Jacket fit.

[Kennyz]

Hi Jeff.

Welcome back to the forum. Did you used to go by the username Rottenheim (my spelling could be off)? If so, I recall you were very knowledgeable about originals, especially Roughwears.

Ken

My name is Jeff. I live in the United States. Born in Minneapolis- live in California. An "expert" from the early VLJ days but not your Julius- sorry

 

[Technonut2112]

There is also a line between following wartime maker patterns / hardware as accurately as possible and 'modern interpretation added'... It matters to some more than others, and there's nothing wrong with that if some modern interpretation is desired and expected by the purchaser. In a forum such as this one, it is reasonable to expect scrutiny when comparing expensive jackets marketed as reproductions of SPECIFIC wartime contracts.

Personally I do not subscribe to the 'everyone wins, everyone gets a trophy' philosophy. The nature of competition demands that a winner will exist, and spur others competing to hopefully best them at some point in time. This also applies to fake Rolex watches... The version with a Seiko movement will compete with, and perhaps be better than one with a Chinese-made movement. Both may be fake, but cater to a segment of folks who this may be important to, no matter how absurd it may appear to the opposing segment. (EDIT: for sake of clarity, I do not own a fake Rolex)

It is also easy to tell someone to just purchase an original if details matter to them so much, but there's a segment of folks who exist that it does matter to, but due to circumstances must purchase within their current station in life, meaning perhaps a 2nd-hand repro in the $500.00- $700.00 USD range, where an original in comparable great wearable condition is simply out of reach.. Those folks are looking for a jacket made by the jacketmeister who is at the top of their game, offering as many of these details as possible, and are very thankful when such a jacket comes along not altered by tweaking the patterns or details to suit modern tastes or interpretation. There are scant few makers out there who offer this level of detail with little to no deviation. Platon's Dubow is certainly a breath of fresh air for this segment of people (myself included), offering a brand-new, highly-detailed, original-maker repro in this price range.

 

[Brettafett]

And thus... it can be done.

 

[Silver Surfer]

good question, grant. my one big bugaboo on the aero repro is that aero does not source proper repro nipple snaps, as just about all of the better makers do. the ones that aero uses are generic leather garment snaps.

 

[ZuZu]

Well, self proclaimed expert Jeff, so far you seem to have woken from hibernation primarily in order to knock certain manufacturers and promote others. Interesting.

I've woken up because my interest cycle has turned back to A-2s! Who exactly would I be promoting? Is that interesting? I am giving honest critiques of A-2 repro manufacturers. The evidence is there in the photos! Don't get huffy about reality!

 

[Smithy]

There is also a line between following wartime maker patterns / hardware as accurately as possible and 'modern interpretation added'... It matters to some more than others, and there's nothing wrong with that if some modern interpretation is desired and expected by the purchaser. In a forum such as this one, it is reasonable to expect scrutiny when comparing expensive jackets marketed as reproductions of SPECIFIC wartime contracts.

Personally I do not subscribe to the 'everyone wins, everyone gets a trophy' philosophy. The nature of competition demands that a winner will exist, and spur others competing to hopefully best them at some point in time. This also applies to fake Rolex watches... The version with a Seiko movement will compete with, and perhaps be better than one with a Chinese-made movement. Both may be fake, but cater to a segment of folks who this may be important to, no matter how absurd it may appear to the opposing segment.

It is also easy to tell someone to just purchase an original if details matter to them so much, but there's a segment of folks who exist that it does matter to, but due to circumstances must purchase within their current station in life, meaning perhaps a 2nd-hand repro in the $500.00- $700.00 USD range, where an original in comparable great wearable condition is simply out of reach.. Those folks are looking for a jacket made by the jacketmeister who is at the top of their game, offering as many of these details as possible, and are very thankful when such a jacket comes along not altered by tweaking the patterns or details to suit modern tastes or interpretation. There are scant few makers out there who offer this level of detail with little to no deviation. Platon's Dubow is certainly a breath of fresh air for this segment of people (myself included), offering a brand-new, highly-detailed, original-maker repro in this price range.

If you look at my last post I make the point that there's absolutely nothing wrong wanting makers to do better and to seek better and better accuracy, that's a great thing. What I take issue with is the holy-than-thou types who use this as some ridiculous form of repro jacket snobbery when if you really want to cut to the chase a repro is still a copy of something. Maybe it's done well and maybe not, but at the end of the day, it's still a copy and will never be exactly what it aims to be. I've never been big on snobbery or arrogance with anything though.

 

[Brettafett]

There are a lot of guys on here who own and have owned many top-tier repros, from all the top makers... AND have also owned or had hands-on experience with originals. I would consider them to all have valid perspectives.
What I would be interested in seeing, are people's pros & cons of each of the top-tier makers' repros... Not a shooting match, but an insight and opinion based on personal experience (of course there would be an element of subjectivity).

 

[KariJ]

So is the mutual understandig concerning this issue - nowadays A2 fit question is a question of fashion. When A2 was used in its original purpose the question was more question of mil needs and logistics

 

[Smithy]

The fact of the matter is that an A-2 was exactly the same as a set of AN6530 goggles or an A-11 flying helmet to an operational airman at the time. Yes he might have liked his A-2 and it was a badge of being an airman but it was a tool and the most important thing for any tool or piece of flying kit was that it did what it was supposed to do, which was to allow him to perform his operational duties to the best of his ability and (in terms of clothing) to protect him and/or to afford a certain degree of comfort whilst performing those duties. This is why a lot of pilots were so quick to drop their A-2s and start using B-10s when they became available.

It's only weirdos like us who care about all this tiny detail. 100% of the rest of the population don't care and it's probably safe to say that close to, if not in fact, 100% of airmen during WWII didn't care about any of the small stuff that starts all the hand wringing and handbag fights we see on here.

 

[DiamondDave]

Gents,

You cannot tell me that you think that these two things are the same...

 

[Smithy]

Both copies DD. One is substantially better than the other, but both are still copies. Not that that's a bad thing but I think sometimes guys seem to equate the very good copy with being on par with, or the same as an original when it's not.

 

[DiamondDave]

Fairy Tales indeed!
Alice isn't about to take advice from the Mad Hatter
If either the lining or shell was to be larger than the other, obviously the shell would need to be the larger of the two as it "wraps" around the lining
It's not rocket science
For the non tailors amongst us.
Measure a human chest, wrap it in a garment, measure that chest again, you'll find the second measurement slightly larger than the first. The external dimemesions increase
Same with a garment. Take a lining, wrap a shell around it, the shell will need to be the same as or fractionally larger than the lining otherwise the lining would droop out/fold up into creases inside
With such a simple garment as an A-2 the shell and lining remain the same
Not sure about a hat?

Ken

Mad-FORMER-hatter though I may be, I can tell you that your information is wrong, period. Just because it is how you've always done it, doesn't make it right, especially to a WWII item. If the lining can not move
without moving the leather it will cause the jacket to pull up altogether. Thus, wen you straighten your arms the sleeves will pull up naturally to some degree, but moreso with a lining the same size or smaller. The
same holds true for these other key points inside the jacket. Not hyperbole, and not fake news, FACT.

Here please find proof positive from OUTSIDE of our little fiefdom, and a professional teacher no less, with the University Of Kentucky and their fashion program.

The salient point is highligted here...

"The completed lining:

Is cut sufficiently larger than the fashion garment to provide length and width fitting ease

(generally at center back, armhole, hem edge, elbow, sleeve hem, shoulder)."

DD

 

[petermack09]

Gents,

You cannot tell me that you think that these two things are the same...

