Questions About the United States Navy Peacoat

[Atticus Finch]

Here's a photo of a tag from one of my coats, but they're both the same. I found these jackets on eBay about eight months apart. They are clearly late fifties or early sixties peacoats. Thick, dark blue Kersey wool. Corduroy pockets. Stitching on the cuffs. Fouled anchor buttons.



As you can see, the tags display the classic format of DA tags from 1957 to 1962...but without any date. Of course, the coats can't be any younger than 1962 because they'd have a DSA number if they were. And I don't think they're any older than 1957. If they were, their tags would be formatted differently.

AF

 

[Peacoat]

My reference materials says that DA was used from 1953 through 1961? To further complicate reliance on the contract numbers, the prefix of QM was used on peacoats during that period of time as well. The QM prefix isn't even mentioned in my references sources. Nor is the N prefix or the TAP prefix which both predate the DA prefix.

I agree that this coat was made in the late 50s to the early 60s. Based on the appearance of the tag, I would say more late 50s than early 60s.

If you found two of these in size 50, you are extremely lucky. That is a very rare size. Our member Spoonbelly has found a few in 46 and 48, but those are difficult to find, as well.

 

[Atticus Finch]

Here are photos from the other jacket. I took them this morning.







AF

 

[Atticus Finch]

I think 1962 was the last year of the DA specification tag on military items. By 1963, the DSA was up and running and spec tags reflected that prefix. I think the first DA spec tags appeared in 1953.

AF

 

[Peacoat]

Yes, that is consistent with my reference materials.

Two very nice big boy peacoats you have. I don't think I have seen a size 50, and you have two of them.

 

[Atticus Finch]

Yes. I was very pleased when I found the first one. I was stunned when I found another in the same year.

But size 50 military outerwear isn't without precedent. There were size 50 A-2 jackets issued in WWII. And Vietnam era deck jackets were issued in size 50. And, of course, size 50 in modern military outerwear is fairly common. You're right, though. I'm certain there were very few 1950s peacoats made in that size...probably only a few in any given contract.

AF

 

[Spoonbelly]

My reference materials says that DA was used from 1953 through 1961? To further complicate reliance on the contract numbers, the prefix of QM was used on peacoats during that period of time as well. The QM prefix isn't even mentioned in my references sources. Nor is the N prefix or the TAP prefix which both predate the DA prefix.

I agree that this coat was made in the late 50s to the early 60s. Based on the appearance of the tag, I would say more late 50s than early 60s.

If you found two of these in size 50, you are extremely lucky. That is a very rare size. Our member Spoonbelly has found a few in 46 and 48, but those are difficult to find, as well.

I've found size 48 to be VERY rare in Kersey coats. Size 46 is much more common then 48, but still few and far between. I never came across a size 50 during my "peacoat hunting days". I didn't even think they made them. If you think about it, there were height and weight restrictions back then.

 

[Atticus Finch]

I've found size 48 to be VERY rare in Kersey coats. Size 46 is much more common then 48, but still few and far between. I never came across a size 50 during my "peacoat hunting days". I didn't even think they made them. If you think about it, there were height and weight restrictions back then.

Unfortunately, I find myself in a "condition" that requires me to actively search for size 50 outerwear. :-(

AF

 

[Rusty54]

Great thread! Very informative. You guys made me willing to try some vintage ones online. Got a 62? kersey and a ww2 one coming in the mail.

I was just wondering if anyone kept track of the shoulder seam to seam measurements when looking for vintage peacoats? I asked a bunch of ebay sellers for measurements if they weren't provided and all the ones I saw had great variability in sleeve length and arm pit width but the shoulder seam width always seemed consistently 19 on sizes 38-40.

and Mr. Peacoat, I sent you a message with a link about an interesting looking peacoat. I'm not interested in buying it but it was quite unique with RCAF buttons.

 

[Peacoat]

I don't know what to make of that peacoat: http://www.ebay.com/itm/222019799435?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&fromMakeTrack=true&rmvSB=true It has the standard 1977 Vi Mil* tag, but with R.C.A.F. buttons. I wouldn't think a peacoat would be worn by our friends to the North who are in the Air Force. Probably someone thought the buttons were cool and added them to his coat.

If properly measured the p2p measurements ought to be consistent within the sizes. Sure there will be some variation, but not much. I think what you are seeing from the sellers is an inability to properly measure. I expect to see great variability in sleeve length measurements as the sellers don't always measure following the curve of the elbow, which is the proper way to do it.

