Show us your suits

[esteban68]

and the last and perhaps the best a Magee Killarney twist two piece;

date label but I cannot make it out as very, very feint

again retailled by J.J Shorts

 

[esteban68]

and a few more;

 

[esteban68]

the trousers; YKK side adjusters

OPTI zipper

 

[esteban68]

and a couple more;

.
The two piece suits are a perfect fit just needing a slight shortening in the legs and sleeves, I have a hunch they were both from the same man as they were in the same shop on the same rail side by side.

 

[GoldenEraFan]

Lack of lapel button hole, polyester blend and cut all say early 1970's to me.

next up is a British (and locally)retailed but West German built woolmix suit, not sure of the age?

 

[esteban68]

I thought around the 1970's on that one due to the lapels(there is a buttonhole it's just difficult to see in the pattern), the waistcoat combo is early really due to wide trouser bottoms, the Magee seems earlier to me possibly 1960's? but I am definately no expert.
I am pretty sure that Shorts in Chesterfield (my home town) closed their doors in the late 1980's and the Matlock branch earlier still IIRC.

 

[Benny Holiday]

Very nice find FFF. A nice early Christmas present!

 

[draws]

Recently purchased this blue 3 piece suit of unknown make and year. Size is 42Long. It appears to be British made but there is no maker tag. The vest button panel and inside tab are unique. Perhaps you can review and provide some feedback as to country of origin and year of mfg. Thanks, Dennis

 

[Marc Chevalier]

.
It's from the late '60s or early '70s. I'd say British.

 

[draws]

Thank you, Good Sir!

 

[Baron Kurtz]

what makes it "appear to be British made"?

 

[GoldenEraFan]

Mid-late '50s Dacron Roger Kent Suit.

 

[Gene]

This suit arrived today, an early 50's Bold Look, and I can safely say it's in mint condition and the measurements are just about perfect!

 

[Red Leader]

This is my post-'75 suit I picked up just today. I am brand new to all this and definitely still at the 'tip of the iceberg' with regards to knowledge, but I find it all fascinating and extremely fun to learn about these clothes from a historical perspective.

It is a 70s-does-30s suit. I suppose the things that differentiate it (from what I can tell, which may not be much), is the full liner, the vent in the back, the faux surgeons cuffs (were they faux back then, too?), the lack of button hole on lapel, the button location (being a little lower from the chest pocket than vintage suits I've studied on here), the slightly shorter length of the coat, and the fabric. The pants were pretty easy to tell.


It has a lot to like and where it comes close to the 30s (again, limited working knowledge here!) as opposed to the 1970s are the lapels which look decently proportioned, the square corners at the bottom flaps, the chest pocket (albeit not really slanted much), and the button stance. However, the best part about the suit is the overall fit, which is fabulous and doesn't show up in the pictures at all - pictures of me wearing it will definitely be in order. It it broad in the chest and pulls in at the waist, giving it the upside-down triangle framework. The pants have the bottom cuff and don't flare out either. And the good news - it fits me perfectly! It is my first new suit in 8 years and while it has a little more wear than my former one, it looks and feels to be of a much higher quality as well.

I still know almost nothing but it seems I learn something new everyday. I'm longing for the day that I can stumble upon a vintage 1930s-1940s suit, but until that day this one will do nicely!

 

[Nick D]

It is a 70s-does-30s suit. I suppose the things that differentiate it (from what I can tell, which may not be much), is the full liner, the vent in the back, the faux surgeons cuffs (were they faux back then, too?), the lack of button hole on lapel, the button location (being a little lower from the chest pocket than vintage suits I've studied on here), the slightly shorter length of the coat, and the fabric. The pants were pretty easy to tell.

It has a lot to like and where it comes close to the 30s (again, limited working knowledge here!) as opposed to the 1970s are the lapels which look decently proportioned, the square corners at the bottom flaps, the chest pocket (albeit not really slanted much), and the button stance. However, the best part about the suit is the overall fit, which is fabulous and doesn't show up in the pictures at all - pictures of me wearing it will definitely be in order. It it broad in the chest and pulls in at the waist, giving it the upside-down triangle framework. The pants have the bottom cuff and don't flare out either. And the good news - it fits me perfectly! It is my first new suit in 8 years and while it has a little more wear than my former one, it looks and feels to be of a much higher quality as well.

I still know almost nothing but it seems I learn something new everyday. I'm longing for the day that I can stumble upon a vintage 1930s-1940s suit, but until that day this one will do nicely!

Full linings aren't unusual for the period, but partial linings were much more common than they are today. Cuffs often had a vent and sham buttonholes, or no vent but still with the sham holes. Also possible was for the first button or two to be functional but not the others. A short coat length isn't indicative of being modern, though this seems to be a contentious subject. Personally, I like a shorter coat. The button stance on vintage suits is almost always much higher and wider, especially in the 30s and 40s.

I like the arrangement of the interior pockets, with the little pen pocket. The closeup shows a nice subtle pattern in the cloth. The trousers have cuffs, which is always good. Even though it's modern, if it fits well and you like it, that's the most important thing. Original pieces will come with time and patience. In the meantime, you'd be suprised what you can do with a modern suit and vintage accessories, especially vintage ties.

