derleicaman said:
Also http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/shared ... 4P-019.jpg
still slight tunneling
-
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.
Also http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/shared ... 4P-019.jpg
still slight tunneling
Andrew
Well-Known Member
RCSignals said:derleicaman said:
Also http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/shared ... 4P-019.jpg
still slight tunneling
...this pic appears to have been taken moments before wiring a Japanese medal to that bomb...
Chandler
Well-Known Member
RCSignals said:
Person, Doolittle, yes -- and you can see he has a larger jacket all around.
Yeah, they obviously couldn't find a correct fit for "Tiny." If you read anything on the Raiders you'll learn this man was a monster.
C'mawn -- you can't look at someone with their hands in their pockets, just not clear.
Agreed, he was my second sighting aside from Doolittle. Though his cuffs still aren't as bad as the majority of mine.
50/50 there.
Can't agree at all, compare those you pointed out to all of the others that just look "right." I don't see that in today's repros.
This, for example: http://www.goodwearleather.com/photos/C ... 8246_1.jpg
Looks nothing like any of the Raiders' jackets. Yeah, the size is probably too large for the wearer, but there are a lot of others in the Goodwear portfolio that have great fits all around... right up to the cuffs.
Chandler
Chandler
Well-Known Member
RCSignals said:
Same jacket, still a little large on the Colonel -- and to compare in percentages, look at each and every other A2 around him.
It's about 5 to 1 that you can pinpoint.
Chandler
Chandler
Well-Known Member
CBI said:
Not talking about hands in pockets or behind the back, talking about generally wearing a jacket without the cuffs crawling into the sleeves. Yeah, I saw your pics, but I'd like to see you standing with your hands down by your sides. If they tunnel up then it would be wrong.
So yeah, tunneling occurs when the sleeves are too long -- so why are repro makers making the sleeves too long? As I mentioned previously, I have 3 different repros in the same size with the same problem. Does it stem from the vintage pattern when a 44 wearer had longer arms than today's 44 wearer? Can't say, maybe John can enlighten. But I just don't like the look or feel.
Here's a decent fit:
http://www.goodwearleather.com/photos/C ... _16160.jpg
Chandler
CBI
Well-Known Member
Chandler - I think we are dealing with taste issues here, the jacket pic of the forum member next to the car looks great and perfectly acceptable sleeve length however for my taste, its a bit too short BUT, since jacket size was all over the map in 40's I don't think one can say one way was/is correct. Back to the GW site, all of the photos samples were custom to John's size (the one's he is modeling) and there are creases, some more than others. Maybe the tunneling is something different than my vision of it. If my original Cable or other 5 originals have tunneling with the arms anyway, then there's no real issues at they are original and they are what they are. The jackets themselves all fit so its correct.
Chandler
Well-Known Member
CBI said:
The majority of the jackets I've seen John modeling at the GW site fit him very well and most don't have the tunneling cuffs, but the customer image I posted above (not Grant by the vintage car, but the other link) shows tunneling at its worst.
You're right, it could be taste -- and I wasn't around in the 40s, but I have a 50s G-1 that fits me very well with no tunneling, yet all my repro jackets have issues. Reiterating my query above: maybe modern clothiers are missing something that those of the past understood better?
Chandler
Something noticeable in the Raiders crew photos, is most of the cuffs are pulled down, almost over the tops of their hands, so they naturally don't show tunneling. I suspect that may have been done for the photo, tug down those cuffs. If not pulled down they may well show signs of some slight tunneling. ( the others have such bad cases of tunneling they had to put their hands behind their back :lol: )
As I posted earlier, I think some slight tunneling is natural. If absolutely no tunneling ever, the sleeves may well be too short.
:lol: )As I posted earlier, I think some slight tunneling is natural. If absolutely no tunneling ever, the sleeves may well be too short.
herk115
Active Member
Look at the picture section in Doolittle's book "I Could Never be so Lucky Again." There's a shot of him with another general looking over a navigator trainee's shoulder. You'll notice that Doolittle's jacket is much larger, sleeves not tapered, and severe tunneling. Never a better illustration that no two A-2s were alike nor fit alike nor looked alike.
herk115
Active Member
Chandler said:
It may also be due to the quality of the cuffs available these days. Have you noticed that the cuffs available at the local fabric store are shaped like a "T" with the horizontal bar of the T being the part that is attached to the sleeves, while the vintage cuffs seem to be shaped like a "V" with the open part of the V being the part that attaches to the sleeve? I mean, the vintage cuffs seem tapered while modern cuffs are not. I know Perrone got around this in the 90s with beautifully tapered cuffs on their repros.