BTW, welcome to the Lounge.

_______________
*Vi Mil stands for Viking Military which was the military side of Sterlingwear. At some point the Vi Mil designation was dropped, and all garments were sold using the Sterlingwear name. That company, has for a number of years, held the contract for manufacturing the current issue peacoat for the Navy. A good company with an excellent product. Unfortunately, the Navy no longer specs the old "Kersey" wool for the shell.

 

[Atticus Finch]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the former owner's service number appears to indicate that he was an officer. I was under the impression that peacoats were only worn by enlisted personnel...at least in the seventies. Don't know that this adds anything toward solving the button mystery, but maybe it's a clue...

AF

 

[Peacoat]

I saw that, but it looks like a social security number to me. In about 1969 the services started using SSN instead of serial numbers. I believe, but not certain, that the Navy did the same. I believe the Navy used this pattern for enlisted service numbers prior to the switch (if the Navy switched): xxx xx xx . Not sure what pattern was used for officer service numbers. The coat in question had this pattern: xxx xx xxxx, which is consistent with a social security number. Maybe one of our Navy members can remember and will enlighten us.

Peacoats are also authorized to be worn by officers and chiefs, but almost all wear the bridge coat instead. An officer's peacoat is called a reefer.

 

[Rusty54]

Thanks for the welcome. I'm glad you enjoyed the RCAF buttons I wasn't sure if ebay links were allowed so I didn't post it.

I got the 62 kersey today. Its exactly the same size as my Sterlingwear authentic so I'm happy. The seller actually copy pasted parts of Peacoat's dating thread into the page. Although funnily, my sterlingwear is a 38long and the vintage is a 38R but the sleeve and the coat length is the same.

I did want to ask a question about this wear/tear on the coat though. It looks like there are a few places where the wool is missing and I can see a lattice/mesh under it. Is this moth damage? or perhaps balding? I plan to wear the coat though, so I'm not too worried. The price was good. I think I would have worn the coat less if it was in mint condition lol

 

[Peacoat]

Thanks for the welcome. I'm glad you enjoyed the RCAF buttons I wasn't sure if ebay links were allowed so I didn't post it.

I got the 62 kersey today. Its exactly the same size as my Sterlingwear authentic so I'm happy. The seller actually copy pasted parts of Peacoat's dating thread into the page. Although funnily, my sterlingwear is a 38long and the vintage is a 38R but the sleeve and the coat length is the same.

I did want to ask a question about this wear/tear on the coat though. It looks like there are a few places where the wool is missing and I can see a lattice/mesh under it. Is this moth damage? or perhaps balding? I plan to wear the coat though, so I'm not too worried. The price was good. I think I would have worn the coat less if it was in mint condition lol

Without a picture it is hard to tell. I haven't known moths to cause damage such as you describe. Could be another form of vermin that has been mentioned in connection with leather jackets, but I can't remember what it was. You could take a picture of the damaged area, post to a third party server and then insert the image using the picture icon above.

 

[Rusty54]

something like this

 

[Rusty54]

Lol sorry for the short reply. Sent it from my phone. Hope it worked.

 

[Peacoat]

That's not nearly as bad as I thought it would be. Probably some moth damage. That happens to wool that isn't protected.

 

[Atticus Finch]

I agree. My closet would be like a smorgasbord for those darned things if I didn't take preventative measures. G-1 mouton collars, wool flight jacket waist bands and cuffs, tasty peacoats and fur felt Stetson hats. If moths have food radars...my house must appear as a huge, bright target on their screens.

I don't care much for the smell of moth balls. I use cedar chips instead. I found where some woods were being cleared and helped myself to some dead cedar branches. I saw off a few chunks and split them into pieces whenever I need to moth proof my jacket storage area. Use them in my hat boxes, too.

AF

 

[Rusty54]

Thanks, there are like at least 5 spots like that though. I got my mothballs all ready for storage so hopefully there wont be too many new holes.

My WW2 one came today too. No moths yet Although the previous owner really messed the buttons up. They are not aligned at all. Is there some rule about how many inches from the open edge of the coat that I should follow?

And there's a rip in the lining where the neck tag should be. I want to know should I get that fixed before getting it dry cleaned or dry clean it first?

 

[Peacoat]

I would get the tear fixed first so it won't get worse.

I measured 2 of my size 42 coats at 5.75". My size 40 coat is 6".