Show us your suits

[Creeping Past]

FL suitist perception 'issues'...

I was (silently) referring to the chest measurement. I'm 46" and many suit n jacket vendors label 44 as large and 46 as XL. In that reality, 40" chest seems kind of medium.

But since I intended my remark to express just a suspicion of mild amusement, and given that this is not a subject I wish to die in a ditch for, I'll retire from suits for now.

 

[Big Man]

... But since I intended my remark to express just a suspicion of mild amusement, and given that this is not a subject I wish to die in a ditch for, I'll retire from suits for now.

Hey, I've got your back on this one. I think a suit that would fit someone with a 40" chest, 40" waist and was only 6 feet "tall" would be considered "munchkin size". Heck, I haven't been that little since I was in Junior High.

 

[Creeping Past]

*Phew*

Thanks, Big Man. Good to have you on my six (and my seven and eight ) I thought it was just me.

 

[Slim Portly]

Ditto here, CP. I see things like that all of the time, and I just scratch my head and wonder what the seller is thinking..

 

[jamespowers]

Hey, I've got your back on this one. I think a suit that would fit someone with a 40" chest, 40" waist and was only 6 feet "tall" would be considered "munchkin size". Heck, I haven't been that little since I was in Junior High.

lol lol lol lol I would actually love to see the guy this suit was originally made for. 42 inch chest and a 40 inch waist?! :eusa_doh:
I know. I haven't fit in a 40 regular since I was in Junior High as well. [huh]

 

[BellyTank]

Even if the jacket is a 42" and the trou, a 40", it need not reflect the actual size of the man- maybe he liked his trousers loose, or high, or low... and his jacket tight. You never can say.

Actually, I am close to those measurements.


B
T

 

[Feraud]

Even if the jacket is a 42" and the trou, a 40", it need not reflect the actual size of the man- maybe he liked his trousers loose, or high, or low... and his jacket tight. You never can say.

Actually, I am close to those measurements.


B
T

This is a very good point.
I initially thought the fellow would appear pear shaped with a 40 jacket and 40 waist. After reading BT's comment I realized I too tend to go for looser pants.
The sizes may not accurately reflect the wearer's shape.

 

[BellyTank]

Thanks, already.

I might add, that I am neither "fat", nor obese.
I am 5' 11".

I would have been more correct, to have said, that some of my suits and separates are of sizes close to those.

If an average sized gentleman is experiencing some middle-age spread and choosing to wear high-waisted trousers, then a 40/40 is pretty easy to do. I can also wear lower cut trousers with a much smaller waist.
Note- high-waisted trousers are virtually on your ribcage, not far from where the chest is measured.
The ribcage IS pair shaped.

It's not even that hard for the waist to be bigger than the chest but we are no longer talking about well-proportioned examples of male-hood.


B
T

 

[Orgetorix]

I'm much the same size as BellyTank. 6'0", 190 lbs., with a BMI that is on the upper edge of the "normal" range. My chest is 42", and while most of my trousers are 35-36" in the waist, a really high-waisted pair that sat on the largest part of my stomach would have to be 38-40".

 

[BellyTank]

Pear, pear!

Applease, if you plause for the latest Phedora Lounge epifany.
Already.

b
T

 

[PADDY]

From the QM-08 Event in November

Not sure if this was ever posted, as I've just stumbled upon it [huh] But this was me with Marc and Scott on the good ship Queen Mary on Long Beach, Ca.

In their well balanced ensembles, both Marc and Scott looked 'outstanding!!'

 

[FinalVestige79]

That is one helluva picture Paddy! Thanks for posting, that chalk stripe DB is awesome!

 

[Lefty]

All three of you look great, though I'm especially fond of that fine collection of shoes.

 

[jamespowers]

Even if the jacket is a 42" and the trou, a 40", it need not reflect the actual size of the man- maybe he liked his trousers loose, or high, or low... and his jacket tight. You never can say.

Actually, I am close to those measurements.


B
T

I didn't mean to offend. [huh] Its just hard for us larger frame guys to imagine losing 4 inches in the chest and gaining a few inches at the waist. At 6', 200 pounds (average guy), I doubt I'll likely ever see a size 40 jacket again.

 

[jamespowers]

All three of you look great, though I'm especially fond of that fine collection of shoes.

Nice ties as well. :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

 

[Tomasso]

the guy was tall and fat. What can I say, he was large. [huh]

US makers use the term Portly.

 

[jamespowers]

US makers use the term Portly.

You mean corpulent.

 

[FinalVestige79]

yeah, I'm with you on that, but as is life.

I didn't mean to offend. [huh] Its just hard for us larger frame guys to imagine losing 4 inches in the chest and gaining a few inches at the waist. At 6', 200 pounds (average guy), I doubt I'll likely ever see a size 40 jacket again.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

At 6', 200 pounds (average guy), I doubt I'll likely ever see a size 40 jacket again.

But you've failed to mention that you've lost a lot of weight in the past several years.

.

 

[Widebrim]

Thanks, already.

If an average sized gentleman is experiencing some middle-age spread and choosing to wear high-waisted trousers, then a 40/40 is pretty easy to do. I can also wear lower cut trousers with a much smaller waist.
Note- high-waisted trousers are virtually on your ribcage, not far from where the chest is measured.
The ribcage IS pair shaped.

It's not even that hard for the waist to be bigger than the chest but we are no longer talking about well-proportioned examples of male-hood.


B
T

Speaking of wasit v. chest size...I'm 6', with a 40" chest. On low-waisted trousers, I'm a 33", but high-waisted I'm 32 1/2". More than once, I have had to insist to tailors to take in the waist enough so that by the end of 15 minutes my cuffs wouldn't be hitting the ground. For some reason, perhaps the popularity of low waists and overlong inseams, some modern tailors don't think it's necessary for trousers to be anywhere near snug at the waist. Sorry if fftopic: