Vintage vs. Modern Workwear Jackets – Durability Showdown

[Daisy L.]

Longtime lurker finally diving in with a debate that’s been brewing in my collection: Can contemporary workwear jackets truly match the longevity of vintage pieces? I’ve put both to the test through two years of farm use, and the results might surprise you.

The Contenders:

• 1950s Sears Hercules Denim Jacket (10oz raw denim, chain-stitched)
• 2023 Carhartt Revised Detroit Jacket (12oz Duck Canvas, triple-stitched)

Field Test Results (Beef Farm/Construction Use):

• Seam Failure: Vintage – 1 shoulder seam repair after 18mo; Modern – 0 failures but noticeable thread wear
• Fabric Wear: Vintage denim developed character without tears; Modern duck shows abrasion at cuffs/hem
• Hardware: Vintage copper rivets outlasted modern coated brass
• Lining: Both survived, but vintage cotton drill breathes better than modern poly blend

Unexpected Insights:

1. The Hercules’ slightly looser fit allowed for better layering without strain points
2. Modern treatments (like Carhartt’s Rain Defender) actually accelerated dye fading with frequent washes
3. Vintage jackets seem to “self-repair” – frayed edges stabilize naturally vs. modern fabrics that unravel

Open Questions for the Community:

• Are we sacrificing multi-decade durability for short-term comfort features?
• Which contemporary brands come closest to vintage construction (I’ve heard good things about Iron Heart’s 21oz offerings)?
• Any tricks to “breaking in” modern duck canvas to match vintage pliability?

Attached: Side-by-side wear progression photos at 6/12/24 month marks.

 

[newtojackets]

Interesting results; Can't see any photos though

 

[TartuWolf]

Wow, talk about comparing apples (10oz denim) to oranges (12oz duck canvas) in an extremely vague manner.

Also how is "The Hercules’ slightly looser fit allowed for better layering without strain points" an "unexpected insight"?

Was the 1950s Sears NOS or worn? You'd think that would matter in such an endeavor.

Vintage shoulder seam tore - that can easily be attributed to a single extreme movement. And you even said that it has less strain due to looser fit?

Sorry for being a negative nanny. Even though the idea/post is interesting I don't find the execution/method valuable at all.

 

[dannyk]

Agree with @TartuWolf really hard to have honest feedback and testing when you’re comparing different fabrics at different weights. In different cuts and designs. Like it’s just not a fair or equal comparison at all.

What I will say is that yeah in general as we all know modern materials and ways of making clothes sucks. Things don’t last like they used to in most cases. But not all. Especially in “real” workwear. I don’t mean reproduction workwear or military gear. I don’t mean in the generic stuff you can pick up at Wal-Mart to work in. The stuff today that is truly meant for your type of work. The stuff made for contractors, loggers, miners, oil rig workers etc…the stuff today is in general lighter for equal or better heat retention, lighter for better abrasion resistance. It’s better per weight and made for a very distinct purpose. Clothes have become hyper specific and designed and studied to be used for that specific task. Materials have been studied and researched to find what works best for insulation, fire resistance, slip resistance, tear resistance etc…
Modern fashion is fast and cheap. It’s full of chemicals. The stuff you buy at Wal-Mart for work, the stuff you get at generic crap hardware stores is the same. But if you’re in a field you know the best places and the real deal places to buy what you need for the job.

Even in generic cover-all, denim, duck canvas purposes hell leather jackets theirs a myth that everything in the past was heavier, denser, triple stitched tanks. But in the example you have it was a 10oz chore coat. Things were not always that crazy. In fact most wasn’t. There was always cheap fast fashion that the majority of working class and middle class folks bought. It wasn’t the norm but it existed. A lot of stuff was like 100% cotton and sewn better and more time taken to build it. Still the denim back then wasn’t 22ozs and the leather wasn’t 4oz+ Lost Worlds HH. Things also weren’t as hyper specific. If you did manual labor in the past of any kind you had denim and you layered. Then you had duck canvas and you layered. So things were for the most part built to a high standard because the makers were making things without necessarily knowing what manual labor they would be used for. They knew they had to be layered with. They had to be pretty tough and long lasting. Today’s world is more expensive and hyper specific built. It isn’t as general purpose and well built across the board. But if you’re doing a job you know what you need. That’s how they get you though. There usually isn’t 2-3 things that are both heavy, warm, breathable, tear resistant. Each thing is going to have its highly researched and specialized piece. It’s going to do what it was designed for super well off the charts but it doesn’t mean it will do anything else necessarily.

 

[navetsea]

since denim is a twill then it is easier to stop fraying, I have a herringbone twill pants with raw hem that doesn't fray. while canvas since the weaving is just normal basket weaving, then the edges is easier to keep on fraying, While I'm not old enough to actually experience vintage, but I remember my first jeans in the 80s maybe at that time even mall jeans have chain stitched hem, and they use 100% cotton thread, because the hem was so easy to get undone, because the chainstitch failed/ broke. I think polycore thread used in modern denim is so much better