Pleats

[Baron Kurtz]

I don't think his torso is so short. His shoulders, i'll admit, are very, very wide. (As we know, advertising art of this era was never so hot at accurately portraying th male physique.) The trousers in the picture are particularly high waisted, i'll grant you - on or around the bottom rib, at a guess. This figure would perhaps be based on a very tall and athletic man, maybe a Gary Cooper type?

Most of my trousers waistbands sit between the navel and the bottom rib, aiding in the creation of the effect shown in the drawing.

bk

[oldog/oldtrix]

But if you really desire that look, you are best bringing the picture to an orthopedic surgeon as you will need your body altered considerably. There are very few humans that have the proportions of the customer or the tailor taking notes. Perhaps a few Dinka tribesman, the most famous of whom was Manute Bol (although even the Dinka don't combine the over long spindly legs with the short broad torso of the customer).

Yes, the illustrated man is idealized, but one need not be freakishly long of leg and/or short of torso to reap the benefits of high waisted, full cut, pleated trousers. Look at this picture of Astaire: http://www.imdb.com/gallery/mptv/1298/M ... re,%20Fred. Though I am 5'10" and of average proportions (165 lbs., 42 reg.), I achieve the effect quite nicely by wearing long rise trousers, either RTW or MTM in the waist size that fits where the waist band sits (anywhere from 34" to 36" depending on manufacturer). For you bespeakers, just tell the tailor “I really do want my pants under my armpits.”

[Concordia]

Look at this picture of Astaire: http://www.imdb.com/gallery/mptv/1298/M ... re,%20Fred.

Hey, are those Iammatt's shoes he's wearing?

[HappyStroller]

No. Sir, I fear my normal rise (i.e., waistband is at waistline height or thereabouts) trousers would be unbearable were I to sit down if it had a flat front due to my well-endowed tummy.

Normally, my suits are 5-piece: SB jacket, DB jacket, SB waistcoat, brace pants, pants with belt loops. Both pants are just above waistline, but the brace pants are looser than the pants with belt loops.

And I found our great Manton was right; DB jackets do look good on those whose girth are on the generous side, contrary to what some tailors were telling their customers. Thanks, Manton.

I've been wondering, do any of you favour different trouser design depending on jacket type (I mean SB vs DB not English vs Neopolitan!)? Assuming that with a DB jacket the actual aesthetic of the trouser waistband is less important, would you ever get flat fronted trousers? And would single-pleats seem incongruous with a DB jacket? Something about that combination to me lacks harmony and reason.

[Mr JRM]

Is it "do-able" to change from double reverse pleats to double forward pleats and likewise to change from single forward pleats to single reverse pleats?

[Costi]

Yes.

[couch]

Our tailors will speak more knowledgeably, but in my experience the answer depends on how the trousers were originally constructed. I recently had one tailor tell me that it takes more cloth to properly construct forward-pleated trousers than reverse. Intrigued, I then went back to inspect a pair of RTW reverse-pleated suit trousers than I had converted to forward pleats at the time of purchase (about 15 years ago) from an obnoxiously upscale men's store in Philadelphia (residents will know the one) with a very good alterations tailor. Indeed, I had not noticed that he had inserted a diamond-shaped piece in the fork along the inseams to add enough fullness for the forward pleats to drape correctly. So I would say that if you are not especially slim and/or the reverse pleats are deep and extend well below the fork, then you may well be successful in reorienting them without adding cloth or ending up with pleats that gap. Otherwise I would proceed with caution.

[Scot]

Does anyone else find that trousers with straight tops, i.e. to be worn with a belt, simply don't work when cut to sit at the natural waist? They just slide down to the hips, resulting in unsightly folds at the ankles, a rise that is too long and a baggy bottom! To counteract this one can tighten ones belt - resulting in ugly crumpling at the waistband and difficulty sitting down! Do side-adjusters work any better?

[Costi]

Scot, I have many trousers that I wear without belts or braces, cut to sit at the natural waist, which they do, too. Some have side tabs, but I don't always need to tighten them.
It may sound like a paradox, but in my experience it is THE BELT that weighs down the tops of high waisted trousers and sends them riding low: the weight of the leather, of the buckle, of the screws is just enough to pull down your waistband to the hips with every move that you make. On the other hand, a tight belt is a terrible nuisance.
If the trousers are well cut to fit your body, they will sit nicely at the waist without any need for a belt. You may add the side tabs to adjust for a couple of centimeters that represent a normal variation of your waist size. They are also much more comfortable, as they hug the waist without adding the pressure of a belt.

[couch]

Much depends on your shape, your habits, and the materials of the trousers, as well as their cut. If you normally carry things in your trouser pockets (keys, change, etc.) this will add to the challenge. If your waist is narrower than your hips/seat, and the trousers taper upward from the seat, this taper will help reduce slipping. I have bespoke trousers made for braces in which the inner waistband and curtain are made of a slippery lining material, so that the trousers do not grip the shirt (and push it up) when wearing braces. This would not be an advantage with side-adjusting or belted trousers. My MTM trousers have a waistband of a rougher material more like pocketing, which slips down less. Some men like inner waistbands with a rubber shirt-gripper ridge stitched in; this can also help (Poole offer it) but I'm not a huge fan. My best-fitting trousers use a DAKS-top construction, which has side-buttoning tabs connected to the trouser at the rear by elastic covered by a tunnel waistband. When well executed, I find this to be the sleekest and cleanest waistband, especially for suits. The trick is to have them sized so that there is just the slightest tension on the elastic when the tabs are buttoned in the normal position. Moving the side tabs to the next button will cause the same kind of bunching you describe when tightening the belt. Using this construction, along with an accurate cut from the seat to the waist, yields pretty stable results, in my experience. Buckle side-adjusters are sometimes positioned too low for optimal performance in my view, and while they have the advantage of being infinitely adjustable, they are bulkier than the DAKS-top button tabs.

[J. Cogburn]

I am still trying to figure out why forward pleats look better than reverse pleats or why reverse pleats were invented if forward pleats are better.

I may have an answer for you. I was visiting an experienced Sicilian tailor today in order to procure a couple of MTM trousers. I asked for double-forward pleats and he tried to talk me out of it. His argument was that, when you sit down, forward pleats billow-out somewhat more than do reverse pleats. He had me try on two trousers - one forward and one reverse - to see for myself. I couldn't quite tell the difference, but he said that he could.

I stuck to my guns, however, and he was happy to do what I asked. I would rather have trousers appear slimming while I stand and a bit bigger when I sit than visa versa.