... Fragrances really pop!
 

HankHarvey

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2014
Frankly find the vintage to be too loud. Not much difference in the scent of the current, but it's concentration is easier on my sinuses. Personally prefer the current version.
 

SmellyFinger

Well-known member
May 21, 2014
Here we go again! :)

People who champ the vintage formulation are perfectly entitled to their opinion but I personally think they're talking nonsense. The modern version is brilliant and anyway...nobody is sure what it's supposed to smell of - whether they prefer more leather and florals or more gas and violet. I've owned both vintage and modern and they're both great but I marginally prefer the modern.

Don't let Luca Turin and people moaning about the good old days of Fahrenheit put you off owning the modern version!

Agree.

12+ hours with the current 2013 version. Excellent!

I think some of the biggest BS put out on forums/ebay is the whole "vintage" is better nonsense. Its more about increasing the value of old cologne that people want to sell at a rather large premium. After 25 years of oxidizing, it will barely resemble its former self anyway. Top notes will be gone and the fixatives/performance is greatly compromised. You will never be able to smell Polo, Obsession, or Fahrenheit as they once were. You are chasing a ghost...
 
Last edited:

nfn1983

Well-known member
Nov 8, 2008
I have and used both the vintage and the modern versions, there's definitely a difference between these two but here Dior has done a piece of art with its reformulation!
They're both great in their own place.
I have and love both, wear them with pleasure...!
 

tensor9

Basenotes Plus
Basenotes Plus
Feb 18, 2014
I know that this a little beside the point, but if I could find a scent that was exactly like Fahrenheit minus the petrol note, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
 

SmellyFinger

Well-known member
May 21, 2014
Vintage vs new- Same music, same lyrics, same singer, same band. Just a slightly different arrangement...

I know that this a little beside the point, but if I could find a scent that was exactly like Fahrenheit minus the petrol note, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

That would be like Aventus without the pineapple note. Or Van Halen without Eddie.
 
Last edited:

calzim

Well-known member
Nov 9, 2014
So in my opinion there is no debate on this stuff being reformulated for any of you that might come across this thread in years to come. CASE CLOSED! New stuff is poop!

Glad you finally solved that for us!... :rolleyesold:


I have a 2001 bottle and a 2012 bottle. Yes, they're different, and I love them both. The more recent formulation performs better. The vintage Fahrenheit talk is mostly nonsense.



I wrote this a few months ago for anyone that cares:

So.. after a couple years of regularly wearing Fahrenheit (batch 2S04, May 2012) I decided to try the vintage (batch 1J01, September 2001). According to the my research this 2001 bottle is the same fragrance as was originally launched by Dior. Everything I read about the vintage formulation led me to believe it would be the same Fahrenheit I know and love, only BETTER! "Richer, deeper, stronger, longer lasting" are some of the words commonly used.

When I received the bottle I put a spray of each (the new and old) on either arm. The 2012 opened much more strongly. In fact, because of the relatively mellow opening of the 2001 I added a second spray of each. The next thing I noticed was the lack of what I will call depth from the 2001. Yes, the base has more depth but the overall effect has less depth. What I mean by this is the florals and clipped grass effect is noticeably weaker in the 2001. In the 2012 bottle this effect is almost loud. It is very sharp and cuts through the air and the rest of the frag. In the 2001 bottle it is more subdued and I interpret it as being less deep overall. The petrol vibe that is so famous is present in both formulations. The 2012 is a little more of an imaginary petrol, where the 2001 is a little closer to actual petrol. The strength of that effect is pretty close in both, maybe a tad stronger in the 2012. The base is the biggest difference between these two to me. The 2012 florals continue much further, or just hold more strength, than the 2001 florals. The leather base of the 2012 is more of a leather and vetiver duo. In the 2001 the leather is much richer; more dense, and smoother. I actually pick up the tonka, sandalwood, and patchouli that are nonexistent to me in the 2012. It is a very satisfying leather accord that the 2012 honestly comes nowhere near achieving. Regarding the naturalness of these; neither feels natural, with the 2012 noticeably more synthetic. In fact if I take a big whiff of the 2001 and then smell the 2012 it almost becomes soapy, which I never experienced wearing it alone. Not sure which note(s) is creating that effect.

