1920s Burtons Suit - Harris Tweed

[Two Types]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Vintage-Harris-Tweed-Suit-tailors-date-label-1921-/261084465430?pt=UK_Men_s_Vintage_Clothing&hash=item3cc9d8c916

This suit is a real survivor. The vendor claims that it has no moth damage. They have a low starting price on the suit (£19.99) - most UK ebay listings for genuine vintage suits like this start much, much higher.

I think will fetch a good price.

P.S. It is the same vendor that Mario bought the brown trousers and waistcoat from recently.

 

[herringbonekid]

the 'date' of 17 2 21 doesn't look like a date to me given that it's on the paper label under 'rotary number'.

 

[Two Types]

That's a good point. I didn't look that closely. We should be able to get a clearer date from the label. Somewhere on the FL is a discussion about when the label changed from 'Burton Ltd' to 'Burton the Tailor of Taste Ltd'. I'll try to find it.

Regardless of date, it looks like a splendid suit.

 

[Two Types]

I found this link: http://andrewsandpygott.wordpress.com/2011/01/31/dating-montague-burton-clothing/

The suggestion is that the name change came in 1936 and 'Burton the Tailor of Taste Ltd' was replaced by 'Burton Ltd'. That would suggest this suit is pre-1936 (unless, of course, they continued to use old labels ....)

 

[herringbonekid]

here's the same brown Burton's label from a jacket of mine which is most likely mid 40s:

there was a thread a while ago about Burton's labels and they're not ideal for dating garments because (as you say) old labels may have been used later.
here's the paper label inside the pocket:

notice that the rotary number could also be read as a date... if you weren't aware of the age of the actual jacket. the suit above looks late 30s to me.

 

[Two Types]

I have compared the Harris label to examples I found on the web. It seems to be the same as a 1940s example, whilst a 1930s harris label has additional writing around the edges. That said, I have minimal knowledge of tweed jackets.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

hey hbk, your jacket was made in 1976. How could you have been fooled, I thought you knew your stuff!

Interesting Burton's suit, and it would have been more expensive than the normal Buron's-made "Laird tweed" fabrics. I'd say 1934-35 on this one. Beautiful.

bk

 

[PADDY]

If it's in reasonable nick, then I'm going to have a go for this one as it would make a lovely autumn/winter piece. Not sure he's got his measurements quite right though.

PS: - Do you ever feel that some of these sellers 'don't know' how to SELL/MARKET an item using photographs..? Those pictures remind me of the scarecrow in Wizard of Oz and 'really' do 'not' do the selling of this ensemble justice.[huh]

 

[herringbonekid]

PS: - Do you ever feel that some of these sellers 'don't know' how to SELL/MARKET an item using photographs..? Those pictures remind me of the scarecrow in Wizard of Oz and 'really' do 'not' do the selling of this ensemble justice.[huh]

i find photos of suits on other people really off-putting (if i'm going to buy the suit that is; not if someone is showing their own suit) and these ones are particularly bad. on the plus side you might get the suit for less than if it was photographed really well.

 

[Two Types]

This vendor is always the same: someone with long hair (and usually a beard) stands on a wall or in a bare brick room whilst wearing some form of comedy shoe-slipper hybrid, wearing clothes that do not fit.
That said, they do seem to keep finding some interesting items (such as the trousers & waistcoat that Mario recently purchased). I always look at their listings - one day they will have something nice for me.

 

[SteveAS]

Not sure he's got his measurements quite right though.

That makes two of us. Two days ago, I asked him: "I'm trying to reconcile your stated jacket size of 38 with your armpit-to-armpit measurement of 23" (which would normally work out to about a size 42). Which is correct, please? Also, what is the waist of the jacket, please?"

This morning, he replied: "Hello, its a 38 chest - sorry for any confussion. Cheers Tony"

Frustrating . . .

 

[Two Types]

Based on the photographs (in which the fit seems fairly good), and comparing it to the same person modelling the waistcoat and trouser combination bought by Mario a couple of weeks back (which was advertised as a 38), I'd say the 38 measurement is the correct one.

A couple of weeks back he also advertised some vintage trousers with a 44 inch waist. When i checked in the same listing the trousers were described as 36.

 

[PADDY]

Size 42 for me is fine. But 38 is not. Big difference - *sigh* I'm not sure what to believe now!

 

[Two Types]

... and look at his answer to this question!!!!!

Q: Hello, What is the circumpherance of the trousers at the bottom?
A: Hello, the color is slightly darker its not a stain it looks like the oppersite to sun fade, quite strange, however its not that noticeable, look carefully at the photos and you will see what I mean

 

[PADDY]

This is really putting me off *sigh*...What a shame.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Well, to be honest, that's a pretty damn stupid question. The info is in the listing. I wouldn't bother even answering that one, except maybe to give a spelling lesson.

... and look at his answer to this question!!!!!

Q: Hello, What is the circumpherance of the trousers at the bottom?
A: Hello, the color is slightly darker its not a stain it looks like the oppersite to sun fade, quite strange, however its not that noticeable, look carefully at the photos and you will see what I mean

 

[Mario]

Communication breakdown...

 

[herringbonekid]

This is really putting me off *sigh*...What a shame.

Paddy, have you asked the seller yourself to verify the chest measurement ? worth a shot.

 

[Two Types]

I asked them for the precise chest measurements three days ago, but still no reply.

 

[PADDY]

Have messaged vendor. No response, yet. There's still time.