-
The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
Master supply co leather jacket
- Thread starter Rockyko
- Start date
newtojackets
One Too Many
- Messages
- 1,098
This is a reply to a thread that was apparently closed before I could respond, in which @ton312 ended by posting a comparison of the jacket I purchased from Master Supply Co. with others from Rugged West. https://www.thefedoralounge.com/threads/master-supply-co.110319/page-5
It’s funny how often “this is self-evident in photos” gets treated as an airtight argument, as though quality can be determined solely from a couple of static images. Stitching assessments, particularly in leather jackets—as I am learning—depend on far more than just symmetry in a product shot. I’m no expert, but my understanding is that leather temper, construction technique, and long-term durability all factor in. Yet, in this discussion, photographs are being positioned as an absolute metric of quality, as if freezing a moment in time somehow provides the full story of a garment’s craftsmanship.
I’ve gone through all these questions, one way or another, with people who’ve guided me in the process. Take the Master Supply Co. jacket, for instance. It’s made from 1.5mm vegetable-tanned leather—a thick, full-grain material that breaks in and develops patina over time. Any natural waviness or texture isn’t a flaw; it’s a characteristic of a less processed, more organic hide.
The zigzag stitching—already a point of fixation in this thread—has been framed as a sign of inferior quality. But based on what I’ve learned in discussions with actual experts (who, notably, didn’t feel the need to prop up their authority through condescension), zigzag stitches are commonly used decoratively or for reinforcement in non-load-bearing areas. Their presence alone tells you nothing about a jacket’s durability or long-term performance. And looking at this specific photo—one I’ve already examined—it’s clear the zigzag stitches function as an aesthetic choice rather than a structural seam. Of course, that makes it a matter of style, which is ultimately a matter of taste. And as the saying goes, there’s no accounting for…
The same logic applies to the French seams used in this jacket’s construction. When a friend with more knowledge of leather jackets suggested I look into this, I did. The Master Supply Co. jacket employs French seams in key structural areas. As I understand it, French seams—unlike welted seams, which are often assumed to be superior simply because they are more visible—enclose raw edges within the fabric, creating a cleaner, more durable finish. They require more precision and effort than exposed seams, yet ironically, because they are less pronounced, they become an easy target for superficial critiques. This is another example of how judging construction quality based on photographs alone is misleading—French seams simply don’t stand out the way welted seams do, even though they are widely used in high-end leather jackets.
Other details, like the inner placket and buttonhole, show tight, even stitching, while the shoulder seams maintain a consistent stitch length without any obvious skipped stitches. The leather itself has a rugged texture, which could be mistaken for inconsistencies in craftsmanship, but that seems more like a characteristic of the material than a flaw in construction.
The comparison to the Rugged West (RW) jacket is similarly misleading. The claim that RW’s stitching is “more refined” might hold true in terms of aesthetic uniformity, but uniformity does not necessarily equate to higher craftsmanship.
The RW jacket appears to use thinner or more pliable leather, which is inherently easier to stitch in straight, uninterrupted lines. The assumption that welted seams are categorically better than French seams ignores the fact that different construction methods serve different design goals. Some might consider welted seams to be “cleaner,” but they are not inherently superior to flat-felled or French seams, both of which are commonly found in premium leather jackets. I was looking for a workwear aesthetic, which should be obvious given that this is a chore coat.
Similarly, the leather’s appearance is a matter of preference rather than an objective measure of quality. The RW jacket’s polished, uniform surface may look “refined,” but this could just as easily indicate heavy correction or treatment—processes that can limit the depth of patina development over time. By contrast, Master Supply Co.’s roughout and veg-tan options lean into a more rugged aesthetic designed to evolve with wear.
But all of this is secondary to the real issue with this entire argument: the failure to distinguish between aesthetic preference and actual craftsmanship. Pretending that one of these jackets is “objectively superior” ignores the reality that different construction methods and leather treatments serve different design goals. Not every jacket is meant to look like a meticulously polished reproduction of a vintage piece. Some are designed to evolve over time, emphasizing natural leather character rather than aiming for a showroom-perfect appearance straight out of the box.