These differences create two very similar fragrances with some significantly different effects. Simply put the 2012 version is fresher, with a stronger clipped grass effect that feels more appropriate for non-winter wear. The 2001 version accomplishes much of what the 2012 does. However I will say it is less fresh, and the richer leather base could be a little too much in hot weather (I have no problem with the 2012 in 100 degree weather). This rich leather and relatively subdued green notes make the 2001 more appropriate for cold weather wear for me.

About performance.. I think the 2012 projects more for the first few hours which is the point I'm at now. As stated above, the 2012 carries the green elements through all stages with more strength. Both are long lasting with above average sillage and projection.

In regards to overall effect I would have to rate these two versions equally, but different. We are mostly very familiar with this fragrance, so I'll not go into too much detail here.

The 2001 is excellent. The leather accord is very smooth and satisfying, and I could even call it classy. The composition is very skillful. A beautiful, well balanced blend. Great for all the reasons we know and love. 10/10.

The 2012 is excellent. It is less balanced, less smooth, with more note separation. The leather accord is hardly leather. The vetiver is much stronger, lending to a greater burnt woods effect. This version juxtaposes more. Sweet and bitter. The burnt woods with the grass and florals. The scorching heat with the icy chill. Maybe a harsh blend, but a greater work of art. For that reason this is the only version I will call a masterpiece. 10/10.
 
Last edited:

calzim

Well-known member
Nov 9, 2014
I know that this a little beside the point, but if I could find a scent that was exactly like Fahrenheit minus the petrol note, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

"Exactly" is going to be hard to achieve haha. Substitue the petrol-y leather for powdery iris and you get Balenciaga L`Essence. There's also a Fahrenheit rip-off called Metal Jeans ($5/100ml) that you might agree with more.
 

badarun

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2013
Agree.

12+ hours with the current 2013 version. Excellent!

I think some of the biggest BS put out on forums/ebay is the whole "vintage" is better nonsense. Its more about increasing the value of old cologne that people want to sell at a rather large premium. After 25 years of oxidizing, it will barely resemble its former self anyway. Top notes will be gone and the fixatives/performance is greatly compromised. You will never be able to smell Polo, Obsession, or Fahrenheit as they once were. You are chasing a ghost...

I bought a bottle last yr, sold it as it was too weak. Got another bottle as a gift few months later, no difference. Now compare it with a sealed vtg bottle I bought & it's unfortunately day & night apart - much more deeper & longer lasting - easily 8+ hrs, whereas even with liberal application, current version just does not last.

As for buying vtg's - where u buy matter the most. A cologne, even of a chypre type will remain "mostly" intact if it's not exposed to light or severe temperature changes. I own several such in "excellent" condition. Don't fall for the perfumers explaining that its lost in 2 yrs, it just doesn't...

I was in your shoes a few yrs back with rgds to vtg vs current, but since acquiring vtg's of perfumes still in production, the difference in depth is unfortunately too much to ignore - examples like Egoiste, Bel Ami, Equipage & the one we are arguing about...
 

SmellyFinger

Well-known member
May 21, 2014
I bought a bottle last yr, sold it as it was too weak. Got another bottle as a gift few months later, no difference. Now compare it with a sealed vtg bottle I bought & it's unfortunately day & night apart - much more deeper & longer lasting - easily 8+ hrs, whereas even with liberal application, current version just does not last.

As for buying vtg's - where u buy matter the most. A cologne, even of a chypre type will remain "mostly" intact if it's not exposed to light or severe temperature changes. I own several such in "excellent" condition. Don't fall for the perfumers explaining that its lost in 2 yrs, it just doesn't...

I was in your shoes a few yrs back with rgds to vtg vs current, but since acquiring vtg's of perfumes still in production, the difference in depth is unfortunately too much to ignore - examples like Egoiste, Bel Ami, Equipage & the one we are arguing about...

Different experiences I guess.

But "vintage" is a great way to sell off old/turned cologne at a premium price. And their are many people in this hobby who want to make a fast buck.
 

badarun

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2013
Different experiences I guess.

But "vintage" is a great way to sell off old/turned cologne at a premium price. And their are many people in this hobby who want to make a fast buck.

Agree that there are opportunists, but that's unfortunately in every field...We just have to be patient in our search to find the quality sellers but at decent prices.
 

Latest News

Top