View attachment 26669

View attachment 26668

Thanks for that,,,,ive just spread my food all over my iPad ,,,,oh my god cmon please stop,,my sides are hurting

 

[Grant]

DD, NICE!
LOL, bottom line: Good Wear, Diamond Dave and Kelso all make a better Aeros repros than Aero. Whatz up with that?!?

 

[foster]

Both copies DD. One is substantially better than the other, but both are still copies. Not that that's a bad thing but I think sometimes guys seem to equate the very good copy with being on par with, or the same as an original when it's not.

What is this forum for, if not to discuss the available options for those like myself who wish to make informed purchases?
Not all copies are created equal. When it comes to A-2's, I want to get the closest to the original within budget and fit requirements. I do not expect everyone to have the same requirements as I do, but when it is my money and my jacket, I do have expectations that need to be met. And this forum has helped me to decide which options are the most likely to give me what I want as a customer (high-maintenance as I may be at that).

 

[DiamondDave]

Both copies DD. One is substantially better than the other, but both are still copies. Not that that's a bad thing but I think sometimes guys seem to equate the very good copy with being on par with, or the same as an original when it's not.

True, and if you're looking for a sz 36 or 38 you absolutely should stay with originals. BUT, some of us like that look, and are WAY better fed than some WWII pilot. Lastly, repros have been around a long time, it seems to me that those of you saying this over and over have lost the plot a bit. Reporductions are a thing, why are we debating it any longer? That ship has sailed fellas, the purists will have to learn how to identify our jackets somehow, and this is as good a place as any to keep that up.

DD

 

[Smithy]

True, and if you're looking for a sz 36 or 38 you absolutely should stay with originals. BUT, some of us like that look, andare WAY better fed than some WWII pilot. Lastly, repros have been around a long time, it seems to me that those of you saying this over and over have lost the plot a bit. Reporductions are a thing, why are we debating it any longer? That ship has sailed fellas, the purists will have to learn how to identify our jackets somehow, and this is as good a place as any to keep that up.

DD

Good points DD. I just take umbrage with guys who equate the very high end repros being the same as originals because they are not and can't be. The might be excellent but they're not facsimiles of the jackets they seek to be, at best they are very good homages to them. It's not helped by people who throw around silly things like "exact copy", "1942 in a box", etc, etc. Working in historic aviation has probably meant that I'm a little sensitive to this kind of stuff getting bandied around.

 

[Micawber]

I've woken up because my interest cycle has turned back to A-2s! Who exactly would I be promoting? Is that interesting? I am giving honest critiques of A-2 repro manufacturers. The evidence is there in the photos! Don't get huffy about reality!

Any huffiness is likely due not so much the message but the manner in which it is conveyed.

 

[DiamondDave]

DD, NICE!
LOL, bottom line: Good Wear, Diamond Dave and Kelso all make a better Aeros repros than Aero. Whatz up with that?!?

Grant,

We allow ourselves to grow and learn. We are not set into the “one way or not at all” mentality. These are not easy things to copy, and every nuance has been shared over and over to Suss out how to do it even more correctly than last year. This is why you may see tons more “test samples” now than ever before, much to the chagrin of those waiting, and I do understand that too.

DD

 

[Southoftheborder]

Actually my fake Rolex Daytona keeps better time than my fully serviced genuine Rolex,,,now that really pisses me off

The fake is probably quartz. I bought a GMT Master in 1988 and thought it kept pretty shit time. I went back several times to get it checked and finally I dragged out of the watchmaker that it was supposed to be accurate to +- 1 second per day. That's 30 seconds a month. I had an RAF surplus fully jewelled International from the post war period that was more accurate than that.

That was a lovely watch BTW, which also let in the rain. But I wish I hadn't passed it to on to a friend. The price of the things went through the roof a few years later. But I bought it from a surplus store for £35 in the late seventies and didn't even know what a good watch it was. A lot better than the Rolex. I always thought I should have worn a sign with that thing: I am a prat I bought a Rolex.

I kept that for twenty years though before buying a nice Omega Seamaster quartz that still keeps perfect time.