Real McCoy Roughwear sz 46

[442RCT]

Too bad it's two sizes too big for me, it's got art and a low beginning price. I would have been interested if it'd have been a 42 or even a 44.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Real-McCoys-Rough-W ... 27ae479795

 

[Andrew]

Very professional looking art...maybe too good?

 

[Silver Surfer]

looks like jeromes handy work.

 

[fishmeok]

That's a big 46!
Great artwork though.
Cheers
Mark

 

[deeb7]

That's a big 46!

I don't know why he would remove the size tag ... it's confusing when the sellers second guess the maker.

 

[zoomer]

That's a big 46!

I don't know why he would remove the size tag ... it's confusing when the sellers second guess the maker.

Hoping for a sucker, perhaps...

I might give this oen a spin if it were unpainted! Ah well...

 

[Clark J]

I think that's correct for RMNZ,sz 50=46.I had a 48 that fit like a 44.

 

[zoomer]

Well this is a 46 that fits like a 50 - ie, all 'tother way round. :?
Whereas my RM 46 fits like a 42, or perhaps an ELC 44.

 

[deeb7]

Well this is a 46 that fits like a 50 - ie, all 'tother way round. :?
Whereas my RM 46 fits like a 42, or perhaps an ELC 44.

That was my point, it is a 50, and it's confusing when they second guess ...

The size tag under the spec label has been removed, because it said that the jacket was a size 50, which it is not. It is basically a modern day size 46.

 

[ausreenactor]

Is the Sack of Flour and the Figure a signature, or on the original in the reference??

Couchy

 

[Clark J]

The sack and the "jumper" are on the original but the full name should be "Wild Children"and it should also have 11 swastikas under the bombs...to bad but I suppose that would not be PC!!!

 

[ausreenactor]

Wow!!

I did not even notice the text. I just looked at the font and thought it was as per the original?
Sack Jumper? Might have to look that up. God knows what that meant.

Couchy