or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › 3 roll 2.5 with peaked lapels
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

3 roll 2.5 with peaked lapels - Page 4

post #46 of 84
mwink[1].gif
post #47 of 84
fistbump.gif
post #48 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Despos View Post

If you start the curve of the belly below the top button on a 3 roll 2 or 2.5, you can't really say it is 3 roll 2 because the lapel shape defines the 2 or 3 button nature as much as the buttons. If the belly extends below the top button, you have a two button with an extra button above.

This makes better sense.

The main thing I am saying is that 3-roll-2 is a misnomer because it is just a two buttoned coat, constructed to button-two, except that an extra show button has been added as a decoration or "show button". This is why I prefer the British term "button-two show-one" to the American term "three button, roll to two" - because it is not a genuine button-three coat.

As far as I am aware, on a button-two show-one single breasted coat, the construction of the roll line is set as per a button-two coat. The collar is cut as per the roll line going to the middle button, because the collar is drafted according to amount of turn dictated by the roll line.

As Chris will know, the cutter sets the roll line when drafting the coat. The bridle just follows the roll line. The collar pattern is drafted according to the angle set by the length of the roll line. The collar pattern changes according to whether you have a short or a long turn of the collar. A short lapel has a longer turn, and needs more curve/length on it. A longer lapel has a shorter turn and needs a straighter collar. I have never heard of anyone adjusting the collar pattern to the position of the roll line by doing nothing more than basting it on tighter or looser, as this would risk adversely affecting the fit of the collar in general (even though admittedly a long turn from a short lapel needs to basted on with extra ease/length at the turn). Tightly basted on collars are a particular heinous problem, especially when the tightness is at the turn of the collar.

There are two alternatives:

1. Set the roll line and draft collar to finish at the top of the three buttons
2. Set the roll line and draft collar to finish half way between the top and middle buttons ("button 2.5")

In the first situation you would have set the roll line and cut the chest piece as though the roll line were set for a button-three, and you would just have a conventional button-three coat. This can be worn according to taste by fastening only the middle button.

In the second situation, if you set the roll line so that it finished half-way in between the top and middle buttons, then when you buttoned the coat at the second buttoning position, the roll line of the coat would appear convex (curved roll line) rather than straight because of the way the edge of the hair cloth would be wanting to push the roll line a little above the second buttoning position:

ConvexRollLine.jpg

This is not a style feature specific to any button-two show-one coats I have seen. This is not to say it cannot be done, but it would involve other changes to the way the coat and canvas are cut to give you the convex lapel.

So it seems that the logical conclusion would be that the cutter would usually set the roll line to end at the second button. This justifies the British term "button-two". You then add in a decorative buttonhole above the middle one and you get a "button-two show-one". The inner construction remains constant irrespective of where the belly of the lapels commence.

Here is a true button-three coat:

TrueB3.png

Note that because the belly starts at the top button, this a little hollow that forms when it is buttoned to the middle position.

This shows that the belly starts at the top button:

BellyButton3.png

If the belly of the lapels started at the middle button this is how the extra belly would make the lapels look:

TrueB3Mod.png

Here is a button-two show-one coat, which has a fullness of lapel around the buttoning point because the belly starts at the middle button:

B2Show1Belly.png

The run of stripes shows how the belly starts at the middle button:

B2Show1BellyCommence.png

This still leaves things open to the possibility that there is a "2 1/2" subtype of button-two show-one coat where the cutter has designed the belly of the lapel to start at the top or middle button level. In all instances though the inner construction is all set so that the coat is button-two coat. The draft would look like this:

Morris_CPG_Lapel.png

You can see that the lapel roll line is set to button-two. The corrected lapel design in red shows how the belly of the lapel commences above the roll line, at where the top decorative show-button is placed.

I guess it is possible to construct the insides of a coat so that the roll line, bridle, canvas construction and collar are all set in harmony for the buttoning point to roll to the middle button - and yet, have the belly start at the top show-button. The only thing is why on earth you would do such a silly thing, just so you can have that "hollow" due to a lack of belly at the middle button. The lack of belly there will also conspire to partially hide the top show button. And worse, why you would give it such an asinine name like "2 1/2"? It sounds like a totally half brained terminology.

The other thing is why you would waste your time trying to pretend you were the possessor of some sort of esoteric knowledge just for knowing such a thing. God, I hope you guys have better things to do than force your tailors to make crap like this just so you can feel like a bespoke connoisseur iGent.
post #49 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton View Post


OK, take a look at the front edges on those coats, the edge of the lapel and the middle section and the quarters, which forms one line from the lapel notch to the bottom of the coat. Notice how the lapel sort of bulges out above the top button and then becomes straighter before curving away at the bottom. That curve at the top, if it is really pronounced, is what constitutes "belly." Either way, even if you want no belly, there has to be a little curve or else the lapel, once folded back for wear, will look oddly concave.

Now look at the diagonal line that goes from where that bulge ends, just above the top button up to the lower part of the notch. This is called the "roll line." I will let jeffryd (should he show up) explain what is going on inside the jacket along the roll line, but in brief it is what it sounds like: that's where the roll is when you wear the jacket.

The second thing that affects the roll is the tension of the collar. A tight collar pulls up a lapel, which in turn pushes down the roll line. So a tight collar lengthens the lapel, all else being equal. Less collar tension has the opposite effect.

So, jackets made with strict adherence to the pattern above will be three button with the roll beginning above the third button. I.e., a true 3 button or a 3 roll 3. Tighten the collar a little bit and/or adjust the roll line downward on the inside and you can make it a 3 roll 2.5.

Going back to that outer lapel edge: typically the roll line will always end at the bottom of the bulge. On a two button coat, the bulge will end above the waist button, i.e., several cms lower than you see above, and the roll line will go to the top of the waist button. Some tailors will cut a 3 roll 2.5 so that the bulge ends between the middle and top buttons. I recall once ordering a 3 roll 2.5 from Raphael and, at the first fitting, he was kicking himself because he had cut the lapel like a three button with the bulge ending higher. He insisted on re-cutting the fronts so that the bulge ended between the two buttons. That is how he cuts a 3 roll 2.5, at least for me. (Oh, and funny how “something that does not exist” is nonetheless on the lips of various accomplished tailors. Ask Raphael or Solito or A&S to make you a 3 roll 2.5 or a 3 roll through as the English would say, and they know immediately what you are talking about.)

But not every tailor does this. Solito cuts all my three button coats with the bulge ending above the top button. But either through adjusting the roll line or manipulating the collar tension or both the coats have a roll that goes past the top button but ends before the top of the waist button.

As for the various denials in this thread of things that everyone else can clearly see with their own two eyes, rolleyes.gif

This doesn't actually say a thing I haven't already said. It certainly doesn't address the alleged distinction between a 3-roll-2 and a 3-roll-2.5 as being really special subtypes of coats which should receive names like this.

It certainly does confirm what I have saying all along: the top button remains a decorative show button. The construction of the inside is the same as per a button-two coat.

Yes, I concede there is room to move with where you commence the belly of the lapels. But to this I can only say: so bloody what? The much bigger question is why you want that decorative top button there in the first place and moreover why iGents keep making a big deal of it. Why stop at one decorative buttonhole? - you could have six, if you really wanted.

p.s.I hope you are not saying that the roll line be set to button-three, but that the collar should be constructed as though the roll line were set to a button-two, so that the shorter turn of the collar keeps throwing the buttoning point to the middle button, as can happen on any incorrectly cut button-three with such a collar defect. That would really be serving up kosher roast pork.
post #50 of 84
I don't know who came up with the term "2.5." It might have been me, might not. I think it is a descriptive term that captures the clear difference between (say) a BB sack, with the full roll to the middle, and an Italian coat where the roll ends halfway between the middle and the top.

Anyway, it sure is an important thing to get worked up about.
post #51 of 84
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sator View Post



You can see that the lapel roll line is set to button-two. The corrected lapel design in red shows how the belly of the lapel commences above the roll line, at where the top decorative show-button is placed.

