The quality of a suit

[Matt Deckard]

Many companies talk about quality these days though don't define what they mean. Whether it be a certain lining or a outer fabric or a construction detail, it is mentioned though they say nothing of what they mean by quality and because o the misinformation touted by salesman about higher numbered super wools being better, I see people in stores asking for higher rated wools.

I was in a tailor shop standing next to a man who was ordering a made to measure suit when he asked if they had anything thinner and lighter. Companies are catering to this customer though not often to me; the old school guy who wants a suit that will last a long time.

The higher the count it seems the faster the wear and tear. When I was in New York I was told one man's custom suit wouldn't last more than a couple years simply because the fabric used. The idea of luxury befuddles me when the materials used are flimsy.

Why pay an exhorbitant price for goods that wouldn't last.

Well to me it's not how smooth a fabric is or how airy and light it is, It's how well it wears. Quality can be smooth and dense or coarse and hard, though in general what really matters to me is that it lasts. thinner threads are nice, though if you are going try to make wool into silk why not just use silk... why make a jacket at all? why not just wear the shirt?

So what is quality?

For starters one sign is the density of the fabric and the anti wrinkling properties. Heavier weights wear longer and higher counts appear to wear out faster... that's mainly because they make them so thin. There are fabrics that will wear down quicker like flannel and loose woven tweeds, though modern flannels and modern tweeds seem to wear down more quickly for the same reason modern wools wear out faster. The fabrics are woven more loosely making for a far less dense wool.
Cashmere tends to stretch and lose shape easily and from some old tailors with which I spoke, at one time it was more of a filler for cheaper suits because of it's problems holding shape.

I'll go more in depth when I get back with a camera.

I'm probably gonna get flak for stating some of the above, though it's all observation and suits that I can't wear that I get my information.

There is much more to post regarding linings and canvasing and basting and finishing tequniques, extras in how trousers are put together... shoulder seams and of course the dreaded armhole... this is the begening.

 

[Johnnysan]

I for one am looking forward to this information, Matt. Keep it coming!

 

[Mr Maltby]

Do you think that men who can afford to pay these rates, do not want to have a suit that lasts more than a couple years?

Example: at an auto shop, I purchased a part. The gentleman next to me had the exact same part, but it was for a mercedes. His cost 25 dollars more. The man was a mercedes mechanic, and I asked him "why so much?" He said that people who drive Mercedes like to feel like they can pay that much for their car, and car repairs. Sounds crazy to me, but its what they want.

Do you think that maybe the lower thread count would be an insult to a man of such a mindset? Especially now when the common association with a suit ( at least in santa barbara!) is a wealthy businessman? To this man, purchasing a suit because of its ability to last, equates to not being able to afford the new suit when the high thread count one he currently has begins to fall apart? Further, since a suit is not common dress anymore, the suitmakers need to make suits to please thier audience, which are in large part, not poor people.

Just a thought.

 

[melankomas]

in addition to Mr Maltby's points, i'll add that perhaps people who are purchasing these luxury items like to feel in fashion (as many people do, luxury items or no). fashion today is quite fickle. it may have always been so, but i've not studied fashion history enough to say. a suit that lasts in body may not last in style. since several people here admire the classic (described often as "timeless") styles of the Golden Era, this style expiration is an almost foreign factor.

perhaps. [huh]

 

[Will]

I want my suits to last but I care even more that they drape. And you don't get drape from seven and eight ounce wool. Ten ounces minimum, though I've heard good things about Lesser's nine ounce cloth.

My last 8 ounce suit, from Loro Piana wool, tore, and not at a seam, on the fourth wearing. Never again.

 

[Benny Holiday]

Companies are catering to this customer though not often to me. The old school guy who wants a suit that will last a long time.

The higher the count it seems the faster the wear and tear. When i was in New York I was told one man's custom suit wouldn't last more than a couple years simply because the fabric used. the idea of luxury befuddles me when the materials used are flimsy.

Why pay an exhorbitant price for goods that wouldn't last.

Well to me it's not how smooth a fabric is or how airy and light it is, It's how well it wears. Quality can be smooth and dense or coarse and hard, though in general what really matters to me is that it lasts. thinner threads are nice, though if you are going try to make wool into silk why not just use silk... why make a jacket at all? why not just wear the shirt?
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I'm probably gonna get flak for stating some of the above, though it's all observation and suits that I can't wear that I get my information.

