Excelled Sheepskin and Leather Company G-1 Jackets

[Technonut]

Pit to Pit: 24" (so 48" around - which is REALLY a size 48!)

Just for future reference in case you want to use actual measurements to purchase a jacket... A 24" pit to pit would work out to a decent size 44, not 48. One needs some room for comfortable movement, and to wear a shirt, possibly a sweater for layering, etc.. For a good military-style fit, I usually go for 2-4" of room, so with my 44" chest, I would be looking for a pit to pit of 23-24" (46-48" around)....

If you have no aversion to previously-owned jackets, you may want to put in a saved eBay search for your issue jacket. There are many Excelled G-1's selling there, and with good seller communication, you may just be able to snag another one like yours (minus stitch-holes ) in great condition for a good price.

 

[Deacon211]

Deacon,
Your write-up on the Cockpit USA 100 Mission G-1 jacket was "spot on!" I got one and it fits just as your said....a bit more like a 47 than an 48. Got me turned on to the Cockpit USA Vintage G-1 Jackets with patches. I got the A-7 Intruder jacket and the "Classic Vintage" jacket with the A-3D Skywarrior patches. I am bidding on a "China Lake Vintage Jacket" as we speak. Would not have happened without your honest opinion of the "100 mission" jacket. Thanks for your honest and sincere opinion. Was a great help.
Cheers,
Mike

Thanks Mike. In that price range, the 100 Mission is definitely my favorite jacket. And I don't usually like antiqued clothing.

Love to see some pics when they arrive.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[HawkFlyer]

Just for future reference in case you want to use actual measurements to purchase a jacket... A 24" pit to pit would work out to a decent size 44, not 48. One needs some room for comfortable movement, and to wear a shirt, possibly a sweater for layering, etc.. For a good military-style fit, I usually go for 2-4" of room, so with my 44" chest, I would be looking for a pit to pit of 23-24" (46-48" around)....

If you have no aversion to previously-owned jackets, you may want to put in a saved eBay search for your issue jacket. There are many Excelled G-1's selling there, and with good seller communication, you may just be able to snag another one like yours (minus stitch-holes ) in great condition for a good price.

No, it used to be - long before I was born - that jacket were labeled according to the actual measurements of the jacket. A size 40 was actually 40 inches around (bi-swing not extended), a 42 was 42, and so one. Jacket labeling at some point changed to reflect the size of the wearers chest measurements, and this changed the industry. NOW days you will get a different actual size jacket from every company despite all being marked with the same size label. Company A will have a size 40 that actually measures 42 inches around, company B will have a size 40 that measures 44 inches around, and company C will have a size 40 that measures 48 inches around. It's retarded and completely absurd! What's worse is that now the consumer has to spend hours, days, and week, shopping around for the "perfect fit" all because sizing has becomes so arbitrarily retarded in the clothing industry and subjected to the whims of designers who "think" more or less oversized is trending!

No... The truth is, that if the labeling was returned back to reflect the actual measurements of the jackets then there would be a lot less headache in the world - and in all honesty, forums like these would have a lot less posts discussing the "size" and fit from each manufacturer.

And FYI, you can STILL order a size larger in a TRUE SIZE labeled for the "extra room" you want - you know that, right?

If the jacket is labeled 40, it should measure 22 inches pit-to-pit, and 40 inches around.

Additionally, REAL flight clothing should NEVER be baggy, loose-fitting, or oversized by design IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, for a VERY good reason. REAL flight clothing should be form-fitting. I would know, as a senior instructor for many years, but that's a post for another time. [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Technonut]

If the jacket is labeled 40, it should measure 22 inches pit-to-pit, and 40 inches around.

Pit to pit generally is doubled... If you get a pit to pit of 22", that doubled (front and back) would be 44" around. Going by your labeled size 40 above, that would give you 4" of movement / clothing room. Going by your 'true' sizing, a person with a 44" chest who purchased a tagged size 44 would end up with a skin tight jacket, with no room for movement.. Wearing a shirt would make it even tighter.

Forums like 'this' usually work out fairly well in the fit department, since the many of the members here tend to purchase custom-made jackets which are made to measure. In some cases, fit jackets are sent to the customer to nail-down their exact size, then sent back to have their jacket made when a great fit is determined.

As for 'form-fitting' flight clothing fit, The Fedora Lounge is for folks who are into the vintage-style clothing / lifestyle of the Golden Era. A-2 flight jackets during WWII were designed to be worn OVER a uniform shirt, AND a flight suit. There still needed to be room to move around after that. Nowadays, fit is subjective, and some like their A-2's tight as a drum, while others like to be somewhat comfortable, and able to move unrestricted. Neither is incorrect from a Golden Era perspective, as evidenced from many, many, wartime photos of pilots and crew wearing both snug, loose-fitting, and everything in-between.