I guess it is possible to construct the insides of a coat so that the roll line, bridle, canvas construction and collar are all set in harmony for the buttoning point to roll to the middle button - and yet, have the belly start at the top show-button. The only thing is why on earth you would do such a silly thing, just so you can have that "hollow" due to a lack of belly at the middle button. The lack of belly there will also conspire to partially hide the top show button. And worse, why you would give it such an asinine name like "2 1/2"? It sounds like a totally half brained terminology.

The other thing is why you would waste your time trying to pretend you were the possessor of some sort of esoteric knowledge just for knowing such a thing. God, I hope you guys have better things to do than force your tailors to make crap like this just so you can feel like a bespoke connoisseur iGent.


Why is the name asinine if, in its brevity, paints the distinction in conversation? I think arguing over where the belly is in relation to the first button is a lot more asinine than just calling it as it looks.
post #52 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sator View Post


This doesn't actually say a thing I haven't already said. It certainly doesn't address the alleged distinction between a 3-roll-2 and a 3-roll-2.5 as being really special subtypes of coats which should receive names like this.

It certainly does confirm what I have saying all along: the top button remains a decorative show button. The construction of the inside is the same as per a button-two coat.

Yes, I concede there is room to move with where you commence the belly of the lapels. But to this I can only say: so bloody what? The much bigger question is why you want that decorative top button there in the first place and moreover why iGents keep making a big deal of it. Why stop at one decorative buttonhole? - you could have six, if you really wanted.

p.s.I hope you are not saying that the roll line be set to button-three, but that the collar should be constructed as though the roll line were set to a button-two, so that the shorter turn of the collar keeps throwing the buttoning point to the middle button, as can happen on any incorrectly cut button-three with such a collar defect. That would really be serving up kosher roast pork.

Holy cow, this is the first time you have directly addressed me in like three years! We are on speaking terms again! biggrin.gif

Your question reminds me of a legendary AAAC thread (my last, IIRC) in which Cruiser asked "Why would anyone get a 3 button coat on which you can't button the top button"? The answer is, because we like the way they look.

I can speak only for myself, but after having nothing but BB knock off (Patrick James, a California chain), 3 roll 2 blazers my whole life, when I started to buy my own clothes, I was a two button man for about 15 years. I got 3 button only for summer casual suits and certain odd jackets because that configuration seemed less formal to me. But I hated (and still hate) the true-3, buttoned at the top with the the short lapel, because I think it makes me look wrapped in cloth.

It was actually a Savile Row tailor, the now-defunct Tobais, which made me my first 3 roll 2.5. It was a very heavy flannel blazer and the roll ended between the middle and top button. I don't recall asking them to do that but I liked the way it looked. This was 1995 or 6 I think. Later, when I was writing my book, I started to go into NYC department stores and pay very careful attention to what was being sold. This would have been the late ’90s/early ’00s. I noticed that all the high end Italian RTW SB coats were made like this. A couple of trips to Italy during which I paid careful attention to the clothes and visited many famous tailors confirmed for me that this was the preferred style of upper-end Italian dressers. I said as much in one my very early posts on Style Forum. Raphael later made me many coats in this style and subsequently so have the MA&SEBT™ and Solito.

Why do I like it? I guess I like the more “symmetrical” look of having three buttons rather than two. With the middle button fastened and then one above and one below not fastened the coat somehow looks at once more “complete” and more “relaxed.” It does not have the same “wrapped in cloth/stubby lapel” problem as the true-3, and I like the slightly narrower shirt-front “V” than the two button.

As to whether these coats are something distinct or not, I can only say that all of the tailors who have made them for me think that they are. Also, they all (with one exception) finish the top buttonhole on both sides, an indication that it is meant purely for show, not to be used, and that the underside is likely to be showing more than the topside. Actually, the first time I saw that detail was on Oxxford coats, which tend to be more in the BB style (hard roll to 2, as Vox would say). None of these tailors finsihes the underside of any of the other buttonholes.

As to why 3 and not 4 or 6 or 12—well, three looks nice and more would not. 3 is traditional for a modern (’30s and beyond) suit and more is not.

I don’t see why anyone would get worked up about a top show button but not care about the bottom. Hardly anyone buttons the bottom button on a two or three button coat (unless it is a hacking jacket and you are actually in the saddle). Yet non-used bottom buttons are ubiquitous. My coats are all cut so that they are not even meant to be buttoned. It can be done but it throws off the line of the coat badly. Still, I would miss it if it were not there because I like the way it looks. Same with the top on a 3 roll 2.5. I have never liked one button coats, except on a DJ.
post #53 of 84
I make 3, roll past the top button ( my new found, politically correct term) and my only complaint is how it disrupts/distorts the roll of the lapel because their is a buttonhole in the roll. If the buttonhole was more supple it would help but when they are made on both sides they get heavier and less flexible.
post #54 of 84
Thread Starter 
I have been liking them recently because I think they look better with a higher buttoning point. I am a bit heavy in the hips so the higher buttoning point, plus three buttons with a gracious roll balances my hips more and creates more of a vertical line. Solitos stuff, plus that first suit Raphael did for aportnoy was a big eye opener.
post #55 of 84
Quote:
It does not have the same “wrapped in cloth/stubby lapel” problem as the true-3, and I like the slightly narrower shirt-front “V” than the two button.

That is pretty immaterial as to the number of buttons. You can get the same roll without the top (non working anyway) button.

If you like the look of an extra buttonhole that's fine, I just get 2 button and ask for a higher throat.
post #56 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH View Post

I have been liking them recently because I think they look better with a higher buttoning point. I am a bit heavy in the hips so the higher buttoning point, plus three buttons with a gracious roll balances my hips more and creates more of a vertical line. Solitos stuff, plus that first suit Raphael did for aportnoy was a big eye opener.

that's independent of the number of buttons too. The working button can be set where it works for you regardless of the number of buttons.
post #57 of 84
Thread Starter 
Yes, but it doesn't always look balanced vertically.
post #58 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Despos View Post

I make 3, roll past the top button ( my new found, politically correct term) and my only complaint is how it disrupts/distorts the roll of the lapel because their is a buttonhole in the roll. If the buttonhole was more supple it would help but when they are made on both sides they get heavier and less flexible.

A stiff buttonhole, whether from the gimp or the double-sided finish or both, can be a problem. The suit I am wearing today has this problem and it is consequently one I am slightly less happy with.

Look, however it is made, I think this is a distinct style. A true 3 simply looks different, whether buttoned at the top or not. Even if you don’t button it, it will have a short lapel roll, the sides of the coat will lie flat on the chest up to the bottom of the roll, and the button and the top of the buttonhole will be clearly visible. I just don’t like this look.

By contrast, I very much like it when the roll goes past the top button, whether halfway past or all the way to the middle. And I like seeing that top button there. On these coats you cannot button that top button without throwing off the line of the jacket and creating an ugly crater in the chest. They are clearly cut not to be buttoned, just as the bottom button on a 2 (or 3) can’t be buttoned without pulling in the skirt and screwing everything up.

3 roll 2.5 may be a dumb term (I happen to think it is not) but dumb term or not the phenomenon is very real. Lots of tailors make this style of coat and I would argue that the entire high end RTW industry in Italy specializes in exactly this style. They are doing it on purpose.
post #59 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by yachtie View Post

Quote:
It does not have the same “wrapped in cloth/stubby lapel” problem as the true-3, and I like the slightly narrower shirt-front “V” than the two button.

That is pretty immaterial as to the number of buttons. You can get the same roll without the top (non working anyway) button.

If you like the look of an extra buttonhole that's fine, I just get 2 button and ask for a higher throat.

Actually, that is the way Shattuck cut my two buttons: with a high buttoning point and high roll to the lapel, but not as high as a true 3. It looks nice.

Still, I have come to like the 3rd button. I have toyed with the idea of adding a 3rd to my Shattuck coats, a la foo, but just have not bothered and probably never will. They are fine as they are.
post #60 of 84
me thinks 3 roll 2.5 more elegant/classy than 3 roll 2. I like the roll to be most pronounced well above the buttoning button. Even on a 2 button i want the roll to be 1 to 1.5" above the button. Looks better when buttoned.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › 3 roll 2.5 with peaked lapels