Modern rabbit, vintage rabbit, modern beaver

[ScottF]

We can go over cost later... that's another thread. Let's go on with what we learn from felt from observation.

Regardless of price... back to quality.

I've taken brim trimmings from vintage Stetsons that have been altered, and brim trimmings from modern and noticed how loose the felt itself is felted nowadays. I could easily pull apart the modern where as the vintage was ... well darn tough to tear. Maybe it's fiber content, yet I'm pretty sure most hats from Stetson are just looser in their felting nowadays.

Modern Borsalino is even looser seeing as you can see the hairs and pull them out one by one if you like. They also end up drooping the worst over time.

Yes, and I don't understand how there can even be any argument about this - everyone I know who's compared a modern Borso to a vintage one, or a modern Stetson to a vintage one, says exactly the same thing. I wore a 1940's Borso into Byrnie Utz's a few weeks ago and they reprimanded me for grabbing it by the front - they told me that I could not get this kind of felt today, because it doesn't exist, and that I had better treat this old hat correctly. And this is a store that has sold me hats in the past, and that sells modern Borsalinos. What reason could they possibly have to tell me they can't match the quality of my old hat?

Still, I'm quite happy with my Fed Deluxe - even the felt quality.

 

[jamespowers]

We can go over cost later... that's another thread. Let's go on with what we learn from felt from observation.

Regardless of price... back to quality.

I've taken brim trimmings from vintage Stetsons that have been altered, and brim trimmings from modern and noticed how loose the felt itself is felted nowadays. I could easily pull apart the modern where as the vintage was ... well darn tough to tear. Maybe it's fiber content, yet I'm pretty sure most hats from Stetson are just looser in their felting nowadays.

Modern Borsalino is even looser seeing as you can see the hairs and pull them out one by one if you like. They also end up drooping the worst over time.

Going further along that line then, we can even compare the low end hats to the modern low end hats such as an Adam or Champ and they were still darn tough dense fiber hats. Some of the Champ Feather weights and light weights that I have may be light felts but the felt is tough and strong beyond that which you find today in factory hats---higher end or otherwise.
They do not compare to some of the custom hats we have out there today though. That would make sense though as they were not the top of the line hats and most assuredly not made of 100% beaver.

 

[jwalls]

In the post EPA era we are not going to match the felt quality of pre 60's top quality felt. The process allowed now is inferior to that previously used. That being said with enough work by a qualified custom hatter we are get some damn fine hats.

 

[jamespowers]

In the post EPA era we are not going to match the felt quality of pre 60's top quality felt. The process allowed now is inferior to thst previously used.

That is a good point. Carroting and other processes that used Mercury made the felt bonds tighter but not unusually so. Somehow into the 1960s hat body makers managed to still do a decent job though. They still use some of the same machinery they used to use back 100 years ago so they are doing something differently that is for sure.[huh]

 

[ScottF]

http://www.measuringworth.com

ahh, the numbers tell a different story. I pulled my birth year for comparison. A $140 hat (which is what you can buy a Chatham using current discounts) is in the range of a $12.00 hat. That just takes in the consumer price index.

There is another factor that pushes the hat price even lower: economy of scale.

Felt Hat production was a capital intensive industry. The more customers you had, the larger the base over which to spread the costs. The economists use a mathematical curve and it is a steep one. Dress hat felt production fell 50% during WWII and continued falling causing the old $5 hat to become a $10 hat by 1954. Remember, there was no post war inflation. The cost increase came mostly from loss of scale.

My thumb in the eye estimate is that you take a $4 hat in 1954 allow for massive loss of scale and inflation and you get a $140 hat today. By the same numbers, a high quality $10 hat becomes a $350 - $500 hat. with only $80 of that increase coming from inflation.

Now you can see why a $140 hat does not measure up to a $10 hat from 1954.

Actually if you paid $140, you'll need to add shipping and possibly sales tax. Mine was $150 + tax, out of the store (vintage style ).

I was simply comparing a bottom of the line 2009 Stetson to a bottom of the line vintage Stetson. It sounds like you are saying that Stetson's Chatham is a bottom-of-the-bottom of the line hat, and that nothing that cheap existed in the past, since it would have to have been a $4 hat? If so, then we are still in agreement, but your numbers are giving a helpful explanation as to 'why'.

Thanks for presenting the numbers analysis - well done.

 

[Matt Deckard]

I wore a 1940's Borso into Byrnie Utz's a few weeks ago and they reprimanded me for grabbing it by the front -
Still, I'm quite happy with my Fed Deluxe - even the felt quality.

They told me the same thing when I visited their shop and I took off my Optimo by grabbg the crown. I've been doing it to my hat for 5 years. I explained to them that it's my hat and I know my hat can take it. They thought it was vintage like most people do. It's just a really high quality modern felt that's been cleaned and blocked a few times. You do what I did to a modern Borsalino, and yes... within a few months you'll have a hole.

 

[jamespowers]

You do what I did to a modern Borsalino, and yes... within a few months you'll have a hole.

More hole than hat.

 

[ScottF]

They told me the same thing when I visited their shop and I took off my Optimo by grabbg the crown. I've been doing it to my hat for 5 years. I explained to them that it's my hat and I know my hat can take it. They thought it was vintage like most people do. It's just a really high quality modern felt that's been cleaned and blocked a few times. You do what I did to a modern Borsalino, and yes... within a few months you'll have a hole.

If you really want to get them upset, grab a straw hat by the crown

Well, I just got back from Byrnie Utz, and I checked out a range of hats. First of all, the owner steamed the brim and creasing, and it's not too bad. I still love the shape of the hat and the way it fits - if I could find a vintage hat with the exact same dimensions, I'd be thrilled.

The Stetson Imperial was okay, but nothing special. The Stetson Pinnacle (beaver) was a very nice hat - felt like an okay vintage hat...but it was $365. I liked the Stetson 'Brewster' - really a beautiful hat and very lightweight. It had the same blocking as the Chatham, but with a fabric sweat, stitched brim, longhair. Nice hat - $165. If I could find one for $80 I would probably buy it.

I really liked the Akubra Sydney except for the taper - very light, good felt feel, nice bow treatment, very tapered.

Then I tried the Borsalino Beaver - much nicer hat than the Stetson Beaver. It felt somewhat like a vintage Borsalino, but not quite as nice.

 

[clevispin]

MERCURY

Can anyone speak to how mercury was used in the felting process? Or point me to a thread? In these modren days I can't see why the stuff can't be reincorporated into the process using proper safety measures or, with modern chemistry, be replaced with a substitute that yields the same results.

m

 

[marvelgoose]

Actually if you paid $140, you'll need to add shipping and possibly sales tax. Mine was $150 + tax, out of the store (vintage style ).

Stirling Leather for $148. Use the Stetson $10 coupon in the ad that is currently in rotation at the top of the FL header and you are at $138. Stirling ships any item over $75 for free. I'll be generous and toss in $2 to get to $140. lol

but your numbers are giving a helpful explanation as to 'why'.
Thanks for presenting the numbers analysis - well done.

Thank you. I think that the good people at Stetson would put out a better felt if it could hit the price point. Not having touched a nice Optimo or Buckaroo or VS I cannot speak on how they would compare to an Adam or Champ. Maybe when we get the kids through college.

I do have an Adam dated 60-65 and the felt is very stiff and thin. Maybe because it was NOS and did not get that new stiffness out.

My Chatham was already getting floppy in the brim when I sent it off to Optimo for a clean, block, and binding. It was also getting a frayed look -- and I was being very careful with the hat. My Knox Challenger and Emerson have a much better felt.

 

[marvelgoose]

Can anyone speak to how mercury was used in the felting process? Or point me to a thread? In these modren days I can't see why the stuff can't be reincorporated into the process using proper safety measures or, with modern chemistry, be replaced with a substitute that yields the same results.

m

Here is a 19th century paper at Project Gutenberg on the chemistry of felting that was made for the British hatters.

Here is the money quote

On the whole, were I a hat manufacturer, I should prefer to buy my fur untreated by that nitric acid and mercury process previously referred to, and promote its felting properties myself by the less severe and more rational course of proceeding, such, for example, as treatment with warm dilute acid.
​

This paper used up everything I remembered from Inorganic Chemistry 101 in the 70's It also gives a good description of "carroting" using mercury.

 

[Matt Deckard]

Cool beans!

 

[rlk]

I don't think you could tell a 1940's Borsalino Alessandria type felt from its 1970's counterpart if they were both clean and fresh. And if you wore either one in heavy rain they would soon become hoods. I would say the same in terms of consistent quality for European makers such as Mossant, Barbisio, Panizza and Habig(Until all the factories closed).

 

[Fedora]

And then there's the rabbit vs. hare issue. Akubra use to use fur from wild hares, which was softer and better quality. Now they use fur from rabbits raised on farms for food.

I think the visual look comes down to pouncing most of the time, and the stiffness to stiffener. To do a real comparison you'd need to control all the variables.

I believe beaver in the old days used to be considered better because the fur had more "hooks" and scales on the shafts, making for stronger, tighter felt. After they discovered chemical treatments that could roughen and scale rabbit fur, this advantage was lost, and rabbit has been as sturdy as beaver for the last century or more. The idea that beaver is "softer" may simply be a unconscious transference over time of the idea that beaver was "better," although the "betterness" was actually originally due to durability rather than softness. Now beaver is "better" because it's more expensive, which simply comes down to supply: you can't farm it like you can farm rabbits in Belgium.

I too have heard Akubra no longer uses their own wild rabbit population, which to me is one reason the old Akubras appear to me to be better hats. In the Hat Talk book by D. Henderson, she interviewed a hatter who said at one time, the Aussie rabbit was the best of the best, rabbit fur to use, and some factories bought it for their bodies they turned into hats. The domesticated rabbit was bred for food, and not fur, so this is part of the reason the wild critters made for a better felt.

I think the visual look comes down to pouncing most of the time, and the stiffness to stiffener. To do a real comparison you'd need to control all the variables.

Some of it does, IMO, but some rabbit felt is felted tighter, and that enters into the equation as well. A loosely felted hat is hard to pounce out smooth, if not impossible.

Now beaver is "better" because it's more expensive, which simply comes down to supply: you can't farm it like you can farm rabbits in Belgium.

It is about supply sure. But beaver under fur is smaller in diameter compared to other furs. I have seen microscopic slides from the Portugal feltmaker showing rabbit and beaver. Beaver has more scales and are easy to raise up, compared to rabbit. Of course, the mercury treatment during carroting raised up the rabbit scales really well, allowing for a tighter "felt" Whereas you could felt beaver with no treatment. (but treating it with mercury sure made a great felt, and very, very tight)

Not sure what is used today to raise up the scales, but I have heard nothing works as well as mercury. And mercury actually puffs up the fur a bit, as the ladies of the evening in the old west found out. They used mercury on their eye lashes to make them look fuller. So, using mercury on the rabbit fur, gave the hat a different feel to it, that can't be replicated today. And put it in the position of being used by hatters who had traditionally used beaver at that time.

After they discovered chemical treatments that could roughen and scale rabbit fur, this advantage was lost, and rabbit has been as sturdy as beaver for the last century or more.

Well, I will have to disagree here. Today, nothing will felt as tightly as pure beaver fur. It can felt so tightly, that no shellac is needed to add body. Factories have to add .04 degrees of shellac to rabbit bodies so they won't collapse, in the crowns. Ok, a bit of hyperbole, but basically is truthful. If you want a real soft beaver hat, you have to go with a lighter weight beaver body. But don't confuse a natural stiffness(for lack of a better term) with shellac. They don't feel the same. On a softness scale, beaver is the softer of the two, but felts much tighter, which negates the softness, most of the time. Except in the "feel" department. Beaver fur has a different feel to it, almost like velvet, if pounced with the right amount of nap. Also, it only takes 20 per cent beaver content to give any hat the feel of beaver. My feltmaker dares anyone to tell him the difference between a 20 per cent beaver hat and a 50 per cent one. Because, you can't tell any difference. In feel that is.

A tighter felted hat will always be more durable, in rough wear situations. Be it beaver or rabbit. And, it will also be more water repellant, as the tightness of the felt is a variable in water repellancy.

Also, a tighter felted hat will be hotter to wear than a loosely felted one. The reason is obvious.

I love pure beaver, and I love great rabbit felt too. I just don't get to see much of the great rabbit these days, unless I pull out one of my vintage Borsalinos, or vintage Cavanaghs for that matter. There are places in your wardrobe for both furs. And blends as well. But if I were to take a long expedition, in the elements, I would always choose beaver over the other furs. Because of the superiour protection from rain, and the toughness of the felt. And those would be the only reasons. You would choose your hat as you would choose your boots. Both must survive if you are gonna have fun. And neither would come cheap. Fedora

 

[mayserwegener]

I don't think you could tell a 1940's Borsalino Alessandria type felt from its 1970's counterpart if they were both clean and fresh. And if you wore either one in heavy rain they would soon become hoods. I would say the same in terms of consistent quality for European makers such as Mossant, Barbisio, Panizza and Habig(Until all the factories closed).

I agree.

For bad weather wear I will put this modern Zapf up against any hat any era. It is my number one go to SUPER bad weather (rain, snow, sleat) hat.

Warning! Golden Era Stylenistas please close your eyes!

 

[Matt Deckard]

I have 40s Borsalinos... and they aren't drooping in the rain anytime soon.

Perhaps they were still making an okay product in the 70s, yet the 70s was a long long time ago.

As for the 40s versions... Well Let's just say that when it rains I don't worry at all about my vintage Borsalinos in a downpour. They've taken heavy rain time and time again and do fine, where as the modern ones don't even need rain to droop.

 

[mayserwegener]

But if I were to take a long expedition, in the elements, I would always choose beaver over the other furs. Because of the superiour protection from rain, and the toughness of the felt. And those would be the only reasons. You would choose your hat as you would choose your boots. Both must survive if you are gonna have fun. And neither would come cheap. Fedora

There are other felts that will stand up to extreme weather conditions. See the Zapf hat I posted. It is probably some type of hare / wool blend.

This Alpen hat maker still makes his own felt (credit Dreispitz)!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21j-GanwwDA&feature=player_embedded

 

[Dreispitz]

I agree.

For bad weather wear I will put this modern Zapf up against any hat any era. It is my number one go to SUPER bad weather (rain, snow, sleat) hat.

Warning! Golden Era Stylenistas please close your eyes!

Youp, Zapf for bad weather, riding, stable work, hiking ...

Mine got soak in the sevearest rains .... fur felt, perfect!

 

[mayserwegener]

Youp, Zapf for bad weather, riding, stable work, hiking ...

Mine got soak in the sevearest rains .... fur felt, perfect!

Yours is more stylish!

 

[ScottF]

I have 40s Borsalinos... and they aren't drooping in the rain anytime soon.

Perhaps they were still making an okay product in the 70s, yet the 70s was a long long time ago.

As for the 40s versions... Well Let's just say that when it rains I don't worry at all about my vintage Borsalinos in a downpour. They've taken heavy rain time and time again and do fine, where as the modern ones don't even need rain to droop.

Same here for most of my hats - it will be raining here in Seattle pretty much every day until June, so that's just life. But I can understand someone being nervous about taking a really nice thin-felt dress hat out in a rainstorm.