ELC RW 1401

Chandler · Apr 28, 2008

As long as I'm on a roll with FotoBuket I thought I'd upload some snaps of my older ELC RW 1401. This is pre-aniline, over 10 years old. The leather is nearly bullet proof. When new there was very little character to the hide, here are the results of many years' wear. I've also attached a pic (pilfered from the last VLJ board) of an original Roughwear -- apologies to the owner, but its hide was strikingly reminiscent, I couldn't resist.

Chandler

Grant · Apr 28, 2008

Chandler,
That's some of the nicest russet horsehide I've yet seen on a repro A-2!

Grant

airfrogusmc · Apr 28, 2008

I agree that hide does look nice.

Chandler · Apr 28, 2008

Thanks. There are times I wish it would show more wear variation in the color like some of that new warhorse -- even some of the hides Chapman has, but I can live with this. Sort of sentimental after so many years.

Chandler

airfrogusmc · Apr 28, 2008

It looks great as is.

Clyde from Carolina · Apr 28, 2008

I agree, very nice looking hide and jacket.

bfrench · Apr 28, 2008

Chandler said:
Thanks. There are times I wish it would show more wear variation in the color like some of that new warhorse -- even some of the hides Chapman has, but I can live with this. Sort of sentimental after so many years.

Chandler

Nice pics.

Now to be a bit of a prick - what is the thickness of the leather?

Bill French

Clark J · Apr 28, 2008

I love the backs of those sleeves,really looks like a oldie!I wish my 1401 looked like that.Do a little hot water treatment on the baby and I bet the grain would really pop!!

better duck · Apr 29, 2008

Hi gents, Now that we have a dedicated ELC RW 1401P thread, let me add some pictures of mine.
My jacket is productionnumber 780 and dates from 2006.
Its hide is very very smooth. When I first bought it, I was very much taken with it, but after dwelling for two years on VLJ I long for some GRAIN: there just isn't any, except on the back of the collar.
The wear and tear of everyday wear add scuffs, makes the color fade here and there, no grain "popping up" as some members seem to experience. I hot water treated it: no grain popping up - at all.

Here are some pics, first of me wearing it. It was fairly new when I took these pictures. It's a size 46:

Now some photos that try to show some wear & tear:

Chandler · Apr 29, 2008

bfrench said:
Now to be a bit of a prick - what is the thickness of the leather?

Until I get a micrometer and follow that formula set up in the vintage forum, the best I can tell you is that it's the same thickness as my ELC Star and my FS Goat A-2, but thinner than my 50s G-1. Now, the finish is bulletproof, compared to the Star, but if you were to measure hide thickness, they'd be about the same.

Peter -- it's crazy that you seem to have gotten some "in-between" 1401 -- somewhere between my older, spray-finish and the anilines that were out sometime thereafter. My 1401 is from 1996 (IIRC), and the anilines came out about a year or so later. Mine was very smooth when new, but I got the chance to see a month-old aniline that had taken on some outstanding patina and hide character. Not sure where yours fell into the production line.

Chandler

Swing · Apr 29, 2008

bfrench said:
Chandler said:

Thanks. There are times I wish it would show more wear variation in the color like some of that new warhorse -- even some of the hides Chapman has, but I can live with this. Sort of sentimental after so many years.

Chandler

Click to expand...

Nice pics.

Now to be a bit of a prick - what is the thickness of the leather?

I know you posted that chart to measure/compare thickness to weight, but since leather is a natural material, it varies in density, so even if two pieces of leather are the same thickness, that doesn't mean they are the same weight.

~Swing

Chandler · Apr 29, 2008

If you took measurements all over one section (and others) of your jacket and averaged out the totals, could that give a relatively accurate measurement?

Chandler

josisek · Apr 29, 2008

One of the two best ELC 1401 I've seen. Two years ago, I saw a guy at a military show with a killer A-2 and I asked him where he got it as I thought it might be an original ... he replied "Eastman". I was a bit surprised because I'd seen a few and owned one and I'd never seen one quite that color with such nice grain ... until you posted yours. His must have been from the same vintage as yours. After 10+ years ... sure you don't want to put it on the market (if it's a size 40)????

Chandler · Apr 30, 2008

josisek said:
After 10+ years ... sure you don't want to put it on the market (if it's a size 40)????

Sorry, couple sizes larger. Thanks for the positive votes, though.

