Woods by Abercrombie & Fitch was one of the first fragrances that the brand released. It was available in 1997 and soon became one of their most recognizable fragrances. Unfortunately, this male fragrance in Eau de Cologne concentration has been discontinued.
| Perfume Name | Woods |
| Brand | Abercrombie & Fitch |
| Year Released | 1997 |
| Concentration | Eau de Cologne |
| Scent Family | Woody Aromatic |
| Gender | Men |
Woods is considered one of the symbols of the 90s because it represents a scent that has both masculinity and freshness. Because it was so popular, the people behind the well-known Abercrombie & Fitch brand decided to put out another version of the same scent. They kept a similar formula, but the Woods 2010 never achieved the popularity of the original.
Because Woods is considered the best representative of the 90s vibes, so I had to test it out. I already used the new version, and I wanted to make a comparison. Thankfully, I found the original formula in one of my friend’s collections, and he was very kind to give it to me as an early birthday gift.
How does Woods by Abercrombie & Fitch smell?
The formula of notes in Woods by Abercrombie & Fitch is kept pretty simple and effective. The combination consists of 5 elements, including top notes of citruses and the middle notes of lavender and exotic spices. The final touch is the two base notes of vetiver and musk.
| Top Notes | Citruses |
| Middle Notes | Lavender, Exotic Spices |
| Base Notes | Vetiver, Musk |
Woods in the 1997 Vs 2010
Woods is one of Abercrombie & Fitch’s most popular fragrances, and it’s also thought to be the best of all of their scents. Therefore, it is not surprising that the 1997 edition got a flanker much later.
The combination of notes used in the new 2010 Woods version is also kept simple with certain modifications in the concentration of the aromas. Even though there were changes, the creators tried to make the same effect and a very similar smell.
When I first tried both fragrances, I noticed that the 2010 version of Woods had a sharper or heavier opening compared to the original. I prefer that my fragrances have a rich and strong initial vibe, but in this case, I still prefer the original Wood since it is not so overwhelming.
Both fragrances had a distinctive citrus aroma that was mixed with woody notes to achieve a nice, manly aroma. What I like about both versions is that the creators kept the fragrance fresh despite so many sweet and aromatic components.
Once the fragrances set on the skin and the opening intensity faded, I noticed the middle notes taking over. After a while, I couldn’t see any differences between the 1997 and 2010 versions.
Lastly, I would argue that the flanker is a little milder and does not have the same longevity as the original. Even though Woods 2010 is much cheaper, the price difference reflects the quality very visibly. Therefore, I don’t think the 2010 version is a good substitute for the original.
My Experience
I am a big fan of fragrances that mark my presence in the room without being overwhelming. Besides wanting to be very noticeable, I like to feel fresh when wearing the fragrance. Therefore, I really liked the 1997 Woods version. Also, ever since I was a kid, I always wanted to find a fragrance that reminded me of the one my dad used, and Woods is definitely it.
Usually, I don’t pay attention to all of the components in the formula, but this combination made each note very present. The 90s classic had a very simple and elegant opening, which made it great for any occasion I chose to wear it. It made me think of Sergio Tacchini pour Homme or Drakkar Noir because it started off so well with all aromas nicely blended and a very visible woody base.
I found that Woods is fresh and clean, which is not something I expected from the 1997 fragrance. The Woods flanker was also dominated by citrusy notes that were not always very pleasant on men, which is why I was skeptical when I tried the original. Luckily, the 1997 Woods was less intense than the flanker.
On the other hand, the middle notes of lavender and spices, as well as the base notes, toned down the harshness and citrusy scent, giving off an aromatic edge. This is why I preferred Wood once it settled on my skin. After a while, it reminded me of a nice barber shop and the traditional-style aromas that you could feel there, which made me love Woods even more.
Silage & Projection
This is one of the best-performing Abercrombie & Fitch fragrances. It has moderate silage and even better projection. It stays on the skin for a very long time and radiates nicely, leaving a good trail behind. Even though it is an Eau de Cologne concentration, it performs like a good Eau de Toilette.
Longevity & Versatility
The Woods fragrance has a great longevity of almost 10 hours. It is a very nice fragrance for different ages, but I would say it is not really a scent for teenagers.
It gives certain mature vibes, which makes it great for men in their 30s. The scents go well together, and you can even wear it to work because they are not too strong.
Conclusion
My impressions of Woods by Abercrombie & Fitch from 1997 are nothing but positive. I really liked the toned-down and very masculine vibe that the fragrance has. I received plenty of compliments while wearing it, and I think it really suited my personal style.
The only downside to Woods is that the flanker is available on the market for a much lower price than the original. So, I will think about whether I want to buy this scent when I run out of the one I got for my birthday. Besides this, the 90s fragrance is a great and safe choice for a good, fresh, masculine scent.