Thank you Persimmon, that's the point! Sir, it's hard to explain better. Highly encourage this point of view.
-
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
ELC Star Sportswear fit poll
- Thread starter Greg Gale
- Start date
Thank you Persimmon, that's the point! Sir, it's hard to explain better. Highly encourage this point of view.
Technonut2112
Well-Known Member
Yes, this is modern-life.... In 'modern life', the look of the size 40 IMO would be more at home in today's Japan, than representing the "most common" look of the WWII American airman, which is overwhelmingly documented by photographic evidence to be a 'looser', 'working' fit. Pics of the 'trimmer' A-2's worn are in the minority.
EDIT: Here's an original Bronco in a size which more likely than not would have been issued to a fellow of the model's height / weight / build during WWII. Damn good fit to my eye, with 'working' room. There would be of course more blousing with higher-waist trousers, but still looks good with the modern ones worn.. The shoulders / epaulets look exceptionally good. It has room, but still has 'the look' IMO, as well it should as an original.
:
Last edited:
Smithy
Well-Known Member
I agree regarding the 'riding up the back'... Not a historical feature, but very handy, and less embarrassing in these days of lower-cut waistlines, and chilly drafts 'down the crack'..
With all due respect Techno but then wear a jacket or coat that was designed to do this, don't bastardise an A-2 by adding excessive length and trying to get it to do something it wasn't designed to do!
That's really what I was alluding to above in my other post, it's this trying to get a jacket (in this case an A-2) to do things they weren't designed to do or be something they weren't designed to be.
Technonut2112
Well-Known Member
My GW RW 27752 is patterned very well...the knits are over my belt in the rear while standing (taking the 'proper' blousing into consideration), and does not ride up over my belt when sitting / leaning forward. From what I gather, JC will not deviate much on the original patterns, so I consider my RW to be a very good representation of how the original fit should be (for this specific contract in a size 46). The few originals I've handled in my time were too small and fragile for me to have tried on, but other A-2's in my size from RMNZ, Eastman, etc.. were always a good comfortable fit, as well as the Star A-2 which Steve Sellers made patterned from an original. It was FAR from an overly trim fitting jacket..(before I applied a HWT and made it too small
) Anyhow, all of that and $5.00 will get you a cup of coffee (tea).. Just my opinion, and experience...
Last edited:
MeachamLake
Well-Known Member
Greg, the size 40 is definitely your size - however, I think a long or extra long fitting jacket would do you much better in the long run. The extra 1/1.5 inches in the sleeves and body would look more in proportion with your frame.
The 42 is too big everywhere.
The 42 is too big everywhere.
Brettafett
Well-Known Member
I'll take that cup of coffee!
It really is subjective... It really boils down to the wearer and what feels comfortable, practical and decent looking to him/ her.
Comparing with WW2 fit pics is fun I'll give you that, but we can't base any definitives off of them.
Original jackets for a given contract often varied slightly from batch to batch, from jacket to jacket... Again, put together during a war. Get that shipment out!
Just ask any collector who has or has had multiple versions of one particular original WW2 contract.
And the guys who wore these jackets, came in every single size; height, weight, body type etc... Add the two together and you have a zillion possible fit combinations.
Adding an inch or so to sleeves or body is totally acceptable... And authentic! Whether its for comfort, practicality or because you want to emulate are particular 'look'...
Also, as you are paying a handsome fee for these jackets, one could say you should be able to get a jacket you are 100% happy with, either way.
This has been a great thread, highlighting how subjective this all really is, and the pics are awesome.
It really is subjective... It really boils down to the wearer and what feels comfortable, practical and decent looking to him/ her.
Comparing with WW2 fit pics is fun I'll give you that, but we can't base any definitives off of them.
Original jackets for a given contract often varied slightly from batch to batch, from jacket to jacket... Again, put together during a war. Get that shipment out!
Just ask any collector who has or has had multiple versions of one particular original WW2 contract.
And the guys who wore these jackets, came in every single size; height, weight, body type etc... Add the two together and you have a zillion possible fit combinations.
Adding an inch or so to sleeves or body is totally acceptable... And authentic! Whether its for comfort, practicality or because you want to emulate are particular 'look'...
Also, as you are paying a handsome fee for these jackets, one could say you should be able to get a jacket you are 100% happy with, either way.
This has been a great thread, highlighting how subjective this all really is, and the pics are awesome.
Dr H
Well-Known Member
Greg, have you considered that another contract, with different proportions, might work better than the Star? My favourite A-2 contracts are by Perry Sportswear, but I tried several before I realised that the pattern is simply too short for my torso (and that Doniger and Spiewak work better).
Greg Gale
Well-Known Member
I have, and I've tried on some at the popup store. RW42 - too big, not much longer. RW40 - couldn't even breathe. I tried a Cable too, but decided I didn't like lighter russet. Tried the house ELC, too baggy. All the other contracts have some details that made me go back to the Star. Nicely shaped pocket flaps, trim fit, pointy long collar, rotated sleeves for better movement, seal brown color, etc... I'm not saying I couldn't possibly find a better fitting A-2 contract, I'm just saying I'm quite happy with the Star. It's just the size I wasn't sure about up until now.
Greg Gale
Well-Known Member
johnwayne
Well-Known Member
Looked again and yep, def the 40" but don't grow any more! If you've been to the pop-up and by your avatar I'm assuming your here in UK (the Cal no plate and guitars in b/g threw me initially - nice Martin and Tele by the way!) and if you might be going to Flying Legends at Duxford in July maybe try on more 40" and 42" there given the variation in same sizes - my wife never picks the the first correct size, she goes through the entire rack!! Maybe contact ELC to see if they've got a few of each size Star's they could take?
Brettafett
Well-Known Member
Keep those pics coming!
Dr H
Well-Known Member
That 23377 is still my favourite.
Brettafett
Well-Known Member
Heres a few of ol' Jimmy Stewart Legend... This is my fav... RW1401. Bare in mind Jimmy was 6'2 or something and thats a size 40...
Technonut2112
Well-Known Member
I had a GW Perry of the same contract. VERY nice jacket, but it was just too roomy in a 46...
Dr H
Well-Known Member
I had a GW Perry of the same contract. VERY nice jacket, but it was just too roomy in a 46...
Ah, sad - I'd have given that a go (in the vain hope that it would stretch to my belt buckle!)
Technonut2112
Well-Known Member
Some Star's with a good-looking fit to my eye:
(sleeves a tad long)
And an Eastman Star pic from HPA:
(sleeves a tad long)
And an Eastman Star pic from HPA:
