Better fit

[Robert Conway]

Small armholes. What a revelation.

I'm getting dressed for New Years eve and did the Matt Deckard test on the sports coat I'm going to wear and lo and behold, when I raise my arms the thing looks like a frightened cat.

Then I pulled out my father's vintage tuxedo, which just happened to be hanging there. It's a beautiful double breasted piece, made sometime in the late 1950's, cut after a 1940's pattern.

Anyhow, I barely fit in the thing, but the moment I slipped it on I noticed the snug fit around my shoulder/armpit and despite it being too small for me, it simply staid put, when I lifted my arms.

So, just for the hell of it, I pulled a few other pieces from the rack, all modern cuts. Every single one of them failed the test, some much worse than others. Suddenly I noticed just how bad they all actually fit, unless you are just standing there, with your arms hanging down. Maybe I'll have a nice bonfire around midnight.

Anyhow, thanks for the tip-off.

Happy New Year.

Robert Conway

 

[herringbonekid]

The shoulder padding in these two are pretty much the same... the armhole difference is quite obvious.

Matt, i basically agree with your 'armholes are too big these days' theory. however, in your photo demonstrations you have always pitted a vintage DB against a modern single breasted. the way a double breasted is cut and buttoned across the torso is going to make it rise less. i've tried your test with a 30s single breasted and the lapels still open out like a modern jacket. not as bad perhaps, but it still happens.

 

[Mr. Rover]

Double breasted suits these days have the same problems, as well. The bespoke jacket I just got made in Hong Kong has modern armholes and it was a little hard to toast at the New Year's party. It fits perfectly except for those armholes. I was so excited for the process I didn't realize the tailor hadn't taken the armpit hole measurement.
Next time I get a bespoke suit in Hong Kong (probably when I graduate high school), I'll be like Freddy and dance around the shop until I'm satisfied.

 

[Matt Deckard]

The single and double breasted difference hasn't had anything to do with how far the suit goes up. I'll get a single breasted suit comparison soon... it's the armholes that cause the extra rising.

 

[shindeco]

I can post!!!

Yay! My membership came through! I've been dieing to get in on this topic.

I have to stick my two cents worth in on the smaller armholes issue. My awareness of armholes came through ballroom dancing (one of my jobs). I did my training with a man who started his competitive career in England in the 40s. He was (and still is) VERY picky about evening wear! I learned more than just dancing from him (including how to wear tails on the bus without getting them creased!).

Obviously, dance tails need to be cut so their best line is when your arms are extended out to the side. This means ... tiny armholes! I wanted to suggest that anyone looking for a tailor might want to check out whoever makes the tails for local competitors (assuming there are some). There's usually only one tailor that everybody goes to in a given area. These guys are used to making the armholes (dare I say it) properly.

 

[3PieceSuitGuy]

Had the same Idea

Shideco,

Had the same idea, since dance tails are designed to stay in place when dancing so I concluded also that a Dance tailor may be able to make suits with small armholes.

There is hope for modern suits as well. I have an Italian 3 pc suit, the brand is Massacri and the armholes on it are smaller than usual. I noticed when wearing it on the train that the shoulders do not move much when I am sitting down, whereas with the boss suit I had on yesterday the shoulders were about 6 inches above my shoulders. Maybe the Italians could tailor a decent vintage repro suit??? Now if I could just find a tailor in Italy that is online and speaks english!!

Cheers

 

[Robert Conway]

I wandered over to the Polo store on Rodeo Drive (BH) a few days ago and saw a charcoal grey, double breasted Windsor. The armholes were very high, dare I say dead on, but unfortunately the rest of the jacket had issues. The bottom four buttons were pretty low and rather 80's. The pants had a pretty steep taper and overall I didn't think the finish and material justified the price (about $1600).

The fit and material of the Brooks Brothers suits next door, was often better,
but the armholes are way too big. Really a shame, because they have some nice stuff, if you wanted something off the rack. Nice ties though and their raincoat isn't all that bad. A little more civilian than a vintage Burberry, but very nice.

Robert Conway

 

[Matt Deckard]

I wandered over to the Polo store on Rodeo Drive (BH) a few days ago and saw a charcoal grey, double breasted Windsor. The armholes were very high, dare I say dead on, but unfortunately the rest of the jacket had issues. The bottom four buttons were pretty low and rather 80's. The pants had a pretty steep taper and overall I didn't think the finish and material justified the price (about $1600).

The fit and material of the Brooks Brothers suits next door, was often better,
but the armholes are way too big. Really a shame, because they have some nice stuff, if you wanted something off the rack. Nice ties though and their raincoat isn't all that bad. A little more civilian than a vintage Burberry, but very nice.

Robert Conway

That is exactly what i have found. Brooks Brothers sport jackets have a very late 30's cut to them, though a little looser in the belly. problem is the armholes are way too big and too 1980's.

Ralph Lauren's blue label Polo suits and black label and purple label have the armholes right though the cut of the jackets are too undefined. Ralph seams to be going for that narrow mod suit fit though with wider lapels.

 

[Marty M.]