I can see this is going to be a very informative thread, Matt. I agree with your comments 100%, and I for one will be sending kudos your way for sharing this information with us rather than any flak. The fashionistas have been duped into thinking the fabric they are getting in their suits is a higher quality, but by what standards, we ask? Not by ours, that's for certain. What is quality? Wrinkle-resistance, durability, drape? Yes indeed!

 

[Senator Jack]

Never could understand the selling point of a cashmere topcoat. They don't seem to hold their shape for more than one winter.

As Mr. Maltby noted, consumer psychology is the greatest factor in this mix. It used to be that Mr. Smith showed up Mr. Jones by buying goods of better quality, now oneupmanship comes from wholly embracing planned obsolescence. 'I can afford to buy this item I'm going to throw away.' It's like lighting a cigar with a $100 bill.

Take a look at Ikea. Okay, not a terribly expensive place to buy furniture, but it's constructed exactly for today's consumer. 'I'm going to be sick of this decor in five years,' he says, 'so who cares if it falls apart? (I have, and have sold, 1950s Ikea goods, and of course they are incredibly well made.)

In the end, this has nothing to do with wrinking or being 'softer', and, in fact, I'd say the majority of men today couldn't give a lick about anything being softer (really, what do today's men know about fabric and suits anyway?), so it comes down to the marketing angle. How can the consumer be manipulated? This is all probably a moot discussion at this point. We're battling the big boys here.


Regards,

Senator Jack

 

[carebear]

How often are they going to be wearing the suit?

If it is an infrequent item worn just to teh office or out to the odd party, it won't HAVE to last as long as the suit of a man who may, in the day, only owned one or two and wore them everyday under all conditions.

 

[Senator Jack]

But being being in the minority who wants to buy a suit to wear at least once a week, we get freezed out. That's the problem. I've gone round to a few custom tailors and the patterns/colors offered in anything under 120 is extremely limited. It's akin to the vinyl lp. Audio enthusiasts know vinyl sounds better, but because the public has been brainwashed to digital, our choices are limited.

Regards,

Jack

 

[Tomasso]

It's akin to the vinyl lp.

It's not quite that bad. :eusa_doh:

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

I think the trouble with suits is a byproduct of trends among all modern clothes.

There is a continual segmenting of clothing into two areas. "Dress" clothing which is not made to last, does not protect one from the elements, and is supposed to be worn in climate-controlled areas with minimal wear-and-tear, and "casual" clothing which often is more durable but usually is also very informal.

What I think is lacking today is clothing which is both functionally useful yet stylish and at least "semi-formal."

For example, think of a lot of the styles we now think of as "outdated." Things like knicker suits, tweed, dress boots, topcoats, hats, gloves, etc. All these things were useful because of their practicality, yet were also accepted as "formal" clothing.

Today, you have the choice of being practical (ie Gore-Tex windbreaker, jeans, sneakers, etc.) or "dressy" (Super 150s suit, paper-thin shirt, thin-soled shoes, etc.) but not both.

I don't see this trend reversing anytime soon, although I personally go out of my way to try to combine the practical with the formal in my wardrobe, and even with a lot of modern items it is surprising how far you can go.

 

[Fletch]

Planned Obsolescence. That's the name of that tune. In the future, they're gonna grab you by the lapels, and if those lapels don't come right off in their hands, you're going on a long bus ride to the outskirts of decent society, where you'll be left to fend amongst serape-and-tire-sandaled tree-huggers and cavalry-twilled kneebooted neo-militias. And a lot of people stumbling around in a daze in torn-up dressy clothes, cooking squirrels on campfires, sleeping fitfully under Gore-Tex windbreakers, attach?© cases gathering rainwater, the forest rustling each night with the last dying chirrups of ten thousand cel phones.

 

[carebear]

Planned Obsolescence. That's the name of that tune. In the future, they're gonna grab you by the lapels, and if those lapels don't come right off in their hands, you're going on a long bus ride to the outskirts of decent society, where you'll be left to fend amongst serape-and-tire-sandaled tree-huggers and cavalry-twilled kneebooted neo-militias. And a lot of people stumbling around in a daze in torn-up dressy clothes, cooking squirrels on campfires, sleeping fitfully under Gore-Tex windbreakers, attach?© cases gathering rainwater, the forest rustling each night with the last dying chirrups of ten thousand cel phones.