 

[Red Leader]

Full linings aren't unusual for the period, but partial linings were much more common than they are today. Cuffs often had a vent and sham buttonholes, or no vent but still with the sham holes. Also possible was for the first button or two to be functional but not the others. A short coat length isn't indicative of being modern, though this seems to be a contentious subject. Personally, I like a shorter coat. The button stance on vintage suits is almost always much higher and wider, especially in the 30s and 40s.

I like the arrangement of the interior pockets, with the little pen pocket. The closeup shows a nice subtle pattern in the cloth. The trousers have cuffs, which is always good. Even though it's modern, if it fits well and you like it, that's the most important thing. Original pieces will come with time and patience. In the meantime, you'd be suprised what you can do with a modern suit and vintage accessories, especially vintage ties.

Nick, I appreciate your thoughts and encouragement. I think the only thing that will supplement the research I am doing is actually getting a hold of some suits, vintage or not, and examining them. I found some today that were even closer to the 1930s style then the suit pictured above in that they had button holes in both lapels, no center vent in the back, and the buttons were higher and much closer to the chest pocket. The difference, if any at all, would have been found in the fabric, the liner, the cut and the tags. However, with the liner and the tags being on the inside of the suit, one of those suits that had the right color and good cut could have been a dead ringer for a nice repro 30s suit.

I'm going to be really excited when I actually do find my first vintage suit. I did pick up some non-'R' Union tagged items - an overcoat and a sport coat, but it will be something else when something from the 1930s/1940s is found.

It has all been really fun and I'm jumping in head first!

 

[avedwards]

It is a 70s-does-30s suit. I suppose the things that differentiate it (from what I can tell, which may not be much), is the full liner, the vent in the back, the faux surgeons cuffs (were they faux back then, too?), the lack of button hole on lapel, the button location (being a little lower from the chest pocket than vintage suits I've studied on here), the slightly shorter length of the coat, and the fabric.

Full linings were the norm on European suits, so that doesn't necessarily make it unauthentic. Faux surgeons cuffs were quite normal too. I've also seen plenty of vintage DB suits with only one button hole on the lapel.

The button stance is what tells it apart as post-50s DB suits tend to have it significantly lower than pre-50s ones. The lapels are also a lot lower on your suit than what was normal in the 30s and 40s. As Nick said though, it's still a nice suit and looks like it's made of nice material. With the right accessories you can make it look quite smart.

 

[Patrick Hall]

Gents,
I got this suit awhile back but wore it tonight to a party, and I thought it would be a good opportunity to showcase the suit, and to invite the collective wisdom of the Lounge in terms of likely age, and any details that jump out at you about it. A few things I didn't snap pictures of - the pants have a watch pocket on the right front side, double pleats, and dropped belt loops. suspender buttons are sown inside the waistband. The trousers are secured by a simple snap button closure, and a zipper. All relevant jacket details are photo documented. I love the prominent, sculpted lapels on this jacket - and you'll notice that there are some very faint and thin blue vertical stripes in the fabric which should be visible in one of the photos below. Jacket is petal-lined, and it looks like the sleeves have been altered to accommodate the larger cuffs of modern shirts. Everything about this suit says "bold look" to me - the slightly slouchy button stance, the longer jacket, the lapels that pop. So based on my limited knowledge I would guess late 40's or early 50's? Looking forward to reading everyone's thoughts!

 

[potemkin_city_limits]

Great suit patrick

 

[kyboots]

This is my post-'75 suit I picked up just today. I am brand new to all this and definitely still at the 'tip of the iceberg' with regards to knowledge, but I find it all fascinating and extremely fun to learn about these clothes from a historical perspective.

It is a 70s-does-30s suit. I suppose the things that differentiate it (from what I can tell, which may not be much), is the full liner, the vent in the back, the faux surgeons cuffs (were they faux back then, too?), the lack of button hole on lapel, the button location (being a little lower from the chest pocket than vintage suits I've studied on here), the slightly shorter length of the coat, and the fabric. The pants were pretty easy to tell.


It has a lot to like and where it comes close to the 30s (again, limited working knowledge here!) as opposed to the 1970s are the lapels which look decently proportioned, the square corners at the bottom flaps, the chest pocket (albeit not really slanted much), and the button stance. However, the best part about the suit is the overall fit, which is fabulous and doesn't show up in the pictures at all - pictures of me wearing it will definitely be in order. It it broad in the chest and pulls in at the waist, giving it the upside-down triangle framework. The pants have the bottom cuff and don't flare out either. And the good news - it fits me perfectly! It is my first new suit in 8 years and while it has a little more wear than my former one, it looks and feels to be of a much higher quality as well.

I still know almost nothing but it seems I learn something new everyday. I'm longing for the day that I can stumble upon a vintage 1930s-1940s suit, but until that day this one will do nicely!

I just saw this picture and it blew me away. Had a dark gray wool Hartz just like this around 1981. Has the button hole in the lapel,full liner, but had double vents. The problem Is I still have this somewhere and I must retrieve it from where ever it is hiding. What an eye opener. I loved this suit and had totally forgotten it. Now! ahem! can I get into it???lol.-- John