ELC Star Sportswear VS. ELC Monarch fit...

[Grant]

It's hysterical how Rooster has this obcession with being so critical about ELC but turns a blind eye to GW and gushes them with praise. Every repro maker has room for improvement (yes, even GW!) and I'm sure John would be the first to admit that. What's awesome is that both ELC and GW continue to make improvements and get closer to the most accurate reproduction possible. For that we should all be happy about.

 

[Anonymous]

It's hysterical how Rooster has this obcession with being so critical about ELC but turns a blind eye to GW and gushes them with praise. Every repro maker has room for improvement (yes, even GW!) and I'm sure John would be the first to admit that. What's awesome is that both ELC and GW continue to make improvements and get closer to the most accurate reproduction possible. For that we should all be happy about.

It's just the way it is- a bad GW (say a test jacket from early last year) still looks more WW2 fitwise than the wide pocket-spaced, smooth leather, bad detailed Eastman from anytime. And I disagree with your statement that both are improving alot. GWs are getting better as the leather gets more realistic and zippers, snaps and labels are procured but Eastmans have taken steps backwards since they started out IMO. Recently there was a post showing a really old Eastman from the 80s which at least had realistic leather. If John's jackets have room for improvement it's a very tiny closet- not the ballroom's worth of improvement needed by the Eastmans. Their construction is simply wrong- many details are wrong and they use weird leather- some OK- often not. I don't see why this criticism freaks you guys out so much- I can back it all up- if I new more about computers and the Appleworks drawing program I'd show you in detail. When have I "turned a blind eye..."? and how do you know? Ask John if I've been critical- as I've said before I'm sure sometimes he's dreaded sending a jacket off to me- I'm honest with him. I didn't like some of the early leather- there were experience issues in the beginning- but still- even an early GW was more focused than those same ol' droop-shouldered, smooth, funny-collared Eastmans I'd had. I really don't think Eastman's goal is "the most accurate reproduction possible"- they just don't quite get it. GWs keep getting more and more accurate- believe me- no one on earth is more focused on getting it right than JC. As I've said before- "you can lead a horse to water but you obviously can't make him understand A-2 accuracy!" :lol:

 

[Grant]

If you're so obcessed then why aren't you more vocal about the GW flaws that are quite obvious? Like goatskin that was far too thick for an accurate A-2? Russet horsehide that was thin as glove leather and not right for an A-2? John is sending me a sample of his current russet horse that's supposed to be a vast improvement over what I've seen - can't wait to see it! The cotton thread that John was using until very recently was too thin resulting in strange large stitch holes. Now he's able to source thread that is much more correct (just like what ELC uses). I'm looking forward to ordering a Doninger now that he finally has sourced a proper weight goatskin. Hopefully he'll be able to source proper United Carr snaps some day soon.

Sure ELC could use improvements as well and they are making good headway. The current cut of the Cable is amazingly close to the original and drapes correctly - even you have to admit that!

Again, it's a hoot how you get all worked up over ELC!

 

[Anonymous]

I disagree with your critique of John's horsehide- I've never had a jacket from him that was too thin- especially if you look at originals. The Horween horsehide looks like WW2 leather- straight up. John's thread has never been too thin- just a different strand pattern- I wear the hell outa my jackets and have had no problems- and at least they were the right color. The strange large stitch hole problem was solved long time ago. I'm starting to see that you're obtuse- yes- obtuse- you really can't see what I'm talking about! GW gets the DETAILS right- GW gets the pattern right- GW gets as close as you can get. If you honestly think that an Eastman Cable is anywhere as accurate a copy as John's 27753 (which is basically a no-name Cable) then you're lost my friend. How many times do I need to post a picture of that collar construction mistake on the Eastman? And with that smooth, timid goatskin and those razor straight soulless stitch lines? ZZZZZZZ...

 

[Miles_Archer]

Obsessively whining is not very Steve McQueen.

 

[Anonymous]

Let's do this ass-backwards- do these look like Eastmans to you?... now- if I told you they were Goodwears...

 

[ausreenactor]

Thanks for the input on the Star vs. Monarch fit. I did not take long before someone took it down the same path as most other threads. I like my reproduction Horsehide A-2's made from smooth Horsehide!! If I wanted wrinkled cowhide I would marry my mother in law. I would love it if someone would make a one off 120% accurate A-2 replica and donate it to 'rotenhahn'. And put an Eastman Label in it just to irk him. Tallied up the rotenhahn posts. Over 200 saying how crap ELC are, 200 singing the praises of GW and over 200 saying how crap ELC are while also singing the praises of GW. I do not know how that Gary Eastman guy stays in business pumping out that trash! Must be the suckers like me who keep coming back for more..

Regards..

Couchy...

 

[Tim P]

I think that therre may be some truth in what rotenhahn is saying about the construction issue nad it is perfectly acceptable to sing johns praises.
(BTW I am not gay, if I were it wouldnt be a big deal either. unless in your opinion anyone who kisses butt is? if so, get your lips a little further from Johns and wake up to the fact that the choices of others, right or wrong are theirs to make.) What I'd appreciate though is if a genuine question could be asked without the inevitable tangent.
thats all really. its all a bit groundhog day and I will stop rising to it,

 

[269sqnhudson]

those same ol' droop-shouldered, smooth, funny-collared Eastmans I'd had. I really don't think Eastman's goal is "the most accurate reproduction possible"- they just don't quite get it. GWs keep getting more and more accurate- believe me- no one on earth is more focused on getting it right than JC. As I've said before- "you can lead a horse to water but you obviously can't make him understand A-2 accuracy!" :lol:

They're not smooth anymore (and don't start the thing about corrected grain, that's a low hit and I don't buy it one bit) and as for shoulder droop, I've never had it. I think this often comes from people with big bellies having to upsize - look at Grant's ELC Cable, no droop there...This is not even considering the multiples of thousands of photos of WWII airmen with a bit of droop.

I have to say Rot, in all honesty, I think GW jackets have ELC pipped slightly, they have better knits by all accounts and some of the final products look unbelievably good from the pics. However, I have really liked all my ELCs bar one and I've had some gloomy OCD episodes myself in the past - especially the steerhide thing a few years back, that really lost me sleep, not kidding! AND I couldn't believe it when I realised the pocket snaps didn't have dimples like original Roughwears, I nearly sent one back. However I have mellowed over the last 10 years and am feeling better for it. It's not about leading horses to water, I ain't got reins for you to tug at (phner phner ), I've got a mind to make choices with and I make the choice to spend £200 less and get something locally that I know is going to work for me.

 

[Chandler]

PS- Look at how too large the Eastman pocket flaps are...

My lines don't follow a straight edge on either jacket as well, so sue me for being a little less than precise. But how did I know you'd find something to support a conspiracy?

BTW -- my 44 ELC 1401 has 4" pocket spacing... depending on from where you measure!

Chandler

 

[Chandler]

Let's do this ass-backwards- do these look like Eastmans to you?... now- if I told you they were Goodwears...

Gee, those pockets look awfully far apart, and those shoulders are awfully droopy. Um, Eastman!

Chandler

 

[Anonymous]

4" on a 44 Roughwear is a bit too much (my Eastman 1401ps were all around 4 to 4.5) and visually makes a difference. The pocket spacing on the jackets in te period photo may appear slightly far apart but I'm sure it's around 3- 3.5 inches. I think that repro makers make their pockets too far apart (RMNZ and Eastman and some Buzz's) because of the way jackets look in photos like this instead of just measuring originals. And to ausreenactor or whoever wants smooth horsehide- whatever dude...

 

[Anonymous]

Let's do this ass-backwards- do these look like Eastmans to you?... now- if I told you they were Goodwears...

Gee, those pockets look awfully far apart, and those shoulders are awfully droopy. Um, Eastman!

Chandler

Sorry pal- it would be a rare Eastman with supple leather like that in the sleeves and generally all over. Wouldn't look so organic. Sorry...

 

[Swing]

4" on a 44 Roughwear is a bit too much (my Eastman 1401ps were all around 4 to 4.5) and visually makes a difference. The pocket spacing on the jackets in te period photo may appear slightly far apart but I'm sure it's around 3- 3.5 inches.

:roll:

I think it's safe to say the man in front's jacket has pockets that are more than 3 1/2 inches apart. Face it, Eastman's aren't the dog you make them out to be, and GW's aren't the end all be all you try to make them out to be. They're both just over priced reproductions. John's is the better of the two, but they're both still reproductions, coming up short in one way or another.

I wonder how many sales you've cost John and how many people want nothing to do with GW because of reading your posts here, and wishing you'd shut the fuck up? Are you completely oblivious to what a jizz you are? Or does it give you some sort of sick satisfaction to come here and behave the way you do (whether is be your political BS, or your shoving GW down people's throats)?

~Swing

 

[269sqnhudson]

those razor straight soulless stitch lines?...

Huh? That's just an experienced seamstress who does a good job. that's one reason they cost so much, no? (or maybe seamster? :? seameister :? semenator? :shock: What's the masculin for seamstress anyway?)

 

[Chandler]

Sorry pal- it would be a rare Eastman with supple leather like that in the sleeves and generally all over. Wouldn't look so organic. Sorry...

Sorry, but perhaps you haven't seen this rare Eastman: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=760. Pal. :roll:

Chandler

Or maybe it's just optical illusion...

 

[Chandler]

I think it's safe to say the man in front's jacket has pockets that are more than 3 1/2 inches apart.

Swing, it's just an "optical illusion." Those guys are really all a size 32 jacket (all ball turret gunners), so 3.5" looks like 6" on them. Sounds like other tall tales you've heard, doesn't it? :lol:

Chandler

 

[Anonymous]

Sorry pal- it would be a rare Eastman with supple leather like that in the sleeves and generally all over. Wouldn't look so organic. Sorry...

Sorry, but perhaps you haven't seen this rare Eastman: http://www.vintageleatherjackets.org/vi ... ?f=3&t=760. Pal. :roll:

Chandler

Or maybe it's just optical illusion...

That would look like cardboard worn...

 

[Anonymous]

4" on a 44 Roughwear is a bit too much (my Eastman 1401ps were all around 4 to 4.5) and visually makes a difference. The pocket spacing on the jackets in te period photo may appear slightly far apart but I'm sure it's around 3- 3.5 inches.

:roll:

I think it's safe to say the man in front's jacket has pockets that are more than 3 1/2 inches apart. Face it, Eastman's aren't the dog you make them out to be, and GW's aren't the end all be all you try to make them out to be. They're both just over priced reproductions. John's is the better of the two, but they're both still reproductions, coming up short in one way or another.

I wonder how many sales you've cost John and how many people want nothing to do with GW because of reading your posts here, and wishing you'd shut the f*ck up? Are you completely oblivious to what a jizz you are? Or does it give you some sort of sick satisfaction to come here and behave the way you do (whether is be your political BS, or your shoving GW down people's throats)?

~Swing

Hey- i'm just following your lead swinglover- I remember thinking 6 or so years a go- "what a pompous know-it-all!" after reading your posts on the old, old forum. I don't see why you guys get so- well- (as Lee marvin put in The Dirty Dozen- "...quite emotional..." about this subject. Do you really think that someone would not buy a GW because I said it was good or because I said Eastmans are inaccurate? Wow- I love having that kind of power! And finally fat boy- the pockets in the photo I posted are no more than 3 1/2" from the windflap seam- this is the whole thing I'm taliking about- thaT 1/2" makes a big difference when worn.

 

[Chandler]

That would look like cardboard worn...

This is great, I finally get to say it back to you!! WRONG! :lol:

Seriously, it's a really soft and pliable hide that drapes very nicely, thank you. You can see the softness in the folds, and it actually looks (yeah, the OI again) softer than the original I found pictured.

So, THERE!

Chandler