Workmanship: Balancing Precision vs. Irregularities/Character

[Superfluous]

In the “Hunting a Buco J-100" thread, Justhandguns made the following observation which got me thinking:

I have seen the RM Buco jackets myself, they have clinical finishes (in footballing term), but DD's jackets are less sterile

Interesting choice of words: "clinical" and "sterile."

FWIW, of the leather jackets I personally own, RMC's construction is definitely the most precise and uniform (perhaps that is what is meant by "clinical" and "sterile"). That does not mean RMC's construction is "better" -- just more precise. My Goodwear, Himel and Aero jackets have palpable irregularities. A couple of irregularities is acceptable and constitutes "character.” On the other hand, too many irregularities transcends character and is undesirable. The point at which irregularities exceed acceptable tolerances, and constitute poor workmanship, is entirely subjective.

A while back, I hurriedly purchased a RRL leather jacket without a proper examination. Later, when I looked closely, I noticed that the stitching was wildly erratic, irregular, and crooked. In response to my inquiry, RRL reported that the crooked stitching was done intentionally to accurately replicate the vintage jacket that RRL was reproducing. Maybe so, but the stitching was too irregular and crooked for my taste (it would have been acceptable for a vintage piece, but not a repro).

Notwithstanding the irregularities, Himel, Chapman and Aero employ certain artisan construction methods and craftsmanship that RMC does not. Again, these artisan methods and craftsmanship do not make Himel, GW and Aero jackets “better” -- just different.

Certain manufacturers do certain things better than others, but no particular manufacturer does all things better. Its a balance. If you want razor sharp cuts, seams and stitching, sans irregularities, its hard to beat RMC (not to mention RMC's fantastic leathers, designs, and hardware). I love this about my RMC jackets. On the other hand, my GW Imperial, imperfections and all, is probably my favorite. I have a new Aero waiting to be constructed by Julie -- I am very excited to see her work. All of these jackets have slightly different virtues and achieve slightly different balances in terms of workmanship.

So, all other things being equal, would you prefer a jacket with razor sharp cuts and stitching; or do you prefer some irregularities?

What are acceptable irregularities?

When do irregularities cross the line and constitute poor workmanship?

 

[handymike]

You know where I stand.
I love my GW! but I'm not a stitch counter nor do I mind little "irregularities". The custom aspect of the GW far outweighs the differences in "technical output". I've gone through my jacket, and have not noticed anything off other than a spot where the sewing machine smooshed the leather a bit. I have to add that mine is completely custom- down to the leather dye color.

 

[Sloan1874]

I'm not that taken with DD's stuff, tbh. Of the A-2s I've seen by him, the stitching falls, in my opinion, into 'inconsistent'. I know the leather looks great, but the construction was a bit too 'Quartermaster' to justify the price.

 

[Jägernaut]

I'm not that taken with DD's stuff, tbh. Of the A-2s I've seen by him, the stitching falls, in my opinion, into 'inconsistent'. I know the leather looks great, but the construction was a bit to 'Quartermaster' to justify the price.

I'd have to agree with this. I had a DD J100 that I got on ebay for $600. At that price, I didn't mind the cuff stitching being a bit crooked. I was too happy with having such a cool looking jacket at that price. If I had paid full price and saw that, I don't think I'd be too happy. Had to part with it because the shoulders were a bit too tight.

 

[Blackadder]

The leather matching is another focus for RM in addition to the stitching work. I know some of us think unmatched hides are periodic correct (for A-2 at least?) and adds character etc.

 

[ProteinNerd]

I'm not a vintage collector but I find it interesting that you consider crooked stitching acceptable on vintage pieces but not repos.

If irregular or crooked stitching had any effect on durability, why the different standards between old and new?

If there is no impact on durability and it's purely cosmetic, then you've just said that vintage pieces have irregular stitching so wouldn't that same irregularity make a repo more accurate?

Personally the only time irregular stitching would bother me is if it was contrast stitching. If someone can clearly see an issue when you are wearing it then it's a problem, otherwise there are more important things in life to get upset about.

 

[Jägernaut]

For the record, my J100 did have contrast stitching. I believe it was a light tan or brown.

 

[HPA Rep]

Crooked stitching is a bother to me on any jacket at the mid-range price point and up, so I correlate this issue with cost. If the jacket design requires the use of a twin-needle sewing machine and one isn't used, that would also annoy the heck out of me; it's then both lacking in authenticity and displaying signs of the two stitching rows failing to maintain a parallel run. Tied-off thread in obvious areas and/or on the outside of the jacket is also a no, no.

Poorly matched hides is another issue, which would be more problematic with high-end jackets if such hides are present because the better jackets will be very likely using aniline dyes and the mismatching will be far more noticed with aniline than if a pigmented dye was employed, thus blending the whole together more readily. And pigmented dyes allow for lower grades of leather to be utilized for this same reason.

Twisted collars and misaligned pockets and pocket flaps also bug me, as would a crooked belt in the back or misaligned adjusting tabs/belts. And it should go without saying that if the jacket itself is somehow misaligned and looks off or twisted on my body, that's time to punch out, which is irrelevant to price paid.

The few things I'm tolerant of are small scuffs or scratches on a jacket type that has been dyed purposely to show age and wear; if they are very few and small and going to happen anyway in as little as the first minutes of wear, I'll let these slide. Also, depending on where they may appear, I'll accept seeing the travel marks of the foot of the sewing machine on seams and corners.

 

[handymike]

^^What Charles said....

 

[navetsea]

I know there is thing like freehand drawing with charming unaided straight line vs when the same drawing done with ruler
but in stitching and cut of a fabric or leather if I could choose then precision is my choice. especially if the jacket maker is confident enough to offer contrast stitching, it means the stitches should be perfect. I can appreciate hand sewn item or hand sewn embroidery. But on machine stitching it is offensive to me , it shows less than utmost effort in doing it right.

mismatched panels, I can forgive that as long as both panels have similar feeling, would bug me if the jacket front is sagging on one side, and dead straight on the other side.

 

[Sloan1874]

Good point. The danger with mismatched panels is that they have a different elasticity, and that greats a 'patchwork' look. ie storse.

 

[pawineguy]

+2 on contrast stitching, I always wondered if ordering that option leads Aero or other makers to assign that jacket to a very experienced machinist. The only time I really went through a jacket and looked at the stitching very carefully was when I did the comparison between my new Langlitz and Aero goatskin jackets. Some bobbles on both jackets but nothing I'd think twice about or even notice otherwise. For me, if I notice something without looking for it, it would probably bother me, as then others might see the same issue when I'm wearing it. With that said, I've never bought a jacket where I've had that issue, be it from Aero, Vanson, Thedi, Schott, etc... I think that if I bought an RMC someday I'd be very impressed with the construction when I first received it, and then I'd never think about it again.

 

[Big J]

With regards to wartime flight jacket repros, this is interesting.

Sure, we can find wartime contract originals that had all manner of blemishes, bad stitching and construction, etc, but at the end of the day, those jackets were all issue jackets, no wearer paid for them with their own money. When I buy a repro A-2, I expect a certain degree of quality control. Sure, I understand that leather is natural, not mass produced and there will be irregularities (hence I love my Aero Real Deal), but construction quality is important at this price point.

 

[pawineguy]

A while back, I hurriedly purchased a RRL leather jacket without a proper examination. Later, when I looked closely, I noticed that the stitching was wildly erratic, irregular, and crooked. In response to my inquiry, RRL reported that the crooked stitching was done intentionally to accurately replicate the vintage jacket that RRL was reproducing. Maybe so, but the stitching was too irregular and crooked for my taste (it would have been acceptable for a vintage piece, but not a repro).

How much of this is really planned and how much is translating "inexpensive" construction into a marketing story? To be more specific, I believe most RRL leather jackets are produced in China. Are they specifically instructed there to wobble their stitches? "Hey, stop with the perfect jackets!" Or, is that what the factory produces and so they run with that as "authenticity?"

 

[navetsea]

personally on my jacket I avoid visible stitches as far as possible, when 2 panels has to be laid on top of each other (padding), pockets, only then surface stitching is needed, for the rest when panels need to be connected next to each other, I prefer stitching only from inside (it also make it easier for adjustment and repair) and using glue to tidy up the leftover edges.

 

[Superfluous]

I think that if I bought an RMC someday I'd be very impressed with the construction when I first received it, and then I'd never think about it again.

Yes and no. You would not notice the precision of the workmanship each time you wore the jacket, just as you rarely notice the slight irregularities on jackets after the first week. On the other hand, I suspect that you, like me, are unconsciously/instinctively/subtly aware of the workmanship of your jackets, and other clothing, when you wear them. Thats part of the reason why we select certain clothing -- quality workmanship.

Given how infrequently I wear my leather jackets, an inferior quality jacket would likely last me several decades. However, I would know that it is inferior every time I put it on, and that subtle awareness would diminish the enjoyment that I derive from the garment. Conversely, when I don quality garments, I am instinctively/unconsciously aware of the quality and craftsmanship, even though I am not examining the garment each time I wear it, nor fawning over the quality, and this subtle awareness increases the enjoyment that I derive from the garment.

Some people put their jackets and clothing through heavy stress and, for them, superior quality translates to a greater lifespan. Other people, like myself, do not need quality to withstand the rigors of our activities. Rather, we exalt quality for other reasons, even though lessor workmanship would fulfill our utilitarian needs. For me, quality translates to increased enjoyment, and I am aware of that incremental increase in enjoyment, derived from the quality, even if I do not examine the details when wearing my garments.

 

[Fanch]

I'm of two minds with this. My last few Aero jackets were constructed by Julie and all are of flawless construction. I have several pairs of western cowboy boots (actually quite a few more western boots than jackets), including a couple of pairs of ML Leddy, one JB Hill, and quite a few by Felipe Ramirez. Felipe had made boots for me over three decades, but died not too long ago in his mid eighties. Strangely enough, his best boots were made while he was in his eighties, and his last pair was made for me just a few months before he died. However, his stitching was somewhat irregular on almost every pair he made, and no two pair fit exactly the same. The shanks he used were made from forty penny bridge nails that he hammered and bent, and everything was handmade. Anyhow, I accept the imperfections as a labor of love, and I well might ask to be buried, hopefully years and years in the future, in my favorite pair of Felipe's handmade boots!

 

[AdeeC]

I believe any artisan made clothing or shoes assembled in its entirity by one person will nearly always show quirks and idiosycratic features including some faults. In items assembled in factory production by numerous workers each specialising in one aspect of constuction eliminate many of these character features because everyone is an expert at their own task.

 

[pawineguy]

Yes and no. You would not notice the precision of the workmanship each time you wore the jacket, just as you rarely notice the slight irregularities on jackets after the first week. On the other hand, I suspect that you, like me, are unconsciously/instinctively/subtly aware of the workmanship of your jackets, and other clothing, when you wear them. Thats part of the reason why we select certain clothing -- quality workmanship.

Given how infrequently I wear my leather jackets, an inferior quality jacket would likely last me several decades. However, I would know that it is inferior every time I put it on, and that subtle awareness would diminish the enjoyment that I derive from the garment. Conversely, when I don quality garments, I am instinctively/unconsciously aware of the quality and craftsmanship, even though I am not examining the garment each time I wear it, nor fawning over the quality, and this subtle awareness increases the enjoyment that I derive from the garment.

Some people put their jackets and clothing through heavy stress and, for them, superior quality translates to a greater lifespan. Other people, like myself, do not need quality to withstand the rigors of our activities. Rather, we exalt quality for other reasons, even though lessor workmanship would fulfill our utilitarian needs. For me, quality translates to increased enjoyment, and I am aware of that incremental increase in enjoyment, derived from the quality, even if I do not examine the details when wearing my garments.

Believe me, I've spent my life searching for the best of everything (up to my financial limits) so I agree with most of what you say above. If I bought something that I knew was inferior in some way, it would be off to eBay very quickly because it would bother me every time I wore it. As I highlighted above from your post, I DO greatly enjoy wearing a quality garment, even if it's not conscious at all times. I've sold many jackets that were 9.5/10 for me, but I'm always in search of that extra .5.

I've done it with jackets, wine, shoes, handguns, watches, etc... It may be conspicuous consumption to some, but to me there is just something about wearing or using a finely crafted garment or piece of equipment.

 

[HPA Rep]

I'm of two minds with this. My last few Aero jackets were constructed by Julie and all are of flawless construction. I have several pairs of western cowboy boots (actually quite a few more western boots than jackets), including a couple of pairs of ML Leddy, one JB Hill, and quite a few by Felipe Ramirez. Felipe had made boots for me over three decades, but died not too long ago in his mid eighties. Strangely enough, his best boots were made while he was in his eighties, and his last pair was made for me just a few months before he died. However, his stitching was somewhat irregular on almost every pair he made, and no two pair fit exactly the same. The shanks he used were made from forty penny bridge nails that he hammered and bent, and everything was handmade. Anyhow, I accept the imperfections as a labor of love, and I well might ask to be buried, hopefully years and years in the future, in my favorite pair of Felipe's handmade boots!

That's an interesting overlap we share, Fanch. I'm a big junkie of western cowboy boots and have some from a variety of makers that include JB Hill, Lucchesi, various others, and a now-defunct one-man show Dave Cobos, the latter being very much what Mr. Ramirez was to you. Cobos used lasts he bought from all over the place, so his fits were often erratic, but the leathers were among some of the best available, and certainly stuff the likes of Hill and Luchessi don't use - wild alligator belly (not farmed), so the scales are the size of big ice cubes, and stingray that is the most coarse and pebbled I've ever seen, with the clearest sensor smack in the middle of the vamp. Another addiction/affliction I suffer from - fine footwear of many, many types.