Roughwear vs. Perry A-2 Fit

[Deleted member 16736]

How does the fit on these contracts differ? They look similar and both have a collar stand. How would you compare them, though, in terms of fit? I am referring specifically to the Roughwear 27752 and Perry 16175 (horsehide). Thank you.

 

[andyfalzon]

The Perry is roomier and slightly longer than the Rough Wear

 

[aswatland]

I have size 44s originals in both contracts. The RW is actually roomier than the Perry across the chest, with longer sleeves, wider shoulders, but is about an inch shorter in the body.

 

[andyfalzon]

We all have originals in both contracts, but it seems that either our originals differ in the measurements (which is quite possible), or we measure them differently (which is quite possible) or both (which is quite possible).

Therefore, if you are interested to buy a repro of those contracts I 'd suggest to ask the vendor who makes them for more accurate information.

Many people believe that the Rough Wear is the roomier of all contracts, while at BK's it is the slimmest of all the line. In addition, in a question we made to Real McCoys few years back to name their slimmest contract, they replied it was the RW 27752.

 

[aswatland]

Of course originals varied significantly even when they have the same tagged size. I have three original RWs in a size 44 and each is roomier than my size 44 Perry. I have seen other size 44 Perry's which are much the same size as my original. The key is to go by the measurements of a jacket and not just the tagged size.

 

[andyfalzon]

That's interesting.
Care to share the measurements of your RW? We 'd like to compare with ours.

 

[aswatland]

OK. .......... . pit..........shoulders .........sleeve......back (from base of collar stand) Front(along windflap)
RW 16159 .. 24"......... 19"............... 25.75"...............26".................................24"
RW 1401-P.. 23.5"...... 19"............... 25" ............... 25"....................................24"
RW 27752.. 24" ........ 19.75"...........25.5" ................25.5"................................24"
Perry 16175..23" ......... 18.5".............24.75"...............27" ................................23.75"

 

[Dr H]

I've also owned multiples of the Perry in horse (or at least I'd thought so until Gary's book was published...) and goat.

Perry Sportswear 23377 (size 44)
Weight = 1.2 kg (2 lb 10 oz)
Shoulder width = 47.5 cm
Pit-to-pit = 59 cm
Front length = 58 cm
Back length = 67 cm (including collar stand)
Arm length = 56 cm (without knitted cuff)
Epaulettes = 16.5 cm
Collar width = 7.5 cm
Pocket width = 15 cm
Pocket depth = 16 cm
Pocket flap depth = 7.5 cm

Perry Sportswear 23377 (size 42)
shoulders (47 cm / 18.5 inches)
chest (55 cm / 22 inches)
arms (65 cm / 26 inches)
back (including collar stand) (65 cm / 26 inches)
front (58 cm / 23 inches)front.

Perry Sportswear 42-16175-P (size 44)
Weight = 1.36 kg (2 lb 15.5 oz)
Shoulder width = 47.5 cm
Pit-to-pit = 59 cm
Front length = 58 cm
Back length = 64 cm (including collar stand)
Arm length = 55 cm (without knitted cuff)
Epaulettes = 17 cm
Collar width = 7 cm
Pocket width = 14 cm
Pocket depth = 16 cm
Pocket flap depth = 7.5 cm

 

[andyfalzon]

OK please see ours below:
....................PIT........... SHOULDERS.........SLEEVE............BACK
RW 27752 ........23"............18.5".................25.25"...........25.25"
PERRY 16175.....23.5".........19"...................26.5"..............26"

 

[andyfalzon]

It's confusing with the cm, but I like your info.

 

[Deleted member 16736]

Wow, now I'm really confused. Thanks for replying.

 

[aswatland]

Oh dear! Remember Wartime sizes were all over the place. You just have to go by the measurements!

 

[Deleted member 16736]

Oh dear! Remember Wartime sizes were all over the place. You just have to go by the measurements!

Okay, thanks.

 

[majormajor]

OK please see ours below:
....................PIT........... SHOULDERS.........SLEEVE............BACK
RW 27752 ........23"............18.5".................25.25"...........25.25"
PERRY 16175.....23.5".........19"...................26.5"..............26"

Seeing as EVERY dimension on the Perry is 0.25-0.75 bigger, then the difference in shape is minimal. It's simply BIGGER.

Famous play by the Bard of Avon - "Much Ado About NOTHING" :eeek:

 

[aswatland]

Seeing as EVERY dimension on the Perry is 0.25-0.75 bigger, then the difference in shape is minimal. It's simply BIGGER.

Famous play by the Bard of Avon - "Much Ado About NOTHING" :eeek:

The Perry is simply bigger in the two examples here, but how typical are the sizes of the examples you quote?
The original question is a legitimate one. Wartime RWs and Perrys varied in actual size even when they had the same tagged size. From my experience of collecting many RW and Perry A2s RWs are generally roomier jackets.

 

[majormajor]

Wartime RWs and Perrys varied in actual size even when they had the same tagged size.

Exactly, Andrew. They varied in SIZE.

But the OP asked about fit - i.e - SHAPE - which on all of the measurements in this thread, looks pretty damn similar across both makers. And we all know not to go by the ticket size on an A2.

I'm sure (especially after studying Gary E's excellent book) that there are huge variations between A2s. And I know that you, Andrew, have more hands on experience than most.

But the answer to the OP's question regarding RW & Perry seems simply to be "ignore the size label - try in on".....

 

[Deleted member 16736]

Sounds to me like all things being equal, RW is a bigger jacket. Since I want a more fitted jacket, Perry is probably the way to go. Thanks, guys.

 

[majormajor]

Sounds to me like all things being equal, RW is a bigger jacket. Since I want a more fitted jacket, Perry is probably the way to go. Thanks, guys.

Fair enough.

But the only thing the published measurements suggest is that the Perry is LONGER. If you are a tall guy, and that is what you want, that's cool.

And, as Andrew says, these jackets vary in their sizing.

What you have not said is whether you are looking for an original vintage jacket or a repro.

If it is the latter, then I guess you have to factor in the views of each individual repro maker. And as we know, they do vary!

 

[Dr H]

Sounds to me like all things being equal, RW is a bigger jacket. Since I want a more fitted jacket, Perry is probably the way to go. Thanks, guys.

Joel, I'm a big fan of the two early Perry contracts (less enamoured with the 1756), but I wouldn't call it fitted as a pattern. It's generally quite short and boxy (as an original), which is partly why it works for me. A different matter if you're having it tailored of course, but if you're looking for a narrower silhouette why not consider the early Webers from the '30s, or the Doniger (which is a longer, narrower pattern)?

 

[Deleted member 16736]

Joel, I'm a big fan of the two early Perry contracts (less enamoured with the 1756), but I wouldn't call it fitted as a pattern. It's generally quite short and boxy (as an original), which is partly why it works for me. A different matter if you're having it tailored of course, but if you're looking for a narrower silhouette why not consider the early Webers from the '30s, or the Doniger (which is a longer, narrower pattern)?

I should probably provide a few more details. It's a GW order. I'm 6'2", 195 lbs. (down 10 lbs. with another 10-15 lbs. to go). Do you think the Werber or Doniger would look best on a man with my build? The Werber has a nice silhouette, but I wore it once and the arms kept coming up on me. Maybe that was because I was wearing John's jacket and I'm an inch taller than him. Other than the arms, it felt good. The Doniger has the inset sleeves to provide greater arm reach, but you have to want goatskin.

Thanks.