X-Centric (2001)
by Dunhill

OK - this one was my go-to in the early 2000's....and if I could find it cheap in quantity, I would be wearing it again. On my skin, it had a tobacco type smell (which I love) and it was pretty even and fresh. I had to layer it pretty good for an evening out...and I guess that helped with the longevity. I found it to be masculine and sexy - and the wife dug it too.

20th February, 2011.

I normally like Dunhill fragrances - a lot.

But this is rubbish.
It's VERY light.
All I smell is a weak rubbery note and maybe a bit of ozone.
Stays incredibly close to the skin.
Stupid bottle top as well.
Very disappointing.

24th January, 2011.

This is the only Dunhill fragrance that I've worn and not enjoyed. I bought it blind, and since it was Dunhill I thought it would be appealing to me. It has a weird and synthetically cloying smell, not unlike Burberry Touch and Kenzo colognes. A major disappointment.

12nd January, 2011.

I really wanted to like this perfume a lot. Judging just by its notes it sounded so apealling, but I could not find the "Eccentricity" of this perfume at all. It is so common, actually it reminds me of several other scents. The word for it is "mediocre", and that is being generous. On the other hand, it is not repulsive, it is actually pleasant and I could wear it anytime, specially if I want to go unnoticed because it will no call the attention of anybody. (Good "camouflage" scent???) LOL

12nd December, 2010.

I used to wear this a lot in highschool as I found it to be very clean, simple, and non-offensive to those around me. Some may say it's a bit generic smelling, but that's not necessarily a bad thing if that's what you want, right?

4th September, 2009.

X-Centric: synthetic to the max but not necessarily unpleasant: Annoying opening - generic middle - nice base.

10th August, 2009.