Functional A-2 fit vs break in questions

[tater]

I am with Steve. this shirt type fit is a crock. It has been started on this forum I think and perpetuated unchallenged. As an outer garment it should have enough room for movement and ideally layering.
Some people on here (sorry guys, honestly) have posted pics of themselves looking like gibbons and the shower of 'great looking jacket' compliments serve as the emperors new clothes.
the overly droopy bat-wing avirex syndrome is equally ludicrous. but the A-2 as a tailored garment rather than an item of sturdy work-wear is pure revisionism.
I don't mean it to sound like a rant and its not personal, even if it seems so. Its just an opinion I hold and I regret it being contrary to some but we could stand to revisit our core belief's on the rights and wrongs of a2 fit. often borne out by photographic evidence.

If it feels too tight, its probably too tight.

I think this is right on. I don't want the baggy feel of an avirex, but neither do I want to be unable to wear it with reasonable layers---living as I do in NM, more than a light sweater underneath is incredibly unlikely as really cold daytime temps are rarely even in the 30s, even at my house (which is at 6500 ft). 40s with bright sun more typical for winter.

 

[tater]

Reading some old threads I missed before, I noticed a few comments on how huge a small difference in the back panel can be when reaching forward (which is what I was suspecting). What contracts minimize this problem (by having a wider back for a given chest size)?

I'm sad because I really like the Perry. Particularly the smaller collar for some reason. It just jumps out at me when I look at my monitor tiled in identical angles of different contracts,

 

[deeb7]

Reading some old threads I missed before, I noticed a few comments on how huge a small difference in the back panel can be when reaching forward (which is what I was suspecting). What contracts minimize this problem (by having a wider back for a given chest size)?

I don't think it's that simple ... the Dubow pattern for example, is narrower than most in the upper back, but this is compensated for by more generous arm openings. Although it may measure up as narrow, it's actually a very comfortable version to wear.

 

[Robman]

I agree with Deeb on this. I have had Dubow type jackets from LW and RMNZ and have absolutely found them to be more comfortable to wear despite its narrower back panel and quite frankly the narrower shoulder measurement. If you don't have freedom of movement it doesn't fit.

 

[RCSignals]

The description of the Dubow arm holes being more generous is a bit misleading. They are not more generous in the traditional sense of jus being bigger and cut lower. The Dubow arm holes are not low.

 

[tater]

It's tough for those of us (read: me ) who don't have the experience you guys have. There is no place here in New Mexico where I can try on any repro jackets, and the only way for me to try a different contract is to have John make me one (and if it doesn't work out, then another). Not fair to him, certainly, and not great for me, either, as I want my A-2

An Aero contract (not 16160) was suggested to me as having room, which I am open to, it's just that aesthetically the contracts that I like (I made a collage picture of different contracts tiled to fill my 27" monitor all from the same angle) tend to be collar stand types for some reason (Perry, Werber, Aero 16160, etc). I should add, I'm not a portly 46 YO---39" chest, 32-33" waist. Think I'm probably a bit wide in the shoulders.

I guess I'm back deciding on a contract again since it may be that the Perry won't work well, and the expert suggestion is to change contracts. I guess once I get a comfortable wearer, I can try a different contract for a 2d jacket.

 

[RCSignals]

Try a Dubow. There is a size 40 LostWorlds Dubow on eBay

 

[Dr H]

For comfort, you could do worse than the Doniger - roomy torso, armholes and collar opening.

 

[dmar836]

Comfort is important and I certainly wouldn't step down to a 40 - larger arm holes or otherwise. The 42 looked good on you. Can't speak for him but if he has one made, can John send you a Dubow, or other contract, to try? Without flying out to the West coast, I would hesitate giving it a go again too.
BTW, welcome to the world of finding that "perfect" jacket. The closer you get, the further it gets from you!
And remember the sage advice that back then guys didn't have the choice to be as picky as we do.
Dave

 

[tater]

Yeah, I'd say other than the binding with forward arm motion, the Perry was spot-on in every other way.

