Coat length

[Fashionicon]

About forty years ago with the arrival in New York City of many tailors from Italy, the coat length tended to be on the short side. It seems to me, that today, bespoke jackets coming out of SR, Italy or the US tend to be about the same length; neither to short or to long.

[jklu]

My experience with a couple Northeast US tailors of Italian heritage is that they prefer a slightly longer coat compared to what I see by Italian-resident tailors. Certainly Americans genearlly prefer that, so maybe this is a chicken or the egg scenarios. Also, what I've had made by Savile Row tailors on the more structured end of the spectrum indicates that they, too, prefer longer coats.

[manton]

By default, Shattuck cuts a coat for me that I consider roughly 1/2" too long. I have talked him out of that, however.

I think our NY clothing would appear a tad long to some of you aficianados in Paris, Milan, the Netherlands, and Columbus, Ohio who get your tailors to make shorter coats than even the average SR tailor would cut for you.

[smoothjazzone]

I have generally noticed the same thing. The length along the back center seam for coats various tailors have made me is:

Frank 35" (he made 34" then decided I could use an extra 1")
Nicolosi 34" (his default for me)
Raphael 34" (his default for me)
A&S 33" (their default for me)
Poole 34" (per their comment to me -- they cut it longer by 1" because they noticed my preference for longer coats)
Hitchcock 34" (he initially made 31.5" and then adjusted it per my request)

The reason why Frank at 35" still works is because he makes the coat cup you at the hem and because he cuts a very full trouser -- so the trouser seems to follow the same line as the jacket. With A&S, there is a visible gap between the jacket and the trouser at the hem -- so the shorter length works out fine.

[alden]

Smoothjazz

Your post confirms what I heard. The European tailors fit you at 31.5-33” and the US at 34-35”. What concerns me however is the spread from 31.5” to 35”, a difference of 3.5” is troubling.

Steve Hitchcock has an excellent eye and he had you at 31.5. Did John Hitchcock dial you in at 33” or did you ask to have it made longer? Poole cuts long coats as a rule so their fitting you at 33” is not a surprise.

If you don’t mind me asking, how tall are you?

I am 6’2” and my back seam measure is 32.5-33”.

As a general rule, a long coat has something monastic about it. Chant and carry around some candles and incense. A shorter coat is much more dynamic and easy to wear. Shorten your coats, gents!

PS Are AS trousers not full enough? They always were in the past.

[kolecho]

I am 5' 10" 170 lbs, and my longest coats are 30.5".

Smoothjazz, may I ask how tall you are?

[Dellen]

Many thanks for an illuminating discussion,
Dellen

[smoothjazzone]

I am 6'2" tall. I went back this morning and remeasured all the coats. The A&S jackets are all 33.5" long. This was the length the jacket was when I had the first fitting -- since it was a bit shorter than all my jackets up until that point, I remember asking John Hitchcock about this. His response was that he made the jacket length that he thought would look best on me. I personally think the A&S jackets look really good on me. Their SB jackets take at least 30 pounds off my frame (now if only I did not gain those back when I took the jacket off!).

The A&S trousers are, however, still a work in process. They are not quite as full as I would like and the pleats are very narrow. They may be full to most people, but I like my trousers really full. The pleats don’t close properly and the back crease bunches up just below the hips. This may be a topic for a different post but I like really deep pleats. The center pleats for my various trousers are the following inches deep (the depth as measured times two):

Frank 2.25" (just what he cut)
Raphael 2.75" (had to really work on him to get here -- I love this look -- now if he could only get the back pleat to be a straight line . . .)
Vincent 1.75" (cannot get him to cut them any deeper; perfect fullness and line)
A&S 1" (cannot get them to budge from here)
Steven 2" (accommodating my request for a deep pleat; he cuts really good trousers)
Poole 2" (accommodating my request for a deep pleat; looked phenomenal under a coat as they are high, full and have a perfect line; not quite as slimming as the Raphael and SH trousers when worn without a coat)

I can't say that my experience with SH concurs with yours. His trousers are fantastic, but when it comes to jackets, I don't think he has a very good eye. The first jacket he cut was really short -- even he agreed with that. My jackets from him have the lowest button point of all my coats (approx. 3" below where I repeatedly told him I wanted it), the gorge is also correspondingly low and the shape of the notch is uninspiring. Finally, the shaping of the coat on the sides is just plain weird. Overall, it a look that I really do not enjoy. This combined with his defensiveness when any flaws are pointed out, refusal to make needed corrections and sometimes questionable billing practices are reasons why I will never use him again.

My general experience with London tailors suggests that its best to stick with the established houses. A&S have been a pleasure to deal with. They have a price list -- so there aren't any price games. Contrary to just about everyone else's experience, I have found them to be very accommodative about special requests. John Hitchcock has a great eye for fabric and styling details and the workmanship is also quite good. John is undoubtedly one of the most talented cutter around – my jacket was perfectly balanced at the very first fitting and the only change necessary was that the armhole needed to be made a touch bigger – which was easily accomplished at the fitting itself by some deft use of the scissors by John. Despite some quibbles about the trousers, I really enjoy wearing my A&S garments.

