Comparison of felts--vintage and modern

[AlterEgo]

I'm with Art on this--age and "weathering" are the primary factors that make old high-quality felt seemingly better than newer high-quality felt--with one caveat: Be it rabbit or beaver or nutria or whatever fur, they all come from animals which vary according to a number of factors such as food sources and environmental conditions like weather and habitat pressures.

So, I don't think any one lot of fur clippings is EXACTLY like another, and it very well may be that such animals of a hundred years ago were healthier than those today. Then again, it could be that present-day critters are generally in better shape than those of yore, though given the downward spiral of the environment, I think it unlikely.

In any case, there is always going to be some variation in anything from the natural world, so it stands to reason that those differences would be manifested in the products from which they're made, like hat felt.

 

[Lefty]

So, it only gives the impression of being better.

quoted for awesomeness

 

[Andykev]

It is the felting process, the number of steps taken.

Matt Deckard had mentioned to me how in a number of old hats he has the felt is really tight and some new hats it is only a loose "knit" felt so you could pull it apart by hand with out excersion, something you could not do with the older hats.

John, I don't know what was told to you or what you have actually tried. I have 60 hats. Many Optimo (modern) and many, many vintage. NOT ONE hat I own or have ever held can "be pulled apart without exertion". That is impossible. Try it. Be brave.

I don't know why, but I have a hat from the late 40's or early 50's. A "Silver Beaver 50". It is the best I have ever seen, tightest fur, smoothest..etc. Why?
It was likely HAND finished to the extreme, was the "pick of the litter" hat body, from an exceptional batch of fur, and it sold for top dollar back in the day.

Modern hats "taper" because of the felting process. No other reason. I have heard that Optimo was experimenting (and may be doing so already, I don't know) about "pre shrinking" their hat bodies before making the hats. This sounds like what Art explained, that they are giving the hat another felt process (shrinking) to further tighten up the felt.

There is no magic in the hat making process. The SAME equipment is used as was back in the day. And a large company like Stetson surely was focused on "production" for the main bulk of their goods. There are always "special" models or examples that were made "custom" by whatever company for the "top end" customer. Just like buying a suit today, bespoke vs. off the rack.

Few major hat manufacturers back then deviated from making hats for the masses. How could they do it differently, production wise, than what goes on today?

 

[Andykev]

You mean like nowadays?

So what we are saying is that while many other industries had quality lapses while attempting to cut costs, time and streamline production, ....

YA MEAN KINDA LIKE TOYOTA?????:eusa_doh:

 

[jimmy the lid]

So, I don't think any one lot of fur clippings is EXACTLY like another, and it very well may be that such animals of a hundred years ago were healthier than those today. Then again, it could be that present-day critters are generally in better shape than those of yore, though given the downward spiral of the environment, I think it unlikely.

On this point, I'll simply reference something I have previously posted in the Winchester thread, based upon information provided by Greg Fiske of Winchester:

As a general matter, there are four kinds of fur in these various bales: nutria, rabbit, hare, and beaver. The rabbit and hare fur comes from Belgium and Portugal. In the old days, the rabbit and hare fur came from wild animals, but, today, it comes from farmed animals. Arguably, this results in some differences in the nature of the fur itself. As far as the beaver fur goes, however, it comes from animals that are trapped in the U.S. -- so, with regard to the beaver fur, the modern source is the same as it was years ago.

 

[AlterEgo]

I know for sure that some of the rabbit fur used in all Akubra felt is from wild animals, a greater proportion in its Heritage Collection than the lesser grades. Of course, everything else being equal, felt made entirely from wild rabbit and hare, as it was in the good ol' days, would certainly be different--maybe better, maybe worse, as fur from caged animals gives improved consistency to the felt.

Another fact is that present-day beavers are not as large as they once were. They do not produce as many offspring, either. Also, beaver range is a small fraction of what it once was. That's due not only to centuries of harvesting for pelts, but also to urban sprawl's shrinking their habitat. Further, beavers being pesky creatures that can dam up a pretty good size stream, people eliminate them to keep the water flowing where they want it to go. Global warming is shifting their range northward, as well, so most beaver fur comes from Canada, not the U.S.

How all these changes affect beaver fur and the felt made from it is anyone's guess. My guess is that current rabbit/hare/nutria/beaver fur is substantially but not exactly the same as the old stuff, but the primary reason today's best felts seem inferior to yesteryear's is age and wear.

As John in Covina so succinctly said, "So, it only gives the impression of being better."

 

[jimmy the lid]

I was talking about U.S. production -- not Australian.

As to the other particulars -- I'll stick with what Greg Fiske has to say...

Cheers,
JtL

 

[RBH]

...

Everyone here refers to what Winchester said and what they saw there, fine. But can you say that the same goes for all of the other felt manufacturers in the US the World?

If I am not mistaken.. and I could be... Winchester is the only felter left in The U.S.