I agree with the "as issued" notion of fit—as long as it doesn't hurt, even after hours of wear (they would have been worn, after all, for hours on end).

The original purpose of the thread was for me to try to be a "good customer," and only realistically demanding. I didn't want to say "this isn't right, we're gonna need to start over" if it was only a break-in issue (something I am admittedly clueless about). Tough part with a try-on for me is I'm a smaller size, and there are not as many options.

tater

 

[RCSignals]

I guess I misunderstood when you said you chest is 39". If it was the 40 Dubow should have worked.

 

[deeb7]

The description of the Dubow arm holes being more generous is a bit misleading. They are not more generous in the traditional sense of jus being bigger and cut lower. The Dubow arm holes are not low.

... and no one said they were low. Here's JC's description:

• Another detail unique to Dubow is that they made the sleeves quite wide at the top, and then the back panel more narrow than most A-2 makers. The wider sleeve tops more than make up for the more narrow back panel, so the jacket is generally more comfortable to wear than most other A-2 contracts

 

[grommet]

I have had a somewhat similar experience with my GW Aero 16160. I repeated the wet armpit stretching maneuver many times in the begining and have worn it every time the weather permitted for the past year and a half. It has gotten to the point where it is not uncomfortable, but I know I am wearing it. (In an odd way, it makes me feel that I am wearing something special.) I can also wear a thin sweater under it, but just barely. Nevertheless, I am looking for a jacket that gives me more room. After having asked advise on some other VLJ threads, I am considering a repro Dubow (also from GW).

 

[RCSignals]

The description of the Dubow arm holes being more generous is a bit misleading. They are not more generous in the traditional sense of jus being bigger and cut lower. The Dubow arm holes are not low.

... and no one said they were low. Here's JC's description:

• Another detail unique to Dubow is that they made the sleeves quite wide at the top, and then the back panel more narrow than most A-2 makers. The wider sleeve tops more than make up for the more narrow back panel, so the jacket is generally more comfortable to wear than most other A-2 contracts

Thanks that better clears up what i was trying to convey.

 

[dmar836]

Okay, I got a hold of Tater's Perry and it's awesome. Another member has it and I got to try it on during breakfast one day. For the record there's not a thing wrong here. Tater, as an FYI, this really is how an A-2 is supposed to fit. You might fish through different contracts for one that is more "generous" but I wonder how often that brings success. We have all had to break ourselves of being used to the baggy 80's style fit that started in the 80's. I blame Tom Cruise.
I'm afraid you passed up on a good one, my friend.
Please let us know what you are finding out. The search begins for yet another member.......

Dave
Kansas City

 

[tater]

I know it was aesthetically good, and I never said anything bad about the jacket (in fact I loved it, and tried hard to convince myself it felt OK), but it hurt to wear after a short time in the pits in front---when wearing it I unconsciously found myself shoving my free hand into my armpit trying to pull the seam forward so it was not touching. Not terribly painful after it got stretched a little by John, but enough that I wanted to take it off after wearing it a while (in various shirts, light sweaters, etc). Driving (arms up) was unpleasant, even if not painful. Sucks to have a jacket that you desperately want to wear all the time, but physically it is uncomfortable enough that you choose not to. I plan to wear it whenever the weather is right here in NM, I don't want a $1000 jacket that I dislike wearing.

My question was if a new jacket actually hurt to wear until broken in. Not stiff, not feeling it on me, but pain, numbness, etc. I am NOT looking for baggy fit, but a ww2-like fit, as long as it is not uncomfortable to wear.

So I assume you are telling me that a brand new jacket is supposed to be physically uncomfortable in saying that is how they are supposed to fit? JC said it should not be, was he just being overly nice? I asked here because I didn't want to put him to any trouble if I was simply uneducated on new jacket feel and comfort.

 

[Dr H]

Tater
If the Perry hurt your armpits in use then you did the right thing.
Some maker's jackets (e.g. LW) have a reputation for a long break in time, with stiff leather, but GW is not one of those.
I had precisely the same issues with my first 23377 bought on EBay from a forum member before I understood how the sizing/fit worked for my frame. It was size too small - I persevered for several months in the hope that it would loosen in all weathers. It didn't: vintage goat is supple but not that forgiving.
Despite the aesthetics (and it was still the best looking Perry that I've ever owned, I subsequently had to upsize.
I'm a bit of a Perry nut: I've had 4 with the last couple being sold on recently due to their wartime history (I no longer felt comfortable with an issued jacket as a regular wearer). I'm very familiar with the fit and have also recently gone through a similar dilemma with Steve's GW Perry, which is beautiful but despite the tagged size just a little snug in the torso for me.
Previously I might have held on to it and hoped it would loosen more, buy this one has already been well worn in (it might have seen some HWT in its past); it would have moulded but not stretched significantly.
Reluctantly, I passed on it, but there are other GW Perrys out there...
Try and make contact with other VLJF members in your neck of the woods: try jackets to ascertain which measured sizes are comfortable.
For me these days I wear my A-2 longer in the year so a 44 (remember that's a 46 in GW terms) allows comfort with some ease for a thin vest/sleeves sweater underneath if necessary); it's not at all baggy.
Good luck with the search.
OK you can hit the dozing icon now :lol:

 

[Robman]

One of the biggest things people notice when they first try on a vintage style A-2 is the high cut arm holes. Quite frankly going up a size really doesn't always help, as the next size up has high cut armholes too. I remember Ken Calder at Aero saying sometimes it takes a while to get used to the vintage fit.

 

[dmar836]

Tater,
Please don't be offended. I didn't want to come across as criticizing your perception. It was more a kudos on the jacket.
I agree you did the right thing. I also understand how you feel. The ELC Werber I had looked good and felt okay but just nagged at me as being about 1/2 size too small. I wore it but I just couldn't get over it. It too had what I'd call a backpack strap feel in the front of each armpit but since there was an overall snugness I soon became used to that. I never dared to wear a sweater. The size 42 Star ELC(*cough*) I have now is one size up and has good sleeve length but the body feels bulky and shell-like. Abuse has been most helpful in fitting it to me. I don't hesitate to do physical activity in it and try to fly in it as much as possible. Yesterday it got it's second splashing of 100LL when my gascolator got stuck open. Not sure how 100LL will effect the new dye - details forthcoming.
But I digress. Aside from a full custom-tailored A-2(not very authentic in a WWII fit), battles with sleeve length, collar stands, arm holes, torso tightness, etc. are all common considerations when trying to find "the one." Even when sizing feels right, there are the issues of materials - knits, hides that "never break in", etc. Thus my statement, "The search begins for yet another member......."
You are right where we all are and you obviously aren't a newb to this. Your experience has helped you in the search, helped John, helped us, and maybe most, Denny who has the jacket!
This forum is all about this search and I'm sorry if I was doggin' on you.
Perhaps at some point, if you can wait (non-jacket season), I can send you the ELC Star in 42 to try. IIRC that Perry was 42 as well. You can see the diff in the body shell that I secretly believe is an ELC - only inaccuracy thing but has never been talked much about. I think some of the old house A-2 habits have served them over the years(call it client retention if you will) and they are slow to change them. As with most things I am knowledgeable enough only to point out the criticism but not knowledgeable enough to substantiate it intelligently. Do I again digress?

Dave
KC

 

[Dr H]

Robman, I'm sure that you are correct in some/many contracts, although it wasn't my experience with Perrys in sizes 40, 42 and 44. Size 40 cut my armholes as described, 42 was fine at the armhole, but snug across the chest; a genuine 44 was perfect all round. Perrys tend to simply widen as the tagged size goes up without changing many of the other dimensions too much.
My Doniger on the other hand is the most modern pattern that I've encountered - it feels classic rather than vintage, perhaps because it supports a longer torso well and seems more relaxed in all the usual stress points: armholes, torso length/breadth, low, open collar. You don't feel that you have to adapt to the jacket, which some contracts seem to dictate, as you observed.
JMHO