Chandler

bfrench · Apr 30, 2008

Swing said:
bfrench said:

Chandler said:

Thanks. There are times I wish it would show more wear variation in the color like some of that new warhorse -- even some of the hides Chapman has, but I can live with this. Sort of sentimental after so many years.

Chandler

Click to expand...

Nice pics.

Now to be a bit of a prick - what is the thickness of the leather?

Click to expand...

I know you posted that chart to measure/compare thickness to weight, but since leather is a natural material, it varies in density, so even if two pieces of leather are the same thickness, that doesn't mean they are the same weight.

~Swing

Hi, Swing,

I realize that the density can vary quite a bit but it seems to be an industry standard - it was only one chart of many that said the same basic thing - so it should give us a better approximation than just grabbing a piece of a jacket and guessing at its weight.

Bill French

Swing · Apr 30, 2008

Chandler said:
If you took measurements all over one section (and others) of your jacket and averaged out the totals, could that give a relatively accurate measurement?

Chandler

I guess. But who cares, ya know? When I see people talking about how "this hide is X oz, and this hide is Y oz, and this one is Z oz" I shake my head and think "Oh, so and so is now a leather expert, with magical fingers that can gauge 1/2 oz differences in leather weight". They don't know what the hide's weight actually is. They've got a jacket that someone (maker/seller) has told them is Y oz, and whether that number is correct or not, they are basing their judgement of other jackets on the weight they think that initial jacket is.

I've got loose .25 cal bullet here at work that weighs 117 grains, which is just over a quarter oz. It's weight is barely detectable while resting in my hand. I imagine that amount of weight would be even less noticable spread over a square foot of leather.

Thick, thin, heavy, light, stiff, soft... IMO it's pointless to try to go beyond those terms when discussing an A-2, and those terms are all relative anyway.

~Swing

Chandler · Apr 30, 2008

Swing said:
I guess. But who cares, ya know? When I see people talking about how "this hide is X oz, and this hide is Y oz, and this one is Z oz" I shake my head and think "Oh, so and so is now a leather expert, with magical fingers that can gauge 1/2 oz differences in leather weight".

Good points, but I guess the question of the weight all came up from what originals may have been made out of -- more to thin-ness than actual weight, but it's really all in the look.

To that, I know that my Star drapes more loosely and looks softer than my 1401 (is softer in feel too). I held them both out in front of me yesterday and if there's any difference in weight, it's negligible (if that's the right word).

Chandler

Swing · Apr 30, 2008

Chandler said:
Swing said:

I guess. But who cares, ya know? When I see people talking about how "this hide is X oz, and this hide is Y oz, and this one is Z oz" I shake my head and think "Oh, so and so is now a leather expert, with magical fingers that can gauge 1/2 oz differences in leather weight".

Click to expand...

Good points, but I guess the question of the weight all came up from what originals may have been made out of -- more to thin-ness than actual weight, but it's really all in the look.

To that, I know that my Star drapes more loosely and looks softer than my 1401 (is softer in feel too). I held them both out in front of me yesterday and if there's any difference in weight, it's negligible (if that's the right word).

Chandler

Right, the units of weight we're dealing with are so small, they aren't going to be detectable, at least to the human brain's scale. Sure, you can measure the thickness of a peice of leather and get an idea of it's weight, but there's going to be variation in thickness over the hide, and varation in weight due to density. And really, who cares what the jackets weight is? Unless it's extremely thin or thick, it's going to fall within the range of vintage jackets, and leather can still be a little on the thicker side and still break in a drape nicely. It all comes down to what you like, and what you're looking for.

~Swing

Grant · Apr 30, 2008

Swing makes a valid point that it all comes down to what you want in a repro A-2 since originals varied as widely as the hides used. I've owned a Poughkeepsie made from very thin horsehide, Bronco's and Dubow's with thick robust horse, a Perry and Monarch with medium weight hides and an Aero made from biker jacket weight and thick horsehide. From my observations, Dubow, Bronco and Aero tended to use hides that were on the thicker side. For my taste I prefer medium thickness hides. In a repro I really like the hides Gary used on my year old ELC Werber.

Grant

Chandler · Apr 30, 2008

Grant said:
Swing makes a valid point that it all comes down to what you want in a repro A-2 since originals varied as widely as the hides used.

Oh, I couldn't agree more. Hope I didn't sound contrary. Half the fun of the 3 jackets of which I posted pictures is that they're all different - yet all correct in their own ways.

Chandler

ELC RW 1401

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Share this page