Matt, You're spot on in your post about higher armholes. That's the biggest difference between an American cut and a British cut suit coat. The American cut has a deeper cut armhole compared to the British version. An American model is very confortable while not moving around. But a deeper cut armhole will give you less mobility then a higher cut armhole. The problem is it takes a lot of education for us retailors to teach our clients about the benefit of the higher armhole. Besides the fact that a higher armhole gives a better shape to the chest. Most American males don't want to feel their suit coats when they put them on. They make all of the strange arm windmill moves. Like they're ready to fly on there own power.
Keep up your posts Matt. They are well thought out and very imfomative. Thanks.

Marty

 

[Matt Deckard]

The armholes have less to do with continent than then with history.

Italian suits still have a pretty high armhole cut, the UK second to that (from what I have seen), The US is the worst now. Armhole size used to never be a factor when it came to Italian UK or US cuts. The width and shape of the sleeves and body were different between the continents, though most jackets pre 70's that I have seen from all countries have a nice high cut armhole.

It wasn't til the 70's that the armholes became larger and larger, and that is mainly in the US.

I see alot of ne mod style UK suits that are snug to the body, though unlike their 60's counterparts, when the wearer lift his arms in his new duds the lapels spread wide.

I have an off the rack Brooks Brothers jacket from the 50's... very American cut, big through the body... tight armholes.

You can sort of seperate armhole sizes by the continents today, though back in the day they were pretty uniform.

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

The question I have is why this happened?

Is it because Americans don't like wearing jackets and thus want one which is the easiest possible to put on and remove?

Or is because Americans are also getting fatter with larger arms such that a larger arm scye is needed for a larger percentage of men?

 

[Matt Deckard]

I don't think the weight gain has to do with the increase in armhole sizes in all suit sizes. If it were a matter of people getting bigger, companies would simply produce more larger sized jackets as they have been doing.

I think it has to do with people associating comfort with easy on easy off.

 

[nightandthecity]

In the UK I noticed armholes getting bigger in the 80s, at first on shirts.

Funnily enough I just tried on a Peter Werth brown cord overcoat I noticed knocked down in a local remaindered store. Original price in three figures of course. The raised arm test pushed the shoulders up almost over head hight. It looked ridiculous.

I don't even think the bigger armhole increases comfort. More often than not it seems to make the item feel tighter across the chest. With this werth coat you could feel the tightness across the chest as soon as you put it on, moreover, it was a size too big for me so God knows what one my size would have been like.

 

[nightandthecity]

readers might find this of interest. Its copied from
http://www.costumes.org/history/100pages/STALIN.HTM

The writer makes the usual ritual sneering at Soviet backwardness, but my reaction on reading it was to think that the late USSR probably preserved older and better standards of tailoring for longer than we did (I think Matei has posted on this theme before).

"This drawing, as well as the next three, are from a book Cutting Simple Clothing for Women Children and Men from 1956 by S.K.Vinogradov and A.M. Lebedev. It's one of the most horrible, obtuse, and over complicated mathematical measuring and cutting systems I've seen. It is a great deal more complex than necessary for such simple clothing.

For example there are 2 and a half pages of math and instructions for making an ordinary circle skirt, and it requires algebra, mind you, for the equation!!! And it takes 9 pages of instructions for the simple dress above."

Its worth checking the link for the illustrations.

This inspired me to search for more on Soviet tailoring and I did find a fantastic diagram from the 50s showing about a dozen measurements to be taken for the shoulder/chest area of a mans jacket! Lost the reference unfortunately! I doubt there can be many modern tailors in the US or UK have this kind of knowledge any more.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

This month's ESQUIRE magazine has a little section on "How to get a great suit", or some such title. It shows a photo diagram of a suit, with arrows pointing to certain parts of it. One arrow points toward the armhole. The caption says that this year's suits will have higher armholes and narrower sleeves.

Paging Matt Deckard -- your ship has come in!

 

[BellyTank]

Whilst scrutinizing Copenhagen's department store menswear last year, I did notice a plethora of 'new' styles, with peaked lapels on SB jackets and the said slimmer sleeves and smaller sleeve-heads. A lot of tweed too.
I guess you'll be seeing them soon enough over there.

Look forward to seeing someone's purchase of said garment/s.

B
T

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Whilst scrutinizing Copenhagen's department store menswear last year, I did notice a plethora of 'new' styles, with peaked lapels on SB jackets and the said slimmer sleeves and smaller sleeve-heads. A lot of tweed too.
I guess you'll be seeing them soon enough over there.

Probably means that H&M will be knocking off that style in the autumn.

bk

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Ironically, this year's "new" higher armholes and peak lapels copy the higher armholes and peak lapels of 1970s suits, which themselves copied -- you guessed it -- the higher armholes and peak lapels of 1930s suits.

There's a 1940s book called Fashion is Spinach, which is a nice way to say, "fashion is bull excrement." I thoroughly agree.

 

[BellyTank]

Probably means that H&M will be knocking off that style in the autumn.
bk

Top Man- Kurtz.
He...he... eh?

See you at Glenfarclas.

B
T

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Top Man- Kurtz.
He...he... eh?

See you at Glenfarclas.

B
T

It appears you may have got there before me. I'll be with you soon enough. I'm on the high road.

bk :beer: