Where do you fall on the functionality continuum?

[Bfd70]

Split if weather dna. Model B was purchased exclusively with the intent to use for riding and protection during. One or two others for aesthetics.

 

[Guppy]

A jacket has many functions. To fit well, to keep me comfortable, warm and dry. To look good doing it. To hold up to everything I throw at it for as long as I own it. To hold stuff in the pockets securely. To be versatile and adaptable. I don't really think too much about separating form from function, or aesthetics from performance. A jacket that performs well at what it was intended to do, when it needs to do it, is always beautiful.

 

[ton312]

A jacket has many functions. To fit well, to keep me comfortable, warm and dry. To look good doing it. To hold up to everything I throw at it for as long as I own it. To hold stuff in the pockets securely. To be versatile and adaptable. I don't really think too much about separating form from function, or aesthetics from performance. A jacket that performs well at what it was intended to do, when it needs to do it, is always beautiful.

Indeed. Well said man. Form and function synchronized. That's the perfect jacket.

 

[nick123]

I have a strange take on the function of jackets; they are there to shield your soul.

 

[Superfluous]

I have a strange take on the function of jackets; they are there to shield your soul.

 

[Professor100]

So um...what size is that there HB deluxe you wish to sell??

I'd love to have it taken on by a FL member, but I think it's a bit small for you. Size 40 P2P 22 inches. Shoulders 18.5. In any case, I'll be listing it in the classifieds here soon.

 

[ton312]

I'd love to have it taken on by a FL member, but I think it's a bit small for you. Size 40 P2P 22 inches. Shoulders 18.5. In any case, I'll be listing it in the classifieds here soon.

I'd be interested. A jacket that is too small or large has never stopped me from trying!

 

[Benny Holiday]

Man anybody that thinks you're a wanker is just a jealous fool. I need to start putting myself together like that! Sadly, after the jacket, it all goes to Hell in a hand basket.

Haha! I don't know about that, you got your own cool thing going on there I reckon. And besides, with the jackets you've presented here, you could be wearing pyjama pants and all we'd think was "coolest jacket ever!"

 

[Edward]

Interesting idea. I think I'm down the middle. Definitely it's aesthetic; when I first got into leather, what appealed to me was the sheer look of the jackets (equally, I've never cared for leather trousers, functional or otherwise). It was partly pure aesthetics back then - and partly also a tribal signifier. A declaration of my allegiance to punk rock in some ways (and one which, surprisingly, made some people think twice about messing with you, which was a distinct plus for a bit of a softy in Belfast in 1990). Later on, it was about purely my own aesthetic tastes on the one hand (and who cares what anyone else thought), but on the other also practical - I'd discovered the bonus of leather being wipe clean when some idiot spills a beer don your back or throws a glass with half an inch still in it. I also liked that it felt more durable than textiles, and didn't seem to need cleaned as often either. (Also less prone to "£$%ing moth damage....) My first leather also got worn out pillion on my dad's bike, so it had that practical feel to it. The right leather also breathes in a way that not all synthetics do (this mattered at hot and sweaty gigs in small venues; paradoxically, my leathers also kept me warm in large, cold concert halls). As a bonus, the right leather also keeps out the rain if you're caught unawares; this mattered significantly growing up in Northern Ireland where it rains a lot.

These days, I tend to look at my leathers from a combination of practicality and utility. Over the next year I'm planning to become a motorcyclist in my own right, and while appropriate gear will always be worn, it will not be at the expense of style. Fortunately, the days where you either took more risks or dressed like someone on their way to a fetish party in Power Ranger costume are disappearing, and there are more aesthetically pleasing options available!

As a functional garment the leather jacket is pretty much obsolete, there is nothing it does better than modern fabrics apart maybe protecting you from abrasion and to some extent fire.
Other than that, modern fabrics are lighter, warmer, more breathable, more waterproof and cheaper, outside of a motorcycle safety context leather cannot win a functionality contest.
Thus if we really cared about functionality outside of motorcycle safety, all of us would chose to wear something else!

I'd like to see this tested out, actually. Some years ago, there was an expedition to the pole which had some guys in reproductions of the original Shackleton expedition's gear, and some guys in modern stuff. Much to everyone's surprise, the Shackleton era clothing performed equally as well as the modern synthetics save for one element: when they got a soaking, the synthetics, as you might expect, dried out much faster. Much less difference in performance than they had expected.

It makes sense some of us would stick to the leather on traditionalist grounds, but surely it should be fast disappearing from the mainstream of motorcycle wear if it really was fully outclassed. Certainly, abrasion resistance is a big part of it. Maybe there is a psychological element too - leather just 'feels' more protective than a flimsy synthetic - no matter hat the stats say about abrasion resistance?

I don't think functionality as in "can i fit all my stuff in the pockets" is relevant, since it really is unique to each of us, and isn't why we wear leather either. Personally when i am out of the house i am either carrying only wallet, keys and phone which all fit in my pants, or i am carrying a bag if i need more. My jacket pockets are empty and zipped up 95% of the time.

Carry capacity will vary with individual need, certainly. I like a bag rather than overstuffed pockets myself (hmn, leather jacket, bag and a fedora - what could possibly have influenced me there? ).

I think the question should really be do you buy leather jackets for protection, or for nostalgic aesthetics.

In my case it is 100% for nostalgic aesthetics, with the useful bonus that i can wear some of them on the bike.
If i want real protection/functionality on the bike, i wear a leather power ranger suit.

Mn, I think nostalgia might be a different aspect of the aesthetic appeal; I love the leather jacket styles from the mid-20th century for the style first, not because of any association with the period. I guess you could say my early punk rock associations had some linkage the the early 70s Bowery, but to me it was a living, breathing thing (in 1990, the Ramones were very much a going concern) - I always rejected the idea that it was about seventies revivalism. I'm sure, though, a preference for the aesthetics of a certain period is a factor for many of us. I like Ken's explanation of the 1959 cut-off point in Aero's designs - "because the sixties was when people started making crap."

To me this is most obviously seen in bags.
I would love to use a nice Saddleback duffle, but they cost $800 and most importantly they weigh 8.3lb empty.
That's almost half of the allowed weight of a carry on gone, just with an empty bag.
An equivalent sized North Face bag will cost you $120 and weighs 3lb. Everything about the North Face Duffel is better, it is lighter, easier to pack, will keep your things dry, will not need any care, and will probably last just as long as the Saddleback.
It won't look as cool in the end, i'll give you that, but I still travel with a NF duffel. IMO it is the most functional/efficient way to carry stuff around.

Argh, don't; luggage is s real sore point for me. I can't abide the nylon hideousness I'm condemned to because of greedy airlines and their baggage charges/gouges. If it wasn't for that as well as the fact that baggage handlers will destroy cheap and expensive luggage just the same within several trips, I'd save up and go all leather. Rooskin would address a chunk of the weight problem. I am a bit resentful of the aesthetic compromises airlines force me to make when it comes to luggage.

The same logic applies to leather jackets, although there i am ready to pay the price of outdated technology because the way it looks/feels is more important to me than its function. But i wouldn't try to argue that a leather jacket is more functional than a north face one.

Maybe, though TBH for any purposes I'd need a jacket for, I can't see anything from the North Face range being more functional for me than a leather either. (Aesthetic considerations entirely aside.)

Aesthetics? A group of women under 30 where I work were talking about men in leather jackets. Their view was that leather jackets were mainly an older guy thing - possibly as an attempt to look youthful or cool. I've heard this kind of opinion from women over the years. I wonder if a guy in his fifties wearing a leather jacket is just the modern equivalent of a comb over?

Probably depends who you ask. Most of the women I socialise with still like leather jackets on men and don't see them as a midlife crisis thing, but I tend to stick to the subcultures. I've got little awareness of what women in the fashion mainstream think.

I like leather jackets because they develop a good look as they wear and can be kept clean with a warm soapy cloth. Can't do that with too many other garments - they are wonderfully practical and long lasting. Not sure any of the modern fabrics really can compete with leather yet as a kicking around town garment. Will I be able to wear a North Face bionic for 25 years and will it look better with each passing year?

Subjective aesthetics aside, I would tend to agree that the leather will be much more durable when worn regularly, though it would have to be compared like for like (i.e. against a £100 leather, not a top of the range Aero).

Ironically, many cannot afford a good leather jacket until their fifties, yet wearing a good leather jacket in your fifties is perceived as an attempt to look like you are twenty . . . when you could not afford a good leather jacket. I give up.

It's sports cars and motorcycles all over again....

I definitely feel cool in my leather jackets, but that's for me. I just love the feel of them...even when a textile equivalent might actually look or fit better. I've always received compliments from men and women alike. I think mainly b/c they've never seen or experienced leather like CXL. It's like going from Bud Light to Half Acre.
I'm absolutely trying to stay young as well. I'm not wearing bedazzled jeans or shiny shirts but I do work hard daily at maintaining my health and fitness levels. I'm determined to maintain the ability to dish out at least 30 seconds of Hell, for as long as possible. Eventually it will pass but I won't go quietly...

I'm positively enjoying getting older, tbh. I was rubbish at being young. I've been a grumpy old man of 77 since was fourteen. You've hit on a key point, though. I too think my leather jackets are cool: they are to me, and beyond that am indifferent to what others think of them.

 

[red devil]

Argh, don't; luggage is s real sore point for me. I can't abide the nylon hideousness I'm condemned to because of greedy airlines and their baggage charges/gouges. If it wasn't for that as well as the fact that baggage handlers will destroy cheap and expensive luggage just the same within several trips, I'd save up and go all leather. Rooskin would address a chunk of the weight problem. I am a bit resentful of the aesthetic compromises airlines force me to make when it comes to luggage.

I would have certainly gone full leather ages ago if that was an option!

 

[felix03]

When I'm in the market for a jacket, it's probably 70% looks and 30% functionality. One odd thing though--and forgive me for getting philosophical--is that once I have a jacket, I don't need to wear it often to enjoy it. I don't really know why. I keep my leather jackets on the closet floor so I'm not really looking at them. Same goes with my boots. I don't wear my White's boots that often and I keep them in dust bags so I don't really see them. But somehow I enjoy them and my jackets immensely. Weird . . .

 

[ton312]

When I'm in the market for a jacket, it's probably 70% looks and 30% functionality. One odd thing though--and forgive me for getting philosophical--is that once I have a jacket, I don't need to wear it often to enjoy it. I don't really know why. I keep my leather jackets on the closet floor so I'm not really looking at them. Same goes with my boots. I don't wear my White's boots that often and I keep them in dust bags so I don't really see them. But somehow I enjoy them and my jackets immensely. Weird . . .

I get that. It's just knowing they are there. Makes it all the better when you do use them.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Probably depends who you ask. Most of the women I socialise with still like leather jackets on men and don't see them as a midlife crisis thing, but I tend to stick to the subcultures. I've got little awareness of what women in the fashion mainstream think.

Like everything else, it certainly would depend on who you ask, but I'm not sure why you assume the women I heard were 'mainstream' - which sounds vaguely like a put down. But I think I know what you mean. As it happens, these were not mainstream gals.

 

[navetsea]

functionality is paramount for me "the need for multiple internal pockets" because I hate to carry stuff in man purse or sling bag, stuffing my cargo pants pockets or occupying my hands. leather jacket seems to be the perfect solution for that while keeping it sleek.

and also here I can wear my leather jacket into bookstore, into supermarket, places that normally other category of jackets not allowed to be worn including denim jackets, so I enjoy this special racism among jackets status ( doesn't mean I ever shoplift anything)

 

[Monitor]

Middle. I need it to be perfect on a bike even tho it's been years I've sat on one and I doubt that'll change any time soon. But I need to know it can do that. Don't know why...

 

[sweetfights]

Like everything else, it certainly would depend on who you ask, but I'm not sure why you assume the women I heard were 'mainstream' - which sounds vaguely like a put down. But I think I know what you mean. As it happens, these were not mainstream gals.

I do not know what mainstream women look like but I also want to know what your non-mainstream women look/act like. Culturally/ethnically/regionally relevant I suppose.

 

[sweetfights]

Middle. I need it to be perfect on a bike even tho it's been years I've sat on one and I doubt that'll change any time soon. But I need to know it can do that. Don't know why...

Me too

 

[Seb Lucas]

I do not know what mainstream women look like but I also want to know what your non-mainstream women look/act like. Culturally/ethnically/regionally relevant I suppose.

I was referring essentially to women who don't follow mainstream trends or fashions or hold predictable views. But these kinds of distinctions between groups can be difficult to pin down and sometimes have a hint of snobbery attached to them.

 

[Edward]

Like everything else, it certainly would depend on who you ask, but I'm not sure why you assume the women I heard were 'mainstream' - which sounds vaguely like a put down. But I think I know what you mean. As it happens, these were not mainstream gals.

Mainstream - non-niche, regular fashion followers.... really, I was looking for a less perjorative term than 'the normals'. Which is not a conscious value judgement; when I was fifteen I'm sure I thought I was better than the 'herd' and went out of my way to avoid what they did, now half the time I couldn't even tell you what is regular these days. My go to on that is to say that the last number one record I could name is 2009, and before that probably the mid nineties, but from what I gather pop music itself isn't particularly a mainstream thing any longer. One either grows up and reaches a point where what everyone else does no longer matters, or one continues to define oneself by reference to that which one professes to reject.... and nobody wants to be the ass in the 'Lone Wolf / No Club' "colours", do they?

I guess I defaulted to regular people with that because it's the sort of thing you see in fashion columns in the news paper ("denim is in this season; get your man a leather jacket; don't get him a leather jacket; get a mullet like eighties Mel Gibson...." and so on), trotted out as a "rule" by someone who'll have a different rule when fashions change. The subcultures I've always identified with or been interested in have generally not held to age-bound ideas about denim, or leather or w.h.y. being 'too young' for a person; on the flipside, it's always been folks into regular fashion that would say I 'dress old' because I like a collar and tie. (Maybe that's tied in to this notion that reuses to die that to wear jeans and a t-shirt is somehow still rebellious?) To be fair, there's a kernal of truth to it: I'm firmly of the belief that the average person finds their own sense of style and sticks with it by their mid thirties; after that, it's a rare person who both much cares what they wear and changes their overall style with great regularity. Maybe the rest of life, whatever niches one settles into, is simply a process of accumulating the cool stuff you couldn't previously afford. Or maybe some folks just think an interest in older designs is inherently an older person thing? The psychology of it all is interesting. What niche where these ladies from?

and also here I can wear my leather jacket into bookstore, into supermarket, places that normally other category of jackets not allowed to be worn including denim jackets, so I enjoy this special racism among jackets status ( doesn't mean I ever shoplift anything)

How does that work? I've been in supermarkets in China where they wouldn't let me carry a bag in (had to leave it in a locker outside), but this is a new concept to me.

I used to wear a lot of what are now called cargo pants - we called them "combats", and only ever bought them from military surplus places back in the 80s and 90s. I remember being furious when they became fashionable (and taking advantage in sales when they went out again!). I was.... quite angry in my teens and early twenties. "I was so much older then..."

Middle. I need it to be perfect on a bike even tho it's been years I've sat on one and I doubt that'll change any time soon. But I need to know it can do that. Don't know why...

A lot of my instinctive tastes in leathers are directly linked to having cut my leather teeth on bike leathers. I think when you get your grounding in some way, the sense of what's 'right' like that never quite goes away. (Also helpful if you ever decide to go back on two wheels again, eh? I mean, you've got all these cool bike jackets, so....)

 

[Doctor Strange]

I'm in the "pockets and comfort" school of functionality. I don't ride a motorcycle or work on a ranch, I don't even walk that much: I basically mostly drive from place to place. So I don't need any protective or hard-wear functionality. Most of my jackets are military repros: my interests are primarily historical respect and classic style.

But you know, I wear my under-$300 G&B black civil A-2 a lot more than my $950 Good Wear Dubow for two reasons: black matches the bulk of my clothes much better than brown, and those three extra pockets in the G&B are really useful. The G&B is, for me, functionally superior to the far more expensive/accurate GW. The GW is definitely "better" in every way... but I need to carry a shoulder bag when I wear it.