Here's a pic of my Good Wear Rough Wear 27752 contract A-2 in horsehide. To me, this jacket is a perfect fit and look for an exact WWII A-2 reproduction. I would not want it any larger or smaller, and both the sleeve length, and body length are perfect for me as well. This has a pit to pit of 23 1/4" (46 1/2" around).

(click to enlarge):



Also, here's my B-10, which I consider a snug military fit (would never fit over a flight suit though ):

 

[HawkFlyer]

Pit to pit generally is doubled... If you get a pit to pit of 22", that doubled (front and back) would be 44" around. Going by your labeled size 40 above, that would give you 4" of movement / clothing room. Going by your 'true' sizing, a person with a 44" chest who purchased a tagged size 44 would end up with a skin tight jacket, with no room for movement.. Wearing a shirt would make it even tighter.

Forums like 'this' usually work out fairly well in the fit department, since the many of the members here tend to purchase custom-made jackets which are made to measure. In some cases, fit jackets are sent to the customer to nail-down their exact size, then sent back to have their jacket made when a great fit is determined.

As for 'form-fitting' flight clothing fit, The Fedora Lounge is for folks who are into the vintage-style clothing / lifestyle of the Golden Era. A-2 flight jackets during WWII were designed to be worn OVER a uniform shirt, AND a flight suit. There still needed to be room to move around after that. Nowadays, fit is subjective, and some like their A-2's tight as a drum, while others like to be somewhat comfortable, and able to move unrestricted. Neither is incorrect from a Golden Era perspective, as evidenced from many, many, wartime photos of pilots and crew wearing both snug, loose-fitting, and everything in-between.

Here's a pic of my Good Wear Rough Wear 27752 contract A-2 in horsehide. To me, this jacket is a perfect fit and look for an exact WWII A-2 reproduction. I would not want it any larger or smaller, and both the sleeve length, and body length are perfect for me as well. This has a pit to pit of 23 1/4" (46 1/2" around).

(click to enlarge):



Also, here's my B-10, which I consider a snug military fit (would never fit over a flight suit though ):

Technonut, I'm very well educated on the sizing and fit of flight jackets from pre-WWII and on (of which there is no "correct fit" back then. The sizing was all over the place). Believe me, you're not telling me anything new.

Earlier I miss-typed. Phone and all, you know how it is. I meant to say a 40 should be 20 inches across. I thought my typing mistake would have been seen by the reader as a simple miss-typing, but I was mistaken. LOL! You seem to have taken it as me saying a 40 should be 22 across, and that's my fault for not spell checking. I agree, a jacket labeled as a 40 SHOULD be 40 inches around (20 inches pit to pit). That's what I'm saying and always will say.

Additionally, people know what they want and what they like. One of the many reasons many people here spend thousands on a custom jacket is because manufacturers for decades have been trying to tell the consumer what the consumer wants instead of labeling their clothes appropriately and letting the consumer decide for themselves what size they want. If you have a 40 inch chest and want to wear extra clothes under your jacket, then you should be able to order a 42 labeled jacket and get that extra room you want. You should not HAVE to resort to custom made jackets just to get a fit you know is appropriately sized, or spend months ordering from one company to the next and returning them (spending lots of money in shipping as a result) until you find a company that makes a good fit jacket... Either way...

Now, I have absolutely nothing against custom jackets and reproductions. I personally think many of them look amazing. Good Wear (John in Washington State), Aero (Scotland), and the like make great jackets. Even I myself have an order in with John for a custom leather jacket right now... But it will take a year as he has a year-long waiting list. But is the average joe honestly going to spend $1000 or more on one? LOL! No... Only a few will be willing and able to do that, and none of that here is the point.

And finally, as for my remark on the actual fit of flight clothing used for real-life flying operations... After 16 years of flying military aircraft, civilian aircraft, and teaching and instructing crew members both US military and NATO, as well as being born and raised in and around military aviation my whole life, I'm very sure I know exactly what is acceptable for fit and what isn't. I couldn't care less what is "historically accurate" or not. And that's not me being mean or anything, it's just the truth. None of that matters. What really matters in real life is that flight clothing should be form-fitting, and for a very good reason. Loose-fitting, overly sized, and baggy clothing is a major hazard in and around aircraft. It's a safety hazard as well as a snag hazard. Loose-fitting clothing can - and WILL - get caught on anything and everything in and around the aircraft. When flying, the wind will blow and flap loose-fitting clothing right into latches, frame guards, safety wire, seat edges, instrument switches, and much more. And when moving about the cabin, loose-fitting and baggy jackets will catch, snag, and rip and tear on just about everything. I have seen it many times over... Further, 99% of all cases where an individual needed to replace a uniform or jacket due to a rip or a tear was exactly because what they were wearing was too big for them, loose-fitting, and/or baggy (had too much extra room by design), and it got caught on something in the aircraft.

Simply put, if you were going to fly in my bird, and showed up in a jacket that is loose or oversized, I wouldn't let you fly in it, as it presents a hazard to yourself and the rest of the crew. But I digress...