And the men of tweed, like Matt Deckard and Hem, will rule them all. Rule with an iron, yet impeccably gloved, fist.

 

[Tony in Tarzana]

Gotta buy some lottery tickets. If I hit the big number, I'll open The Every Day Suit Factory, specializing in suits a guy can wear every day, all day, and drive a car in or change a lightbulb in without one's arms being restricted. I'll be sure to have sizes to fit everybody from Baron Kurtz to myself, and even larger.

I'll find some tailors over the age of 80 to help design the suits and train the staff, and if Matt and Senator Jack are available as consultants, so much the better.

Until then, I guess I'll just have to suffer with the rest of the fellows.

 

[MK]

.

I'll find some tailors over the age of 80 to help design the suits and train the staff, and if Matt and Senator Jack are available as consultants, so much the better.

Actually, an older tailor is not guarantee of getting the kind of suits we are talking about. Read my article in Classic Style about having 89 year old Jack Taylor make a bespoke suit for me. You will see that although Jack made suits in the golden era, he kept changing with the times....until the sixties. He likes pants with flat fronts and peg legs.

I thought getting an older tailer was the hot idea too. Don't get me wrong....Jack is great at what he does....but you have to fight him to get him to do it like back in the day.

 

[John in Covina]

Gotta buy some lottery tickets. If I hit the big number, I'll open The Every Day Suit Factory, specializing in suits a guy can wear every day, all day, and drive a car in or change a lightbulb in without one's arms being restricted. I'll be sure to have sizes to fit everybody from Baron Kurtz to myself, and even larger.

I'll find some tailors over the age of 80 to help design the suits and train the staff, and if Matt and Senator Jack are available as consultants, so much the better.

******
Now that is the best Idea i have heard all day, maybe all month!

 

[Fletch]

The Stormy Kromer cap people have branched out into clothing. Maybe you could get them interested - it would mesh nicely with their marketing image.

 

[GateXC]

I do have to ask though, what is it that you guys are doing that would necessitate having to wear a lower count than 120s; how you manage to rip holes in suits, and why you'd want one suit to wear every day?

I have several suits 120s or greater and have had them for years with no problems. I have enough suits that I rotate them through once a week or so - or wear the jackets separately - and haven't ever wished that they were of a lower count and have never had a problem. It's all in taking care of your clothes - minimal to no dry cleaning, hanging it up after every wear, etc.

For today's guy that does a job that would require a suit or even if he just wanted to wear one to the office on a regular basis, there is no reason that a well-made suit with Super 130s couldn't last years as long as it's well taken care of.

As a result, I'm going to have to question/clarify Matt's assertion about what defines quality in a suit fabric. Just because a suit fabric is of a higher count and will wear out quicker by no means it is of a lesser quality than a lower one that might last 15 yrs - it's just a different quality. Would anyone assert that a scratchy wool sweater is of a higher quality than a cashmere sweater of the same style? Sure the scratchy wool will last longer and keep you warm, but the cashmere, even though thinner, will keep you just as warm (if not warmer), feel better against your skin, and yes, wear out faster. It's a trade-off. It isn't a determination one way or the other, except to the fact that one is much more expensive than the other. But with the higher price, you get the trade off on durability for the other factors. The same goes for suit fabrics. And as one final comment, two suits constructed in the same manner and cut but with varying fabric counts, I am willing to be that the higher count suit looks more appealing 9/10 times. And after all, isn't that why most of us wear a suit - to look better than 99.9% of the populace?

 

[J. M. Stovall]

Here's my question: if new suits fabric is 120, 130 and such, what would the fabric in vintage suits be using that grading system? And where does fabric like modern tweed fit in?

Somebody needs to make me a chart!

 

[Senator Jack]

I have a few custom-made 120 suits, and I have to say, I really don't like the feel of them as compared to my vintage stock. Silk and 'silky' suits kind of put me in the mind of a flouncing Indian prince, (NTTAWWT) whereas the coarser materials make me feel, well, hard-boiled. That could me just wanting my suit to be an extension of my cynicism. Yeah, I like silk scarves, and silk-lined gloves, and silk pyjamas but silk shirts and suits are out.

Regards,

Senator Jack