 

[handlebar bart]

I'm getting light headed.lol lol

 

[tonyb]

If I am not mistaken.. and I could be... Winchester is the only felter left in The U.S.

I know of one other, for sure. Got a couple of their bodies. Still prefer Winchester.

And I can't help but think some of the other, lesser-known brands (you know, the ones other than the Hatco [which has its own felting plant] brands of Stetson, Dobbs, Resistol -- think Bailey and Dorfman-Pacific, etc.) either run their own felting plants or have very close relationships with businesses that do. Whether they sell raw hat bodies to anyone else, well, I don't know that.

 

[rlk]

Manufacturers of Fur Felt Hat Bodies:
http://www.hatsuk.com/furfelthood.htm

 

[rlk]

1941 vs. today

Compare for yourself...
Winchester:
http://www.thefedoralounge.com/showthread.php?t=38239
Modern Hatco:
http://www.stetsonhat.com/video.php
Hat Corporation of America 1941:
http://books.google.com/books?id=nC...resnum=3&ved=0CBEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=&f=false

 

[Art Fawcett]

Art -



(1) Felt quality for several makers has been quoted as being better prior to 1970's. If this is so...were they getting bodies from Winchester or making them in-house and were those other felt body makers doing things differently after that date? But not so for Winchester?

No Woody, I don't know for a fact ( no sworn afidavit) what others were doing but there are only two US companies , Winchester and Stetson and I'm sure their production differed between them but felt making is a rather simple task. It has some pretty complicated steps & equipment, but overall the concept is simple. That concept and process ( in it's basic form) hasn't changed since the beginning of time.

(2) Hats from the 1970's are now around 30-40 years old. Those from 1950's are about 50-60 years old. If differences (in hats of equal grade) are due to aging alone, is the critical age for maximum density roughly 45 years on average?

I honestly don't have an age figure but yours sounds feasible and yes, felt to felt ( no hatter finishing etc) the older the felt, the dense it should be. Like I said, it DOES reach a point where it cannot felt itself tighter but who knows when that time frame is?


Will the 1970's hats exhibit a notable improvement in the next 10+ years?

yes, I believe so but remember, what you actually feel has a bit to do with the finishing also by the hatter.


Do any of you who were collecting old hats 10 years or more ago remember seeing any changes in hats you owned that were approaching ~45 years in age?

I do not. But I was never really having to defend anything so I didn't document.



(3) The one-year outdoor aging experiment quoted by Winchester is especially interesting. Reminds me of some attempts at "breaking in" guitars by exposing soundboards to audio frequencies for weeks on end...but aside from that, would it work with a finished hat as well as a raw body?

I believe yes

If so, it's an experiment that could be repeated pretty easily. Or accelerated by moving a hat frequently from climate-controlled indoors to outdoors under varying conditions of humidity and temperature in a bugproof container. To stress it as much as possible.

(4) If the one-year Winchester experiment made a significant difference, wouldn't different conditions of storage make 10+ year difference in the rate of aging for typical hats? In other terms: some hats got put in a box and stuffed into the attic - wider range of humidity and temperature - while others got put into a closet downstairs in a more equable climate. Do you all see such differences in the same age and model of hat? Also, could the ~45 year horizon have anything to do with the advent of mass-produced window AC units around 1947 - thus stabilizing the home environment to an unprecedented degree and maybe stretching out the felt aging process?

Woody, I'm sure all of this comes into play but I really think this is taking it further than I'm comfortable with. You may be right, but does it really matter?
The only reason I'm involved in this discussion really is that I'm a bit weary of the comparison by some with agendas and little more to go on.


(5) If felt density and dimensional stability are the critical factors, these are measurable and quantifiable. Not easy because it's a pliable material, but possible. Know if anyone has done that?

No I don't

(6) If other factors are at play, maybe they can be seen. I started to do some stereo microscope examination of old and newer hats - limited to those I have - some months ago but got sidetracked. Wanted to post pictures but don't have facilities for digital captures. Don't want to jump the gun and reach unwarranted conclusions, but I was seeing some interesting compositional differences - uniformity and thickness of hairs, frequency of unidentified non-hair contaminants. (Caveat: none of these were from modern Winchester bodies.) Now I know from you that the furs are essentially the same and the processes of felting are, but are there any steps not considered in the comparison? Such as those connected with detaching fur from pelts, sorting and mixing the fur fibers, or something else like that? I admit I barely know enough to ask, but can suspect there could be some other things afoot that could affect quality in addition to those Winchester mentioned. Maybe upstream of Winchester themselves?

Bill, I'm a hatter not a scientist. I will leave the science to those experts for the most part. Personally, I view these as hats, not body parts, so the minutia seems to border on the ridiculous at times. The blanket statement that "vintage is better than modern" although is true in my opinion, is also easily explained. Invariably , even when faced with experts that actually MAKE the felt, there are disbelievers as to the reasons and I am at a loss to explain THAT phenomenon.

Please note that Johns response directly after my post addresses absolutely NONE of my points, choosing instead to spew opinion without fact and demanding an afidavit. Yes John, you put an icon after it but based on previous discussions with you I'm sure it was only partial joking. It sort of reminds me of the old joke where the wife walks into the bedroom to find the husband cheating with another woman and he shouts "Who are you going to believe me or your lying eyes".

 

[Art Fawcett]

Thanks Tony, I forgot about Dorfman. I guess because the make mostly wool bodies I tend to blank them out.

 

[Lefty]

That maybe true but what they say applies to them, does it also strictly apply to any other felters that existed in the past in the US?

And what about the ones in places that we don't know about yet? There's a lot of space out there.

 

[Zanzibarstar]

I know for sure that some of the rabbit fur used in all Akubra felt is from wild animals, a greater proportion in its Heritage Collection than the lesser grades. Of course, everything else being equal, felt made entirely from wild rabbit and hare, as it was in the good ol' days, would certainly be different--maybe better, maybe worse, as fur from caged animals gives improved consistency to the felt.

Another fact is that present-day beavers are not as large as they once were. They do not produce as many offspring, either. Also, beaver range is a small fraction of what it once was. That's due not only to centuries of harvesting for pelts, but also to urban sprawl's shrinking their habitat. Further, beavers being pesky creatures that can dam up a pretty good size stream, people eliminate them to keep the water flowing where they want it to go. Global warming is shifting their range northward, as well, so most beaver fur comes from Canada, not the U.S.

How all these changes affect beaver fur and the felt made from it is anyone's guess. My guess is that current rabbit/hare/nutria/beaver fur is substantially but not exactly the same as the old stuff, but the primary reason today's best felts seem inferior to yesteryear's is age and wear.

As John in Covina so succinctly said, "So, it only gives the impression of being better."

Wild duck as compared to domestic duck meat is much, much tastier. I would imagine the pelts of wild versus domestic animals also differs.

 

[barrowjh]

I don't believe that the list of fur felt manufacturers per the UK site is accurate - unless you consider it more as a list of hat manufacturers from whom you might be able to purchase a fur felt hat body. Langenberg in New Haven MO (Beaver Brand) is on the list, and to my knowledge they import 100% of their felts, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.

On Thursday night before the tour, one of the attendees (I forgot name?) stated they had recently visited and toured the Hatco operation in Garland. The tour began with a look at stacks of hat bodies, and the guide told this FL'r (or the FL'r sincerely believed that he heard) that all of the hat bodies were imported. I asked Greg Fiske about this during the tour, because I am believing that Winchester may be the last fur felting operation in the US. Greg dismissed this right away, as far as he knew, Hatco was still felting in Garland.

So, we see how things can get confusing in a hurry, and both the FL'r and Greg were doing their best to be honest, but yet we end up with an inconsistency.

Has Hatco's production increased to a point where it was expedient for them to supplement their own felting operation by importing until they could ramp up?

Maybe Hatco needed to jack up production rapidly, and does not want to invest in expanding their own felting operation until they can see if the demand has staying power?

Is it just semantics? Somebody misunderstood?

Maybe Hatco is phasing down its own felting operation, and Greg just was not yet aware of this?

Does it really matter? No. Winchester may or may not be the last, but certainly they are one of the last two, fur-felting operations in the US. I doubt that any of the other US addresses on that UK list are actually felting on US soil. Like Beaver Brand, and Optimo, and . . . they are importing the hat bodies from Portugal, Eastern Europe, or South America. So if you want to SEE felting - feel the different furs, see the bales, hear the machines, feel the vibrations, talk to folks that make the felt - Winchester is a place to visit. Garland TX might also be such a destination, but I'm not so sure of that anymore.

 

[tonyb]

Thanks Tony, I forgot about Dorfman. I guess because the make mostly wool bodies I tend to blank them out.

One good reason among many for blanking them out, eh?

 

[jporgeck]

:eusa_doh: Apparently no horse is too dead to beat.

 

[tonyb]

I
On Thursday night before the tour, one of the attendees (I forgot name?) stated they had recently visited and toured the Hatco operation in Garland. The tour began with a look at stacks of hat bodies, and the guide told this FL'r (or the FL'r sincerely believed that he heard) that all of the hat bodies were imported. I asked Greg Fiske about this during the tour, because I am believing that Winchester may be the last fur felting operation in the US. Greg dismissed this right away, as far as he knew, Hatco was still felting in Garland.

I believe Hatco's felting plant is in Longview, Texas, not Garland. I've never seen it myself, but I've had an in-person chat with a fellow who has. I can think of no reason for him to deceive me on this point.

And I recall seeing a video showing the Hatco felt hat body making process. [EDIT: a link to which rlk posted above. Silly me.] I believe the video is of fairly recent vintage.