[smoothjazzone]

Leaving Frank out as his coat is cut completely differently from everything else and SH out as an error in judgement, most tailors on either side of the Atlantic want to make me coats that are 33-34" long -- which while still longer than Mr. Alden's 32.5-33" despite us both being the same height -- is a much more narrow spread than 3.5" -- and could be explained by a host of factors including my very prominent shoulder blades requiring more fabric. That being said, even 1 inch, while sounding small, is a significant and very visible difference as coats go. You WILL notice a huge difference when you look at the mirror wearing a 33" long coat vs. a 34" long coat.

The one issue I have never been able to figure out is why does nearly every tailor one meets wants to make a bad looking suit. Left to their own devices, most tailors (not all), including some very well known ones, want make a coat with a low button point, low gorge, narrow lapels, small pockets, stiff, long in length, closed quarters with lean trousers with narrow pleats that are too long by an inch often for clients that don't know any better. Really, why?

[alden]

Smoothjazz,

Thanks for the explanation and very informative response.

I have shoulder blades that make most tailors break down and beg not to have to try and make a jacket for me. And to make them more interesting one mountain is bigger than the other. Add to that a bit of the Hunchback of Notre Dame and it is simply a sartorial miracle that I am able to dress myself.

If you have big blades then 33.5 sounds just about right and 31.5 would have been very short as you have indicated. Clearly SH did not adjust his measures for your blades. 35 must look a little long though.

The one issue I have never been able to figure out is why does nearly every tailor one meets wants to make a bad looking suit. Left to their own devices, most tailors (not all), including some very well known ones, want make a coat with a low button point, low gorge, narrow lapels, small pockets, stiff, long in length, closed quarters with lean trousers with narrow pleats that are too long by an inch often for clients that don't know any better. Really, why?

You may want to go back and read this article:

http://thelondonlounge.net/gl/forum/vie ... php?t=5294

The other explanation is that tailors are craftsmen, they don't necessarily have taste. You wouldn't ask the stonemason working on your house to draw up the plans? You would go to an architect or draw them yourself.

[alden]

On the other hand, coat length should be adjusted to account for length of the owner's torso compared to his legs.

I have always felt that this is the most important factor. There are very few perfectly balanced bodies. The short torso/long legged man needs a longer coat, and long torso/short legged man needs a shorter coat. The fellow born with perfect balance can choose!

[iammatt]

On the other hand, coat length should be adjusted to account for length of the owner's torso compared to his legs.

I have always felt that this is the most important factor. There are very few perfectly balanced bodies. The long legged man needs a longer coat, and short legged a shorter. The fellow born with perfect balance can choose!

My torso is slightly long compared to my legs. I measure in at a smidgeion under six feet and weigh about 175. My coats are all pretty much 31" and they definitely look shorter than just about anybody you see around here, but they are not too short.

[whittaker]

I can't say that my experience with SH concurs with yours. His trousers are fantastic, but when it comes to jackets, I don't think he has a very good eye. The first jacket he cut was really short -- even he agreed with that. My jackets from him have the lowest button point of all my coats (approx. 3" below where I repeatedly told him I wanted it), the gorge is also correspondingly low and the shape of the notch is uninspiring. Finally, the shaping of the coat on the sides is just plain weird. Overall, it a look that I really do not enjoy. This combined with his defensiveness when any flaws are pointed out, refusal to make needed corrections and sometimes questionable billing practices are reasons why I will never use him again.

Your experience with SH has differed from mine. As my first SR tailor I almost found him too accommodating to my ill formed requests. With several suits from 4 SR tailors behind me I appreciate more debate and learn more from the process. Now SH has my pattern down he makes excellent suits, though clearly finds the lighter fabrics more challenging.

SH has always been highly consistent in his billing with me.

[Concordia]

It is clear that SH is still growing into his persona as a tailor, balancing as he does extreme youth and an accomodating personality on one side, and his training at the authoritarian A&S on the other. Certainly there are others on the Row who offer more and better guidance on fabrics and "the rules."

Nevertheless, I have had no real problems working with him. He's been good about making things right when there are a few loose ends left, and on one occasion phoned me to tell me that he was re-making a suit entirely because there had been a problem with the fabric. No need for browbeating.

I've also come to like his jacket patterns (SB) very much. [His DB style is too assertive for my taste, but it is also very comfortable and well-cut by any reasonable objective standard.] His way of combining roped shoulders with very soft fronts splits the difference very nicely between the A&S techiques and mainstream SR style.

The only "irregularity" in his billing I've noticed is that he is reluctant to postpone payment to the degree that larger firms might. He is also more likely than some to adjust his prices to reflect costs of fabric. As his sticker price is a bit less than the big firms', I'm not espectially peeved at either of those practices.