Vintage Suitings: Discussions of, and sourcing modern equivalents, etc.

[Guttersnipe]

about 22-24 oz, unless you're talking about a very rugged Norfolk type suit, as oppose to a smart suit, in which case you could probably go a bit higher.

(you could find Shetland / Scotch tweeds with a nearly identical look in the 18-20 oz range more suitable for suits)

What does that translate to in grams?

I ask because I'm looking at two different gray flannels at the moment, one is a 660 and the other a 720. Both are vintage(ish) remnants , I believe, but there's enough to make a pair of trousers from both. I hoping to get a pair of wide legged 1930s-esque bags made from one of them, but I'm not sure if those weights are too heavy.

What do you think HBK?

 

[Baron Kurtz]

This is a useful link Just insert the grams or ounces and it converts for you. 660 grams is about 20 Oz, 720 grams is about 21 Oz

http://www.ginifab.com/feeds/ozyd2_gm2/

 

[Tomasso]

Not HBK here...... but I have a few pairs of flannels that heavy and I can't wear them at temps above 50F or so and they get very warm in the overheated indoors of today. But then I run a bit warm so YMMV.

 

[herringbonekid]

660 is about 23 oz, and 720 is about 25 oz

that's heavier than the standard 1930s-40s British weight suit of 18oz, but not too heavy for a winter / sports pair of trousers. depends what temperatures you intend to wear them in !


edit: Baron my imac converter disgrees with that online one.

edit again: yours seems to be per yard rather than metre.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Does yours calculate on the sqm? The online one is working on running yard.

660 grams = 23.28 ounce(s)
1 square meter = 1.19599 square yard
660 g/m2(gsm) = 19.47 oz/yd2
fabric size : 15000 cm² = 990.0 grams


I hate mixing measures, and despise Imperial measures for their screwed up an/or insane base relations. I'm a metric man through and through.

 

[herringbonekid]

Baron, i realise there's much possibility of confusion in talking about weight without knowing if we're talking yards or metres... when i say '18oz' i'm thinking about what the fabric feels like between the fingers i.e. its thickness and density.... but it's based on per metre.

so a yard of 18oz fabric might actually weigh 15 oz, but i still think of it as 18oz fabric.... if you see what i mean.


(p.s. your online calculator doesn't disagree with mine after all ... it just converts it into yds at the top and gives the metre weight below)

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Yup, see edit above. Our numbers seem to agree, anyways

 

[herringbonekid]

do Americans always talk in yards for fabric ?

 

[Baron Kurtz]

For everything, pretty much, as I recall. Metric, even in university science classrooms, can be spotty at best. It was madness, as a European, to have to learn - and teach - conversion to calories etc. when those measurements would never, ever be used in a serious science publication.

 

[Feraud]

Yes, fabric is discussed in terms of yards.

 

[Guttersnipe]

Thanks for all your responses guys and thanks HBK for qualitative feedback. I guess I'll skip these fabrics...the quest for the perfect gray flannel continues...if anyone is interested in the fabrics I spotted PM me and I'll send a link.

What confuses me is that, more often than not, it's unclear is weights are expressed per-yard or meter. I actually worked the conversion formula BK linked on my own a while back. However, I noticed it didn't always return the same weights stated when mills list in both ounces and grams.

 

[Tomasso]

Those weight numbers are really just used as a guideline, for IRL they don't properly convey the handle or feel of the cloth in regard to thickness. If you had the opportunity to peruse a stack of thirty different bolts of flannels of the same approximate weight this would become apparent. I really don't know how one can compare and choose cloth without handling the stuff, on the bolt preferably. The books are nice to look at and are somewhat informative (visually mostly) but choosing from bolts is a different world. Probably not something that people want to hear but there it is.

 

[Patrick Hall]

Alright guys, last couple of posts and then I'll quit spamming the forum. I recently had a couple suits made by a local tailor to (relatively) vintage specs. This first one is a three piece suit with double breasted waistcoat and fancy back made from this 13 oz. Fox Bros. flannel. The waistcoat is copied from a dove gray waistcoat I bought from Nick D. a while back. The trousers are unremarkable, so I didn't bother to photograph them - they are high waisted with no belt loops, single pleats, and suspender buttons on the outside of the waistband. There are some problems, I think, with the cut of the jacket, which are exacerbated by the peculiar way it hangs on my dress form. Any advice y'all have for future endeavors with this tailor would be most welcome.

 

[Patrick Hall]

The second suit I had made by this tailor is a sportier variety. Still the strange fly-away lapels, and a reverse pleat in the center of the back. Also pleated breast pocket with a pocket flap.

 

[herringbonekid]

Still the strange fly-away lapels,

lapel corners should ideally curve back into the jacket slightly to counteract this problem (the curve is put in while pad-stitching the canvas to the jacket).
in this case the very high gorge of the jackets is exacerbating the ping-up peaks, because they're lying on the area of chest where it's starting to curve away into the shoulder.

 

[Two Types]

My initial thoughts were:

I love the first waistcoat (it reminds of the ones found on some of the flashier mid-30s British suits), but I'm not keen on the second one. I think a higher closure (rather than the low four button front) would have been more striking.
On the second jacket, I would have preferred to see matching patch pockets all over, there's something I find off-putting about the mismatched pockets.
The first suit is eye-catching. What about going for a one button closure on a future suit in that style? It might not be easy for the tailor to get the right balance, but if he got it right it would look striking - especially with that waistcoat.

The main question is, how do they feel and look when you are wearing them?

P.S. There is a thread somewhere called soemthing like 'Show us your vintage inspired suits'. That's the prefect place to post these.

 

[Two Types]

lapel corners should ideally curve back into the jacket slightly to counteract this problem (the curve is put in while pad-stitching the canvas to the jacket).

Coincidentally, I went to see 'Barmey' at work yesterday and he demonstrated how they shape the chest piece and collar etc when constructing a jacket.

 

[Patrick Hall]

in this case the very high gorge of the jackets is exacerbating the ping-up peaks, because they're lying on the area of chest where it's starting to curve away into the shoulder.

Thanks HBK - in future, perhaps the best idea will be to ask him to lower the gorge of the lapels, so as to moderate the effect of his technique.

My initial thoughts were:

I think a higher closure (rather than the low four button front) would have been more striking.
On the second jacket, I would have preferred to see matching patch pockets all over, there's something I find off-putting about the mismatched pockets.

The main question is, how do they feel and look when you are wearing them?

Thanks for the feedback TT - the second waistcoat is indeed too low. I don't think it's inauthentic to the period, as I've seen photos of similarly low cut waistcoats, but I'm not happy with it either. This was a case of me not giving him something to copy when I requested the suit, and left to his own devices, this was the waistcoat I got. In future, I will bring one from a vintage suit for him to copy. I agree about the one button closure - the cut-away is pretty extreme, and when I wear it, the jacket almost looks like a morning coat. Both suits feel great, and I wear them quite often. And I also found myself wishing I'd instructed him to do patches for all three jacket pockets as well - I was so focused on what I wanted for the breast pocket, I neglected to specify for the other two. Ah well. They aren't perfect reproductions of vintage suiting, but I was at least able to get the fit and proportions, between trousers, waistcoat, and jacket mostly correct. Also - heartily recommend that Fox Bros. flannel. The drape is amazing, and the fabric feels great.

 

[herringbonekid]

Thanks HBK - in future, perhaps the best idea will be to ask him to lower the gorge of the lapels, so as to moderate the effect of his technique.

yes, i think if those gorges had been 1-2" lower the lapel corners might lie as they should.
very high gorges tend to be more of a modern thing, though i've seen some illustrations (not to be totally trusted) from the early 20s with very high ones too.

 

[Fastuni]

Can anyone tell me what kind of fabric the sportcoat is made from?
Am I mistaken or does it look like a kind of knit fabric?



Another photo showing the structure from a different angle:
http://fotothek.slub-dresden.de/fotos/df/pk/0000000/df_pk_0000710_017.jpg

1948, Berlin

Photo by Abraham Pisarek