Getting into Huntsman's trousers

A notice came today indicating that the post office is holding a parcel for me. That must be the Henry Poole coat so I had better get the Huntsman finished!



This suit was cut for a very short man, but in typical English fashion, the trouser is cut with a very high rise and a fishtail back. Intended to be worn only with suspenders (or braces, as they would refer to them), the waist is cut very high, there are no belt loops, and the fly closes with buttons. It looks just like a page out of a tailoring manual from the turn of the last century. It's actually charming!

Here you can see just how long the rise was cut, even for this very short man the square extends only to the bottom of the fly- not all the way to the inseam, which is a few inches further.



Notice how the back is cut very high, without a separate waistband, in order to accommodate the suspenders.



The front has been cut with a waistband to allow for two forward pleats and the pick stitching of the pocket is barely visible.



Instead of a bulky seam, the pocket edge has been turned under, having been reinforced by a piece of linen, and finished by hand.



The pocket inside has been finished by hand, as has all the curtain and facings. The facing has been felled to the pocketing by hand, and you can see the enormous inlays left at the outseam. The trouser had been altered, probably at the final fitting as a previous seam line is evident. but even the original inlays were pretty big, allowing for considerable weight gain.



A bigger view of the outseam. Generous inlays have also been allowed at the inseam.



The waistband has been finished by hand, using a large piece of lining folded over three times.



The back of the trouser is finished with the same lining, leaving ample pleats in the curtain to allow for future alterations.



Here you can see how the back was reinforced with linen prior to finishing. A lot of extra cloth has to be folded in to allow to rebuild the points if the trouser has to be let out or taken in (one of the minor drawbacks to this style is the amount of work required to do what is otherwise a simple alteration.



The front of the waistband was done in a smart way which will deserve a post of its own to explain how it was done, as I think this will interest home sewers. The banroll was attached to a piece of linen and the two were attached to the double width waistband cloth in such a way as to make it very stable and prevent shifting, and the edges of the cloth meet up neatly to create a smooth, even finish. Notice the inlays left at the waist to allow the waist to be raised even further.



The seat seam has been sewn by hand, which brings me to a point I keep trying to make.



ON RECEIVED WISDOM

As we can see in this trouser, a lot of the craft of tailoring has changed little in the last hundred years. More. A lot of the basic truths have also been repeated, without changing, over that period of time. It's almost religious. One of the maxims is about the hand-sewn seam and its flexibility-

A hand-sewn seam has give and a machine-sewn seam does not, therefore a hand-sewn seam is superior to a machine-sewn seam.

Let's put that in context. A hundred years ago, the only machine available to tailors was the plain machine, more correctly known as the lock stitch machine, because two threads interlock to form a stitch, and a series of those stitches for a seam. It is strong and has very little give, so in an area subject to strain, such as the seat of the trouser, a lock-stitch seam could break easily. A tailor, however, could sew the seam using a back-stitch, a stitch which loops back over itself, which allow the seam to stretch a fair bit. In this context, the above statement is entirely true- a hand-sewn seam is better than a lockstitch seam. We hear this in reference to seat seams, shoulder seams, sleeve seams, and more.....

Though many things have not changed, and tailors are justly proud of the tradition we have maintained, technology HAS changed since then. There are now machines which not only replicate that looping hand stitch but better it, creating complex looping chainstitches with one or several threads which are far more flexible and strong than any hand-sewn backstitch. Those machines can be expensive, though, so most tailor shops will not bother with the expense of such a machine which is only good for 3 or 4 of the hundreds of operations involved in making a suit. My guess is that many of the tailors who chant the mantra of the hand stitch have never seen a lot of the equipment available today. And even though you will hear it repeated often that hand-sewn seams are superior, if you look inside what you thought was a very well-made pant and see that the seat seam has been done by some sort of machine, do not feel that you been been short-changed because the seam was not done by hand. In fact, it is likely that the seam is much stronger than a hand-sewn seam.

So before you go blindly repeating the received wisdom about the hand-sewn seam, know that while it was once quite true, and that it is still true in certain contexts (like that of a small tailor shop, equipped only with lock-stitch machines), it is certainly no longer entirely true. It is nice to know your garment was crafted entirely by hand, but is no longer strictly necessary in order to achieve the same degree of quality, or better, in this instance.

Rant over.

Breast pockets, Huntsman-style

This one's for the tailors. Tiny little details that I obsess over.....

I have always operated under the assumption that there were two basic methods of setting the breast welt pocket (with many variations on the methods, but two global methods).

The first being the hand-made method, in which the welt is constructed (usually by hand), sewn to the front, then the ends felled or slip-stitched in place by hand. This is how I have always made my breast welts.

The other method is the factory method, in which the welt ends are machine-stitched on top, either by micro zig-zag (which is the common technique)or, horrors, by plain machine. The zig-zag method looks like this; you have to look very closely at some garments, but it is there and it is visible.



Every once in a while I would come across a garment whose welt ends looked cleaner, more solid and better executed than the ones felled by hand, but there was no visible stitching on top, leaving one to assume they had to have been done by hand, but with some very talented hands. I knew there was something that I was missing, something I had yet to figure out. The breast welt on this Huntsman coat was one of those types. I have removed some of the pickstitching, but you can see how the ends are done- cleanly, with no visible stitching, yet they are solidly affixed.





That's what's fun about studying other people's garments. We learn. We can improve.

Looking inside, we can see that the breast welt has been tacked by machine, but from the inside. At first it seems obvious, until one sits down to try to do it. Hmph.




I finally managed to figure it out. The welt has to be constructed in a totally different way than I am used to, but I got it.



This suit has just about paid for itself now. Now I have to practice this, oh, about a hundred times or so before I do it on somebody's garment....

EDIT

This blogging thing's cool. I got an email from someone who trained at Henry Poole, saying that this was how he learned to do welts there, and then proceeded to send me an explanation of his method. Most of it was pretty much what I had figured out, but there is nothing like experience. When you have done it a hundred times you come up with little tricks to make it easier or better, things that did not immediately occur to me. So he saved me a whole bunch of trouble; in the interest of sharing, I'll put together a tutorial showing the method.

Thanks R!

Huntsman, Ripped and smoothed, part two

Since my last post, a reader emailed me to tell me that the initials of the cutter would be found on the label, those initials being "TH". I assume this must mean Terry Haste, former MD of Huntsman, but was he there in 2000? I'll have to go back and read the book again. Or do some more homework. But in any case, we're not evaluating the cutting here, only the sewing. It's just fun to know a bit about the suit.

Another thing I have been thinking about; there was a mass exodus from Huntsman during that period so anything not quite up to par may be a result of them losing their best people. Or it may not. More to think about. Meanwhile, let's get ripping.

The finishing inside is quite neat; the felling is so neatly done that you have to look close to see it in spots. There is no pleat in the bottom of the lining and to tell the truth, I'm not sure one is really needed, looking at this suit. Hmm.



The neck is neatly done as well. The facing/collar seam has actually been opened and drawn on the whole way, rather than clipping and working the facing over the top collar around the neck which creates some bulk. Extra work, but I like it and will use it.



Two pockets on the left, one on the right, neither with any kind of closure.



While I was surfing Ebay listings I found the pockets odd, as they seemed to have been worked onto the lining, the way manufactured suits are done, and like this one-



I prefer to set the pockets onto a cloth facing which will carry the weight better. It also makes relining much easier- if the pocket has been cut through the lining and goes onto the facing, as in the picture, it's a bit of a beast to reline neatly since you have to work the new pocket exactly over the hole in the facing- margins of error no more than 1/32" or so. Not a job for your average alterations tailor. Well, I should have known better. I didn't notice that the lining was a bit crooked at the pocket- this would have given it away. The pocket is not actually worked through the lining (though the smaller one just below it is)- the pocket is worked through a cloth facing and the lining is felled to conceal the work. It is common for most Italian tailors to leave this facing exposed in a bit of a decorative manner, like in this shot from a Zegna Couture coat (notice also the hand-felled lining with a backstitch instead of a felling stitch- we also saw this on the Brioni dinner jacket I dissected)


but Huntsman has chosen to conceal it entirely; naturally, it has all been done by hand.







Now on to some of what gives the suit its shape.

The bridle has been taped with lining instead of the cotton tape which is more common, and the lapel has been sparingly pad stitched. Remember that a lot of the stitching poked through- it is probable that the padding was done by an apprentice. I personally feel that denser pad stitching on the lapel will give a richer roll, and the results that I get would seem to support that theory, but I haven't properly tested it yet so I can't state it as fact, only as received wisdom. Which can sometimes be false. The undercollar (not shown) has been padded by hand, something that I HAVE tested extensively and found that it is not necessary to do by hand- the machine does just as adequate a job, in my opinion.



The canvas front is a lovely, dense hair canvas which has not been singed. I need to find out where this canvas comes from. Huntsman has a reputation for being a firm coat so I expected to find more in the chest. Instead, there is only one piece of haircloth, on a partial bias, and a rather thick piece of chest felt.



The direction of the hairline is surprising since this won't support the upper shoulder as well and there is no additional shoulder support piece.

The "vees" or shoulder cuts are left open rather than being fixed. I'm not sure how I feel about this yet. Readers who survived my pagoda shoulders will remember that these vees are opened and fixed in place to provide the shape to the shoulder and without them being fixed in place they can shift around so the shoulder shape will not be constant. This could possibly be a good thing since there is perhaps more movement allowed, but I think this would be very dangerous in lighter cloth- the hollow created by the open vees would make a very visible dent in the shoulder which would be very obvious in light cloth- the only thing covering them is the piece of striped lining on the top and bottom. I need to think about this for a while.



There is a moderate amount of wadding in the shoulder and two small pieces of collar linen. This is certainly a lot less than either Oxxford or Brioni put in their shoulders, again a surprise, since I expected a firmer shoulder from Huntsman.



Here is the pad removed



In the sleeve head, FOUR layers of heavy felt. This is a lot, even for me who likes a good, healthy rope. The effect is not bad, but its a bit chunky and lumpy since it's put in straight rather than shaped, which is now the norm (sometimes tradition should give way to innovation).


The back of the scye (as well as the underarm) has been padded with cotton and chest felt. This was common in the days of body coats (Sator will love it) but I haven't seen much of it lately; I'm not sure if this is common practice for them or if this gentleman had very hunched shoulders which needed some help. Judging by the, um, proportions of the suit, I am guessing the latter.



EDIT
I went plowing along without mentioning that the shoulder seam was sewn by hand and that the sleeve has been sewn in by hand. More on that later.


So far so good, the only major surprises being how LITTLE stuff there was inside. I was expecting much more. As some of my other garments begin to arrive, we'll have a better basis of comparison, though. Need to find an A&S......... But before that, the trousers, which seem to have changed little in the last 100 years.

Hunstman, Ripped and Smoothed

I just finished reading Richard Anderson's recent book, Bespoke: Savile Row Ripped and Smoothed. It tells of his apprenticeship and work as a cutter at H. Huntsman, widely regarded as the Row's best and most expensive tailor, and how a change of ownership and some questionable practices led him to leave and start his own bespoke house, Richard Anderson, Ltd. I rather enjoyed the book and recommend it to anyone who has an interest in Savile Row and the business of tailoring.

Having read the book, I thought it only fitting that my next dissection should be a Huntsman bespoke garment dated 2000, right around the time of his departure from the house. I don't think we'll ever know who cut it or if it was off an earlier pattern, but that's not really relevant to us right now.



There's a lot to show so I will do this in several installments. I also now realize that I need some better lighting and a macro lens (thanks NOBD); I hate what flash does to these shots and daylight is in short supply these days......

To see bigger versions of the photos, click on them which will bring you to my Flickr site. Click on "All sizes" above the photo, which should give you the full size, or the ability to select it.
The coat is their typical one button, with a notch (or step) lapel.


Functional sleeves buttonholes (the quality of which are just ok) are a little close to the hem, suggesting alterations. Strangely, one sleeve has four functioning buttonholes, the other has three functioning buttonholes and one sham hole.



Here's a shot of another coat. This was made for Voxsartoria by Steed Bespoke Tailors.



Now a trick question. If I hadn't told you which was which, but instead told you one was from the house reputed to be the absolute best and most expensive, and the other was from a much less-expensive off-Row tailor, would you have guessed right? If you guessed wrong, go get Edwin to make you a suit. Not that we should judge the merits of a suit on buttonholes alone, but Edwin's seem just a little neater, and it should be the other way around.

Back to Huntsman.

Now notice the two-hole buttons and the fold-up hem. Most RTW and MTM is not done like this as it is quite bulky BUT it allows alterations to the sleeve length after the holes have been cut. Ebay scroungers take note.



The front buttonhole. Notice the off-coloured pad stitching peeking through under the lapel.



Underside of the lapel, where you see more of the padstitching peeking through.



Notice the font configuration- unlike most modern garments there is no separate side body so the underarm seam stops at the pocket. The front dart, however, extends to the hem, a detail often associated with drape cuts.



And finally, for today, the side vent, with an extra-wide underlay. Notice how the finishing of the lining is done.



Check back soon for more, as there are more interesting details in the coat, and tons in the trouser. There's also a Henry Poole sportcoat coming so SR fans stay tuned.

Hand Made Buttonholes- UPDATE

I got an email from my Gutermann rep; Germany, it seems, has relented and will now allow me to order my gimp by the spool instead of by the box per colour- a box containing 5 spools of 100m of gimp which would make, I guess, about thirteen thousand buttonholes. That's too much. Now if only they would relent on the silk twist as well.

UPDATE If you are located in North America and are interested in the Agreman gimp, a group buy is being organized on the C&T forum. Or you can contact me directly at jeffery_d at ymail dot com for more info.

In the photo above, on the far left, the large spool is my gimp of choice. I have always used this type of gimp but when Gutermann made it hard to get I tried a few different varieties and none even came close. Made in Spain, the article is called Agreman and is a wrapped core gimp which comes in spools of 100 meters. Richard James Weldon stocks this but shipping gimp from London to North America can be very expensive.

To the right of the gimp is my buttonhole twist of choice, Gutermann's silk R753, which is a size 40/3 long staple thread. More on this in a bit. It comes in 400m spools (like the one with the orange cob) and can be found at Ely Yawitz or Bergen Tailor Supply in the US. The box standing behind it is the same thread but in small cobs of 10m each; this is the retail format which is available from RJW (they told me they didn't have the bigger format) and is not really worth the money; a cone of 400m from Bergen is about $15 US, while the box of 10 cobs of 10m costs around $20 from RJW. Yawitz sells the individual cobs for about $2 or $3 so if you have a weird colour to do and don't want 400m of it, then the individual cobs are good for a two piece suit.

Second from the right is a one ounce spool of size F (Mara 30) long staple thread that I got from Bergen for about the same price a the 400m of R753. To far right is Gutermann's S1003 wihch is the same size but is a spun thread. Again, more on this in a second. This cone came from Dugdale and I haven't seen any of it in North America but is fairly common in Europe and comes in 300m spools; it is also available in size 40/3 (like the R753 but Dugdlae does not have it. Despite its being spun, it is about the same price as the long filament thread.

Not pictured is some continuous filament thread from Amann which Schneidergott sent me- it is the same size (40/3) but a shade more lustrous than the R753. He says it's hard to find over there (it's impossible to find over here). Maybe someone knows of a good source?

So which one to use?

First the difference between the spun thread and the long staple. When the silk cocoons are soaked to separate the fibers, the beginning and ends are shorter in length and are spun together to create the thread. Because they are shorter, the are more fiber ends which makes a fuzzier, duller texture. The long staple threads are made from the longer silk fibers from the middle part of the cocoon- the longer fiber means less ends and thus a shinier, stronger, and more lustrous thread.

The advantage of using a heavier thread, like the size F or the S1003 is that less stitches are required to cover the buttonhole, meaning less time and less thread. It is also easier to do a neat job using heavier thread. The buttonholes look a bit chunky compared to those using finer thread, so I prefer the finer. This is personal preference and one is not better than the other.

Examples of both size can be seen below; in each case I used the Agreman gimp.

This is the Gutermann S1003- the heavy spun silk. The size F thread would look the same, only shinier. This is a small buttonhole for a 24L button on a vest.




This is Gutermann R753 with the contrast punched up a bit so you can see some detail. This is also a small buttonhole for a 24L button on a vest.



And finally, the Amann 40/3 thread.



For details on how to make hand made buttonholes, see this thread

Different shoulder types

Since my next suit will have a softer shoulder than I usually wear, Lynn has asked for some details.

The drafting of the shoulder seam itself will depend on the amount of padding, if any, used. I have sloping shoulders so I will use some padding and structure, but it will be a much more commercial shoulder than the usual pagoda and rope.

For a pagoda shoulder I will start with a straighter line and work the shape in with the iron. For a softer shoulder, I draw a straight line for the front seam, then divide that line into thirds. The third closest to the neck will have a concave curve of about 2mm below the line, then I curve upward about 2mm above the line, and finish with a slight downward dip to ward the end of the line. The shape will be adjusted in the fitting so I don't get too crazy when drafting. More important is the sleeve draft.

One of the first calculations I make when drafting the sleeve is the cap height. To get this, I measure the shoulder height on the pattern from the breast line- right to the tip of both shoulder seams where they join the armhole. I measure both, add them, then divide by two to get an average height. From this I will subtract a variable amount to get the cap height- for a rope shoulder with moderate padding I will subtract 7/8", for a softer shoulder I will subtract 1 1/8", for a shirt-type shoulder I will subtract up to 1 3/8". The cap height is absolutely crucial to a good fit- too long and you will get dimples or divots, too short and you will get vertical drag lines. Fortunately it is easy to fix in the fitting so I would err on the long side and adjust during the fitting- it's easier to remove than to add.

The following image shows what a rope draft might look like and a softer shoulder in red. Not only is the cap height lower but the top sleeve is narrower by about 3/8" as well. A soft shoulder requires less fullness and a smaller sleeve. If I wanted the Neapolitan "waterfall" effect I would shorten the cap without narrowing it- the extra width gets worked in as the fluting or pleating.



The dark pencil line in the draft will give this kind of rope sleeve, which is very full



while the red line will give a much flatter appearance, not only in height, but also in the crown of the sleeve. The few inches forward of the shoulder seam are pressed open and flat, whereas there is a prominent ridge formed in the rope shoulder. I've started pulling the basting to give a better idea, but the coat has not been finished or pressed yet.



Ok- here it is after having been worn and travelled in but not repressed yet so you can see how the cloth performs.



ABOUT THE CLOTH
The grey is from Dugdale Brothers' English & Town Classics book, number 9437.

Dugdale Brothers

A parcel came this morning.