Thanks for the reply. [emoji846]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Technonut]

If you have a 40 inch chest and want to wear extra clothes under your jacket, then you should be able to order a 42 labeled jacket and get that extra room you want.

All that I am trying to say is that if you have a 40" chest, and ordered a size 40 which is actually 40" around, it would be skin-tight, and you would have absolutely no room for movement. Like I posted above, you would be lucky to be able to wear a shirt under it, or zip it up..... That's why most in the industry generally add 4-6 inches of room to one's actual chest measurement for their tagged sizes.

 

[nick123]

All that I am trying to say is that if you have a 40" chest, and ordered a size 40 which is actually 40" around, it would be skin-tight, and you would have absolutely no room for movement. Like I posted above, you would be lucky to be able to wear a shirt under it, or zip it up..... That's why most in the industry generally add 4-6 inches of room to one's actual chest measurement for their tagged sizes.

True in my experience. No way in hell I'd be able to comfortably wear a size 40 (my chest size) ever in most repro A-2s or better yet, the M-422a. It is just too tight, even painful, and I've tried it. 1-3 sizes bigger (42 all the way up to 46) for me.

*Not exactly what you guys are talking about but anyhow!

 

[HawkFlyer]

All that I am trying to say is that if you have a 40" chest, and ordered a size 40 which is actually 40" around, it would be skin-tight, and you would have absolutely no room for movement. Like I posted above, you would be lucky to be able to wear a shirt under it, or zip it up..... That's why most in the industry generally add 4-6 inches of room to one's actual chest measurement for their tagged sizes.

Oh yeah! I'm not arguing with you at all that it would be skin tight. You and I are on the same page... But a jacket labeled as a size 40 SHOULD rightfully so be actually 40 inches. The label should reflect the accurate size of the jacket itself, NOT what the company that made it THINKS should fit the individual wearing it.

Yes, 2 extra inches is about perfect, and 4 extra inches would be a "personal preference", not necessarily a standard. But remember that those 2 or 4 extra inches in the chest would only be needed in a jacket with a one-piece back (like an A-2). G-1's have a bi-swing back which already adds an additional 4 inches when extended. So technically, a person with a 40 inch chest wearing a true-labeled size 40 G-1 that measures 40 inches around, would STILL have those extra 4 inches regardless because of the bi-swing back that can extend.

So... only with G-1 jackets (and other jackets with a bi-swing back), I would suggest a person wear true to size. With an A-2 (and all other jackets that have a solid back), I'd suggest going up one size to get the extra 2 inches they need in a true to size jacket - or two sizes to get the extra 4 inches if that is their personal preference...

But again... please understand, I'm not arguing any of this... I am arguing that:

1. There SHOULD be a regulated industry labeling standard. This is for consumer protection and information awareness when shopping.

and

2. That all real-life use flight clothing should fit "form-fitting". What this means is that the clothing should fit "close" to the actual size and shape of the individuals actual body (of course with a few inches all the way around so clothing can be fit underneath... that's just common sense...). The body of jackets should NOT be "blowzy", "baggy", or over-sized in any way, but should be trim, athletically cut, and tapered from chest to waist. The waist band should NOT be bunched up when sewn. The sleeves should NOT be over-sized in circumference, and should taper down as well to follow the natural taper of the limbs down to the wrist. When worn over the individuals flight suit, the jacket should present a neat, form-fitted appearance without bunching or overhanging off or out away from the body. The DESIGN of the jacket (right down to the manner in which it is sewn together) SHOULD allow for the jacket to fit in a form-fitted fashion while STILL allowing full freedom of movement of the arms above the head (this is exactly why A-2's are - in reality and no offense to anyone who loves A-2's - a TERRIBLY designed jacket). And in all honesty, the G-1 design could be greatly improved if the bi-swing back was only just around the shoulders instead of extending all the way down like it does... Having only the shoulders extend would still accomplish the exact same extension of movement offered by the design as intended for the G-1, but it would eliminate all that extra material sticking out down the length of the back - which, as I have stated several times here now... Is a snag hazard...

That's all I'm trying to say here man. You and I are both in agreement with the room needed underneath for it to be worn over clothes... I'm just saying, manufacturers SHOULD be FORCED to label things according to actual size of the clothing... And that flight clothing should never be baggy or over-sized. That's all.

 

[galvestonokie]

i suggest that we remember that many of us have been conditioned while buying shirts, suits, etc. to know the size that fits us without actually measuring the purchase. i think all would agree that baggy clothing in a flight environment is not safe. but, i think, few here wear flight jackets in flight, except maybe on commercial flights as a passenger (speaking for myself). IMHE, a G-1 jacket sized at 44 would have about a 24 pit to pit measure. if you measure your suit jacket, you might find the same, or approximately the same, added inches over the stated size. i have measured a few G-1s, both issued and repros.