-
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.
My New Good Wear Monarch- 1941 In a Box
- Thread starter Clyde from Carolina
- Start date
grommet
Member
majormajor1
New Member
SuinBruin said:
Obviously, JCs jacket has rotated sleeves - that's how the Monarch was constructed - but that is no reason for the twist.
Here's my Eastman Monarch - also with the correctly rotated sleeves:
but with no noticeable twist:
majormajor1
New Member
HHjackets said:
On a fairly close fitting jacket, the rotated sleeve gives you more upward movement in the arm, without mis-shaping the jacket.
That's why I chose the Monarch - because I wanted that close fit
Clyde from Carolina
Member
HH, I hear ya. The twist is quite noticeable without a doubt. I think this is an example of John's striving to illustrate the subtle differences between contracts. He told me that the other inset sleeve makers like Star and Doniger usually had about 1 to 1.5 inches of difference in the body seam in relation to the sleeve seam and Monarch's usually went more like 2 to 2.5 inches. This probably accounts for the exaggerated twist.
John also agreed that the inset sleeve may not be as clean aesthetically as a simple sleeve attachment, but that isn't what its purpose is. He told me that the reason for it is to keep the sleeve panel almost the same width from the top part all the way to bottom, to give the arm more room to work in.
Majormajor's right as the sleeve design really does make it more comfortable....this is the most comfortable A-2 I've yet tried. (Thought admittedly, I don't have the vast experience with originals AND repros that some here do.) I'm a big guy with broad shoulders even in my "skinny periods" so I appreciate every bit of help I can get!
I submit that John, and any other Repro jacket maker who makes these one at a time with his passion for detail- is an artist. As such they make judgments about what to put into their interpretation of a Monarch A-2. John's very up front about this. On his site he says for some jackets words to the effect, "Most examples of contract X we have seen had this feature, though some did not. We have chosen to pick the unique feature to represent the contract in our reproductions..."
I think a healthy debate about these features is what this forum is all about. After all, we come here to talk jackets and look at photos of repros and originals and show off our newest prizes.
One of the things I like about this jacket is that is is SO Monarch. It's not just a collar shape, or even the little paper 'SCHED SIZE' tag in the pocket. It's a bunch of little details that make it as much like a WWII Monarch as its very knowledgeable and passionate artist creator could make it. I'm sure John could make one of these with less "twist" in the sleeves for a buyer if he wanted to do so, though I'll leave that call to John of course.
I appreciate the healthy criticism and honest comments. I really would rather have that than a 100 posts saying "great jacket" if it wasn't sincere. (Though I'm sure the guys here who said so were sincere...just saying)
In the end, it would be a boring forum if we all wore the same Dubow 27798 or Rough Wear 27752, wouldn't it?
John also agreed that the inset sleeve may not be as clean aesthetically as a simple sleeve attachment, but that isn't what its purpose is. He told me that the reason for it is to keep the sleeve panel almost the same width from the top part all the way to bottom, to give the arm more room to work in.
Majormajor's right as the sleeve design really does make it more comfortable....this is the most comfortable A-2 I've yet tried. (Thought admittedly, I don't have the vast experience with originals AND repros that some here do.) I'm a big guy with broad shoulders even in my "skinny periods" so I appreciate every bit of help I can get!
I submit that John, and any other Repro jacket maker who makes these one at a time with his passion for detail- is an artist. As such they make judgments about what to put into their interpretation of a Monarch A-2. John's very up front about this. On his site he says for some jackets words to the effect, "Most examples of contract X we have seen had this feature, though some did not. We have chosen to pick the unique feature to represent the contract in our reproductions..."
I think a healthy debate about these features is what this forum is all about. After all, we come here to talk jackets and look at photos of repros and originals and show off our newest prizes.
One of the things I like about this jacket is that is is SO Monarch. It's not just a collar shape, or even the little paper 'SCHED SIZE' tag in the pocket. It's a bunch of little details that make it as much like a WWII Monarch as its very knowledgeable and passionate artist creator could make it. I'm sure John could make one of these with less "twist" in the sleeves for a buyer if he wanted to do so, though I'll leave that call to John of course.
I appreciate the healthy criticism and honest comments. I really would rather have that than a 100 posts saying "great jacket" if it wasn't sincere. (Though I'm sure the guys here who said so were sincere...just saying)
In the end, it would be a boring forum if we all wore the same Dubow 27798 or Rough Wear 27752, wouldn't it?
majormajor1
New Member
Clyde from Carolina said:
Dead right Clyde.
Where would we be without the likes of John Chapman and Gary Eastman? The little paper "SCHED SIZE" tag fell out of the pocket of my Eastman straight after it's HWT, but I'm still glad he put it there. Little things like that mean alot, once you've caught the "A2 disease".......
buzzthetower
Administrator
Gents,
I'll see if we can set up a hotline for any former Monarch employees, to find out what they were thinking when they made this odd design. I didn't make up the twist, but copied the Monarch design just like the original that I have. I've handled a number of original Monarch A-2s, and it would seem this was a common "problem" with them, if it was indeed a problem. Note the photo below.
So, this gives me two choices as a copier of Monarch jackets. I can make a design that is identical to Monarch, or I can alter the pattern they used, and make my own sleeve design that hides the sleeve seam being out in front. I think the second choice pushes the envelope of altering history, and I prefer not to do that. Of course the argument will be made that I also adjust patterns to fit my customers, but even in sizing jackets correctly for people, the adjustments are usually quite small, just like the subtle difference in the position from one jacket to another is small - that seam was not hidden, whether it be out in the open or not.
Monarch used the inset sleeve to their advantage, and other companies, like Rough Wear, Aero, and Werber, chose not to use that design. Inset sleeves require certain machines to operate most efficiently, and each piece has to be cut perfectly to fit together, whereas the standard sleeve design allows for some slop or non-perfection. Different ideas and different products. The Monarch design isn't for everyone.
John
I'll see if we can set up a hotline for any former Monarch employees, to find out what they were thinking when they made this odd design. I didn't make up the twist, but copied the Monarch design just like the original that I have. I've handled a number of original Monarch A-2s, and it would seem this was a common "problem" with them, if it was indeed a problem. Note the photo below.
So, this gives me two choices as a copier of Monarch jackets. I can make a design that is identical to Monarch, or I can alter the pattern they used, and make my own sleeve design that hides the sleeve seam being out in front. I think the second choice pushes the envelope of altering history, and I prefer not to do that. Of course the argument will be made that I also adjust patterns to fit my customers, but even in sizing jackets correctly for people, the adjustments are usually quite small, just like the subtle difference in the position from one jacket to another is small - that seam was not hidden, whether it be out in the open or not.
Monarch used the inset sleeve to their advantage, and other companies, like Rough Wear, Aero, and Werber, chose not to use that design. Inset sleeves require certain machines to operate most efficiently, and each piece has to be cut perfectly to fit together, whereas the standard sleeve design allows for some slop or non-perfection. Different ideas and different products. The Monarch design isn't for everyone.
John
John, as you say the inset sleeves from the Monarch contract should be replicated exactly in your repros. As Monarchs are broken in the seams blend in with the jacket and appear less pronounced. Here are a couple of pics of my size 44 Monarch to add to your photos of originals.
I have measured the seam on the sleeves on the following original jackets and am aware of variations within contracts. Here are some measurements from the side seam to the front inset seam.
Monarch (size 44): 2.75"
Star (size 44): 3"
Spiewak (size 42): 2.5"
Doniger (size 42): 1.25"
I have measured the seam on the sleeves on the following original jackets and am aware of variations within contracts. Here are some measurements from the side seam to the front inset seam.
Monarch (size 44): 2.75"
Star (size 44): 3"
Spiewak (size 42): 2.5"
Doniger (size 42): 1.25"
majormajor1
New Member
This is getting silly. Are we talking "kings new clothes" here?
Here's a direct comparison between the original Monarch(left) and the Goodwear repro(right). The repro sleeve IS twisted. If you take a line from the elbow of the original, the seam moves to the left. On the repro, it goes straight down.
Saying "I can make a design that is identical to Monarch, or I can alter the pattern they used, and make my own sleeve design that hides the sleeve seam being out in front. I think the second choice pushes the envelope of altering history, and I prefer not to do that." does not alter the fact that these sleeves ARE different.
Vintage 501 Levis have exactly the same kind of twist in the legs, and believe me, it NEVER goes
Here's a direct comparison between the original Monarch(left) and the Goodwear repro(right). The repro sleeve IS twisted. If you take a line from the elbow of the original, the seam moves to the left. On the repro, it goes straight down.
Saying "I can make a design that is identical to Monarch, or I can alter the pattern they used, and make my own sleeve design that hides the sleeve seam being out in front. I think the second choice pushes the envelope of altering history, and I prefer not to do that." does not alter the fact that these sleeves ARE different.
Vintage 501 Levis have exactly the same kind of twist in the legs, and believe me, it NEVER goes
buzzthetower
Administrator
OK. You know much more than I, so I'll bow your practical knowledge and experience.
John
John
SuinBruin
Well-Known Member
Don't sweat it, John, the guy clearly has a bias and agenda to defend Eastman no matter what. The reflexive defensiveness is quite telling.
Major, you can spin these extremely minute details all you want, but to any objective observer comparing shots of the originals and the respective Monarch offerings by Good Wear and Eastman, the conclusion is clear... Good Wear is far, far closer to the original sleeve seam alignment than Eastman. No contest. (I would add, BTW, that the "difference" you posit could be explained by any number of variables in the angle of the photos, to say nothing of slight pattern variations that are well within the realm of historical manufacturing differences. No two Monarchs will be identical, after all.)
Why don't you post your own shots of original Monarchs to bolster your claim instead of trying to create discrepancies in John's pics where none exist?
Major, you can spin these extremely minute details all you want, but to any objective observer comparing shots of the originals and the respective Monarch offerings by Good Wear and Eastman, the conclusion is clear... Good Wear is far, far closer to the original sleeve seam alignment than Eastman. No contest. (I would add, BTW, that the "difference" you posit could be explained by any number of variables in the angle of the photos, to say nothing of slight pattern variations that are well within the realm of historical manufacturing differences. No two Monarchs will be identical, after all.)
Why don't you post your own shots of original Monarchs to bolster your claim instead of trying to create discrepancies in John's pics where none exist?
majormajor1
New Member
So it IS the "kings new clothes".......
My last post didn't mention Eastman - you guys reintroduced it. Yes, I could have put up an Eastman in that comparison, but I didn't - because I'm not trying to score points for anybody.
The sleeve on the left (JCs original Monarch) DOESN'T twist. The one on the right DOES. Period.
Eastmans could be made of pink fairy dust by monkeys - it wouldn't alter that fact that the sleeve is different.
You guys are just SO smug. Anytime anyone says anything, it's "I've handled more than you" ......yeah, yeah,yeah......
And if you really wanna shut someone up, you get rotenhahn out of his box.
Tell you what - I'm just glad the guys who wore those jackets in '43 weren't as mean spirited as you lot - we'd all be speaking German now.
You guys deserve each other. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
PLEASE PLEASE CANCEL MY MEMBERSHIP. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH OF YOUR CONDESENSION :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
My last post didn't mention Eastman - you guys reintroduced it. Yes, I could have put up an Eastman in that comparison, but I didn't - because I'm not trying to score points for anybody.
The sleeve on the left (JCs original Monarch) DOESN'T twist. The one on the right DOES. Period.
Eastmans could be made of pink fairy dust by monkeys - it wouldn't alter that fact that the sleeve is different.
You guys are just SO smug. Anytime anyone says anything, it's "I've handled more than you" ......yeah, yeah,yeah......
And if you really wanna shut someone up, you get rotenhahn out of his box.
Tell you what - I'm just glad the guys who wore those jackets in '43 weren't as mean spirited as you lot - we'd all be speaking German now.
You guys deserve each other. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
PLEASE PLEASE CANCEL MY MEMBERSHIP. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH OF YOUR CONDESENSION :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