I decided to try out another English cloth merchant, Dugdale Brothers. From what I gather they are a smallish, private cloth merchant in Huddersfield who will deal directly with tailors selling cut lengths. Their prices are very good (for English cloth, mind you) and they stock a range of trimmings as well, trimmings which are getting very hard to find over here. They have an attractive website here

I initiated discussions with them and had the samples I requested very quickly so I placed a little order last week to try them out. They were nice to deal with and quick to respond, and the order arrived within days so full marks on service. One thing that surprised me was that the Gutermann S1003 silk thread I ordered is quite a bit heavier than the R753 that I usually use for buttonholes, though that may be a good thing; it's not quite as heavy as the F size thread that's more readily available over here but that I find just too thick and clumsy looking. It's only available in 7 colours but they are the standard menswear colours.

Now I have to decide what to make first. Life is full of tough decisions.


EDIT

Decision made. I have a meeting coming up with one of our retail accounts in the US. If I showed up in one of my severe, rope-pagoda shouldered numbers they would probably vomit (the US is all about soft shoulders) so I'll have to make something much more demure and soft-shouldered for this meeting. In the light grey, I think.

Two cloth merchants, two drafting systems

OK so here are the finished garments. The navy is Harrisons and the charcoal is J&J Minnis. Aside from the differences in lapel, the Minnis was drafted using Whife, with no side body (which I think contributes to that wobbliness on the front) and the Harrisons was drafted using the Mitchell system. Each system has its strengths and weaknesses, but I definitely vote for separate side body- it's far easier to get a good fit with it. I used my own sleeve system adapted to each draft, which worked out better on the Mitchell system than on Whife.

Thoughts?





Thank you, all, for your comments.

Karen, here is a partial backview of the Harrisons, taken before it was finished. I'll get better shots of both of them soon.

And you are quite right, a donlon wedge at the level of the pocket would have fixed the front or the Minnis, but a separate side body is required for that, which was why I expressed that preference. That's the thing about experiments; sometimes they don't turn out the way you would have wanted them to. That's why I make so many suits for myself- I wouldn't want to experiment on a client's suit and the best way to learn is to try new things out and make mistakes. So it's all good

Superfluidity? You have taught me a new term, Jordan. But what do you mean by it? They are both pickstitched by hand, ever so discretely, to keep the edge crisp and flat. Perhaps you would have liked a swelled edge or a more decorative stitch?

Regarding the drafts, Whife was the editor of the Modern Tailor, Outfitter and Clothier, a massive 3-volume encyclopedia of tailoring last published, I think, in 1951. It's now something of a collector's item.

The Mitchell System was published by Frank C. Doblin in the 1950s as the New Mitchell System, and then in the 70s as the Modern Mitchell system- I believe that they are still available, and a few pages of the New Mitchell System are available oon the Cutter and Tailor forum. I originally learned a system very close to this, and later studied this system, but abandoned them for what I thought were systems which made more sense to me, since the drafts need to be "straightened" after cutting them out- that is to say, the main construction lines are not parallel to the grain lines, which is a pain when grading or trying to cut directly to cloth. I was speaking recently with a tailor who uses and speaks highly of the system so I decided to give it another go. He likes the sleeve draft, so long as you don't change the scye- I am particular about the scye fit and so used my own sleeve system for this draft. It should also be noted that neither of these garments fit like this "out of the box" (from the first draft) several fittings were necessary, as usualy, to get them to a point where I was somewhat satisfied with the fit so anyone using these systems should not feel discouraged if their first attempt at a draft does not fit as well as they expect. It should also reinforce the notion that fitting skills are more important than drafting systems- there is no magical system which is always perfect, and so long as your fitting skills are strong, you will get decent results no matter the system used.

A last note about these systems- they were published as guides for trained cutters and not as a step-by-step manual to teach how to cut patterns; it was assumed that one already had a firm understanding of drafting or was under the guidance of someone who did. If you are just starting out it is very easy to make all sorts of mistakes, and very hard to spot those mistakes; I would advise anyone who is just learning drafting to find someone who is familiar with the systems to give them some guidance for their first few drafts or to be prepared for a bit of frustration at first.