This distinction—conveniently ignored in this discussion—is critical. Aesthetic preference does not equal superior craftsmanship. If someone prefers a sleek, refined look, that’s fine, but that doesn’t mean a jacket designed for a more rugged, broken-in aesthetic is of lesser quality. I’ve already said that the style of the jacket was a major factor in my decision. That this keeps getting ignored suggests that the goal here isn’t an honest discussion of quality—it’s about reinforcing a hierarchy of taste.
I say this because I’ve seen this same kind of reasoning play out before. I used to research other areas of craft, like 19th-century furniture. Again, I’m no expert here. But I learned that supposedly “objective” views on the details of any craft always require a degree of argument. They are not absolute. The way we define quality, authenticity, and craftsmanship is never as fixed as people like to pretend. In the case of antique furniture, what was once dismissed as crude or unrefined later became valued for its hand-finished irregularities. The “truth” about craft is always contingent on how we frame it, on which details we elevate as meaningful and which we choose to dismiss. This is precisely what’s happening here. The assumption that neat, uniform stitching in a photograph signals superior quality isn’t an absolute—it’s just a particular way of seeing, one that ignores the broader context of materials, construction, and intended use.
The yet bigger problem with this argument is how it leans on assumption rather than substance. Calling one jacket “superior” simply because it looks more uniform is a stretch, especially when some of the most respected heritage brands embrace hand-finished variances. Photos alone are not absolute proof of quality, because leather is dynamic—it stretches, breaks in, and develops character over time. A static image tells you nothing about durability or wear. The claim that Master Supply Co.’s stitching is sloppy is based on a highly selective reading of aesthetics rather than any real assessment of how the jacket is made.
Moreover, the idea that French seams signal lesser quality contradicts what I have learned about the reality of high-end tailoring. If we’re talking about “refinement,” French seams are actually more difficult to execute than welted seams. They provide a cleaner internal structure, eliminate raw edges, and add durability. Just because they aren’t as pronounced as welted seams doesn’t make them inferior—it means they are designed for a different effect.
The assertion that Master Supply Co. is inherently of lower quality also falls apart under scrutiny. The idea that one can make definitive judgments about leather quality without firsthand experience is pure speculation. If someone wants to claim that one jacket is objectively better, they should at least have direct experience with both. Instead, this argument isn’t about craftsmanship—it’s about selective gatekeeping, where one brand is deemed legitimate while another is dismissed outright, despite both being manufactured in Pakistan. This suggests less an argument about quality than about reinforcing a preferred narrative.
At the end of the day, I chose Master Supply Co. not out of blind allegiance but because I looked into it. I sought guidance elsewhere. This thread struck me as biased from the outset—and it still does. If others prefer RW, that’s fine. But let’s not pretend that eyeballing a couple of photos grants omniscient knowledge of construction quality.
The shill accusation is amusing because, if anything, I came into this thread expecting to find a reason not to buy the jacket. Instead, what stood out was how quickly Master Supply Co. was dismissed without direct experience. I’m not saying people have to like the jackets, but if the standard is, “We don’t need to handle it to know it’s bad,” that’s not an evaluation—that’s gatekeeping.
And if the best argument against my position is still “just look at the photos,” maybe it’s not the strength of my argument that’s the problem.
That said, I do appreciate your bringing up these details in a more substantive way than I have seen in this thread. In a broader sense, the points you make touch on concerns and questions I had about the jacket before purchasing. I went into this knowing I could send it back for a full refund—because, if nothing else, I’ve learned that photos are never enough. But beyond the product itself, there were other elements of the experience with Master Supply Co. that I found reassuring, including their transparency in answering my questions and their willingness to engage directly with customers.
It’s funny how often “this is self-evident in photos” gets treated as an airtight argument, as though quality can be determined solely from a couple of static images. Stitching assessments, particularly in leather jackets—as I am learning—depend on far more than just symmetry in a product shot. I’m no expert, but my understanding is that leather temper, construction technique, and long-term durability all factor in. Yet, in this discussion, photographs are being positioned as an absolute metric of quality, as if freezing a moment in time somehow provides the full story of a garment’s craftsmanship.
I’ve gone through all these questions, one way or another, with people who’ve guided me in the process. Take the Master Supply Co. jacket, for instance. It’s made from 1.5mm vegetable-tanned leather—a thick, full-grain material that breaks in and develops patina over time. Any natural waviness or texture isn’t a flaw; it’s a characteristic of a less processed, more organic hide.
The zigzag stitching—already a point of fixation in this thread—has been framed as a sign of inferior quality. But based on what I’ve learned in discussions with actual experts (who, notably, didn’t feel the need to prop up their authority through condescension), zigzag stitches are commonly used decoratively or for reinforcement in non-load-bearing areas. Their presence alone tells you nothing about a jacket’s durability or long-term performance. And looking at this specific photo—one I’ve already examined—it’s clear the zigzag stitches function as an aesthetic choice rather than a structural seam. Of course, that makes it a matter of style, which is ultimately a matter of taste. And as the saying goes, there’s no accounting for…
The same logic applies to the French seams used in this jacket’s construction. When a friend with more knowledge of leather jackets suggested I look into this, I did. The Master Supply Co. jacket employs French seams in key structural areas. As I understand it, French seams—unlike welted seams, which are often assumed to be superior simply because they are more visible—enclose raw edges within the fabric, creating a cleaner, more durable finish. They require more precision and effort than exposed seams, yet ironically, because they are less pronounced, they become an easy target for superficial critiques. This is another example of how judging construction quality based on photographs alone is misleading—French seams simply don’t stand out the way welted seams do, even though they are widely used in high-end leather jackets.
Other details, like the inner placket and buttonhole, show tight, even stitching, while the shoulder seams maintain a consistent stitch length without any obvious skipped stitches. The leather itself has a rugged texture, which could be mistaken for inconsistencies in craftsmanship, but that seems more like a characteristic of the material than a flaw in construction.
The comparison to the Rugged West (RW) jacket is similarly misleading. The claim that RW’s stitching is “more refined” might hold true in terms of aesthetic uniformity, but uniformity does not necessarily equate to higher craftsmanship.
The RW jacket appears to use thinner or more pliable leather, which is inherently easier to stitch in straight, uninterrupted lines. The assumption that welted seams are categorically better than French seams ignores the fact that different construction methods serve different design goals. Some might consider welted seams to be “cleaner,” but they are not inherently superior to flat-felled or French seams, both of which are commonly found in premium leather jackets. I was looking for a workwear aesthetic, which should be obvious given that this is a chore coat.
Similarly, the leather’s appearance is a matter of preference rather than an objective measure of quality. The RW jacket’s polished, uniform surface may look “refined,” but this could just as easily indicate heavy correction or treatment—processes that can limit the depth of patina development over time. By contrast, Master Supply Co.’s roughout and veg-tan options lean into a more rugged aesthetic designed to evolve with wear.
But all of this is secondary to the real issue with this entire argument: the failure to distinguish between aesthetic preference and actual craftsmanship. Pretending that one of these jackets is “objectively superior” ignores the reality that different construction methods and leather treatments serve different design goals. Not every jacket is meant to look like a meticulously polished reproduction of a vintage piece. Some are designed to evolve over time, emphasizing natural leather character rather than aiming for a showroom-perfect appearance straight out of the box.
This distinction—conveniently ignored in this discussion—is critical. Aesthetic preference does not equal superior craftsmanship. If someone prefers a sleek, refined look, that’s fine, but that doesn’t mean a jacket designed for a more rugged, broken-in aesthetic is of lesser quality. I’ve already said that the style of the jacket was a major factor in my decision. That this keeps getting ignored suggests that the goal here isn’t an honest discussion of quality—it’s about reinforcing a hierarchy of taste.
I say this because I’ve seen this same kind of reasoning play out before. I used to research other areas of craft, like 19th-century furniture. Again, I’m no expert here. But I learned that supposedly “objective” views on the details of any craft always require a degree of argument. They are not absolute. The way we define quality, authenticity, and craftsmanship is never as fixed as people like to pretend. In the case of antique furniture, what was once dismissed as crude or unrefined later became valued for its hand-finished irregularities. The “truth” about craft is always contingent on how we frame it, on which details we elevate as meaningful and which we choose to dismiss. This is precisely what’s happening here. The assumption that neat, uniform stitching in a photograph signals superior quality isn’t an absolute—it’s just a particular way of seeing, one that ignores the broader context of materials, construction, and intended use.
The yet bigger problem with this argument is how it leans on assumption rather than substance. Calling one jacket “superior” simply because it looks more uniform is a stretch, especially when some of the most respected heritage brands embrace hand-finished variances. Photos alone are not absolute proof of quality, because leather is dynamic—it stretches, breaks in, and develops character over time. A static image tells you nothing about durability or wear. The claim that Master Supply Co.’s stitching is sloppy is based on a highly selective reading of aesthetics rather than any real assessment of how the jacket is made.
Moreover, the idea that French seams signal lesser quality contradicts what I have learned about the reality of high-end tailoring. If we’re talking about “refinement,” French seams are actually more difficult to execute than welted seams. They provide a cleaner internal structure, eliminate raw edges, and add durability. Just because they aren’t as pronounced as welted seams doesn’t make them inferior—it means they are designed for a different effect.
The assertion that Master Supply Co. is inherently of lower quality also falls apart under scrutiny. The idea that one can make definitive judgments about leather quality without firsthand experience is pure speculation. If someone wants to claim that one jacket is objectively better, they should at least have direct experience with both. Instead, this argument isn’t about craftsmanship—it’s about selective gatekeeping, where one brand is deemed legitimate while another is dismissed outright, despite both being manufactured in Pakistan. This suggests less an argument about quality than about reinforcing a preferred narrative.
At the end of the day, I chose Master Supply Co. not out of blind allegiance but because I looked into it. I sought guidance elsewhere. This thread struck me as biased from the outset—and it still does. If others prefer RW, that’s fine. But let’s not pretend that eyeballing a couple of photos grants omniscient knowledge of construction quality.
The shill accusation is amusing because, if anything, I came into this thread expecting to find a reason not to buy the jacket. Instead, what stood out was how quickly Master Supply Co. was dismissed without direct experience. I’m not saying people have to like the jackets, but if the standard is, “We don’t need to handle it to know it’s bad,” that’s not an evaluation—that’s gatekeeping.
And if the best argument against my position is still “just look at the photos,” maybe it’s not the strength of my argument that’s the problem.
That said, I do appreciate your bringing up these details in a more substantive way than I have seen in this thread. In a broader sense, the points you make touch on concerns and questions I had about the jacket before purchasing. I went into this knowing I could send it back for a full refund—because, if nothing else, I’ve learned that photos are never enough. But beyond the product itself, there were other elements of the experience with Master Supply Co. that I found reassuring, including their transparency in answering my questions and their willingness to engage directly with customers.
Last edited:
bigmanbigtruck
Practically Family
- Messages
- 503
At this rate, you’re probably gonna spend more time typing about master supply co than actually wearing the jacket.
The other thread got locked because the discussion wasn’t gonna go anywhere and in all likelihood this is gonna get locked too.
You haven’t even gotten the jacket yet, just generated wall after wall of text. Come back after you’ve gotten to wear it and put your money where your mouth is. Then you can educate everyone on here rather than give MSC empty praise.
The other thread got locked because the discussion wasn’t gonna go anywhere and in all likelihood this is gonna get locked too.
You haven’t even gotten the jacket yet, just generated wall after wall of text. Come back after you’ve gotten to wear it and put your money where your mouth is. Then you can educate everyone on here rather than give MSC empty praise.
Last edited:
Featured products
-
John Lofgren Monkey Boots Shinki Horsebuttt - $1,136 The classic monkey boot silhouette in an incredibly rich Shinki russet horse leather. -
Grant Stone Diesel Boot Dark Olive Chromexcel - $395 Goodyear welted, Horween Chromexcel, classic good looks. -
Schott 568 Vandals Jacket - $1,250 The classic Perfecto motorcycle jacket, in a very special limited-edition Schott double rider style.
Ah yes, the “too many words” complaint—again. And sure, let’s pretend I’m the reason the thread was locked. Lol.
What’s funny is how unaware you and others on that thread seem of how this all looks from the outside. The logic of bullying is always the same: mock, dismiss, pile on, then act bewildered when someone doesn’t just sit back and take it. You might not see it, but others will.
So keep it up. Because this was never just about a jacket. It’s about fairness and standing up to this kind of thing. But if the expectation here is that no one should push back, I’ve said what I needed to say. I’m good.
And since I know how this works, go ahead—keep talking. Convince yourselves you “won” because I don’t feel the need to respond. That’s the great thing about an echo chamber: it always sounds like you’re right.
So let’s just skip ahead: someone will post another quip, another performative dunk for the high-fives and upvotes. Gotta make sure the in-group sees you playing your part. Go for it. The floor is yours.
Last edited:
