Need Help to Identify "A2 Werber Leather Coat Co. Contract 1729"

[mulceber]

Normally that’s what I do as well (see my above posts), but there was evidently enough variation in the early Werbers that we need to see more than the one jacket of each in Gary’s collection. Because if we only go by the Eastman Guide, then this jacket doesn’t fit any known contract.

 

[2BM2K]

Does it matter that the snap studs are not dimpled? Or is that an "I don't care"?

Good point. No dimples in the snaps.

 

[ties70]

Normally that’s what I do as well (see my above posts), but there was evidently enough variation in this contract that we need to see more than the one jacket in Gary’s collection. Because if we only go by the Eastman Guide, then this jacket doesn’t fit any known contract.

Would that be a possibility?

Did Werber offer "private purchase" jackets, maybe after one of its contracts was fullfilled but they still had material left?
Actually, I would still assume that somebody who has made 500 jackets in a row would make the 501st exactly as the ones before... and not suddenly go for the "L" shaped pocket stitching..

Or do we count the jacket into the contract which matches the best and regard the differences as "production tolerances"?

Ties

 

[2BM2K]

Normally that’s what I do as well (see my above posts), but there was evidently enough variation in the early Werbers that we need to see more than the one jacket of each in Gary’s collection. Because if we only go by the Eastman Guide, then this jacket doesn’t fit any known contract.

This jacket doesn't fit any known contract.

There are three Werber contracts with no known survivors.
32-6225
and the two Eastman phantoms;
34-518
37-1119

 

[leper-colony]

On a small contract? Would there be much surplus material? I did also have the same thought because I thought I saw somewhere that happened in 1939 bit thats 3500 jackets- can't find the reference.

 

[mulceber]

Would that be a possibility?

Always possible. That said, if we're going the "it's not one of the known contracts route", then I think what @2BM2K just proposed is the most likely answer. That being said, if this thread's brought up anything, it's that the 1112-P seems to have had some significant variations in construction methods (double vs. single stitching on the epaulet, collar hooks vs. a throat latch, box stitching vs. triangle stitching on the pockets), so I'm still inclined to go with that one.

 

[leper-colony]

The cuff knits do not look bi-weave. Wasn't that a feature of earlier patterns?

 

[Nickb123]

Nothing to add, other than I hope this piece is cared for in the utmost.

 

[leper-colony]

The cuff knits do not look bi-weave. Wasn't that a feature of earlier patterns?

Buttoned Pocket Flaps A-2 Jackets

Smashing!! Just make sure to do a Werber 32-6225 label to enclose with each jacket if it turns out that’s what they are!!!

www.vintageleatherjackets.org

 

[2BM2K]

The remanents of the lining look to be a dark colour. It would be interesting to test it to see if it is silk or cotton.

 

[YoungMedic]

Identity aside, it looks like an awesome jacket. The stitching and the leather make it look dainty and comfortable.

 

[Silver Surfer]

Could be an early aero contract

 

[33-1729]

I wouldn’t say it’s a missing Werber contract, because that would require someone much more knowledgeable than me (and an in-person inspection). Messrs. Eastman or Chapman would be your best bet if you want to go there. If it is, that would be an amazing find.

Besides the Goldsmith 31-1897, three known A-2 contracts have no survivors and they’re all Werber’s; order numbers 32-6225, 34-518P, and 37-1119P. I found they made six hundred (600) jackets of the Werber buttoned-pocket order number 32-6225 when the A-2 spec documents were de-classified and Mr Eastman was able to estimate the quantity made for the other two from the contract amounts (below).

I have no doubt in Mr Eastman’s findings. He documented his findings with government contract paper trails and one of the other paper trails he found was confirmed with the discovery of the Rough Wear 42-1671P last year. The three missing Werbers may be out there, waiting to be found, like RW 42-1671P.

 

[YoungMedic]

So by looking at this chart, and seeing the disparities of both 36 and 39 Werbers, this could possibly be a 37-1119P survivor, that it has features of both contracts on either side of it? That or it's a late 36 or an early 39 with different zip hardware / throat closure
I suppose without the tag it will all have to be speculation

EDIT * I cant tell from the pics but what kind of zipper?

 

[leper-colony]

To me a key question is which Werbers had lined pockets?

 

[YoungMedic]

To me a key question is which Werbers had lined pockets?

To my eyes it just looks like the backside of the leather, just like the inside of the jacket

 

[33-1729]

Specifically identifying the zipper maker & type would help narrow the possible date range of manufacture. Have a better picture?

ZIPPER GEAR

This is a site for ZIPPER GEAR book.I have researched American Antique Zippers for over 30 years.

zippergear.com

 

[mulceber]

I'm starting to lean toward this being a plain old Werber 1729 actually. People have been asking for pictures of the zip. Shawn hasn't posted any that I've seen, but here's a close-up from one of the photos he did provide:

Looks much more like a Talon M-32 Hookless, which Eastman's guide says was used on the 1729, whereas the M-33 fantail was used on the 1112-P. Eastman's book has been known (again and again) to get the zippers wrong: on a lot of the war contracts, he evidently looked at 1-2 jackets, saw the same zipper on them, and concluded that was the only one that was used, when in fact several different types were used. That being said, it seems less likely that there was much variation in zipper usage within a contract this early on: in the early '30s, I doubt it was hard for the government to buy enough zippers for 500 jackets from a single company.

So here's the evidence so far:
zip of a 1729
collar hooks of a 1729 or of 1112-P
epaulet stitching of a 1729 (/also 1112-P?)
zip reinforcement rivets of a 1729 or 1112-P
pocket reinforcement of no attested jacket - this could very easily be due to a factory worker being lazy though.

Others have suggested that it's one of the missing Werber contracts. That's of course possible, but as they tell you the first day of medical school, when you hear hoof beats, think horses, not zeebras. At present, I'd say it's the 33-1729 Werber.

 

[ties70]

Jan,

the 1729 is probably a good guess, as my first impression this morning was "It has lots of 1729 details, only the flaps look slightly different..."

But somehow that was before the discussion on the "L" stitched reinforcements. I have difficulties to see the "lazy worker / shortcut" theory. After 20 or 30 jackets you would be in your flow and probably sew triangular reinforcements automatically..

Maybe Ken from AERO can shed some light on the work process?

Oh...If I understand Shawn correctly, the pockets are indeed lined... blow up the picture to full resolution, and it becomes obvious.

Ties

 

[mulceber]

But somehow that was before the discussion on the "L" stitched reinforcements. I have difficulties to see the "lazy worker / shortcut" theory. After 20 or 30 jackets you would be in your flow and probably sew triangular reinforcements automatically..

The problem I see with that is that no A-2 jacket has anything other than square or triangle stitching. I really doubt any of the missing contracts were any different. And I tend to think a private purchase jacket would come with “upgrades” like underarm gussets or handwarmer pockets, which this one lacks. So lazy worker seems the most likely explanation to me.