or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Official Vintage Clothing and Accessories Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Official Vintage Clothing and Accessories Thread - Page 13

post #181 of 1150
Thought I'd jump on this vintage Polo thing. Here's mine, same tag as you Wes. Full tweed suit, double green and red windowpane, flat front trousers with a 2" cuff. icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
AppleMark

AppleMark
AppleMark
And this one has had me stumped for quite awhile. Dormeuil MTM or Bespoke? The styling screams swinging 60's to me but I'm not too knowledgeable on the subject. Dual vented working cuffs with iridescent blue buttons.
AppleMark

AppleMark
And I picked this up for my wife yesterday. BB cashmere topcoat, dated (if I'm reading S Allen P's tag correctly) also from 1962, belt back with large MOP buttons. Sorry for the crappy pics, it really needs a good cleaning and pressing.
AppleMark
AppleMark

post #182 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by eazye View Post



And this one has had me stumped for quite awhile. Dormeuil MTM or Bespoke? The styling screams swinging 60's to me but I'm not too knowledgeable on the subject. Dual vented working cuffs with iridescent blue buttons.
AppleMark




 

Was this made in H.K.? I had one similar last year. Spectacular Dormeuil fabric, all the tailoring extras.

post #183 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by s_allen_p View Post

All three of these were at some point posted to the Thrift Store Bragging thread as well.

1939 NOS Edwin Clapp Boots w/ receipt. My Dad pulled these out of a box in the closet when I showed him a picture of a pair of Aldens I had just ordered. They were apparently owned by a pair of wealth aunts in Nebraska. No one knows whey they had a pair of unworn men's boots as neither ever married. Too narrow to fit me unfortunately.

Note that the receipt advertisX-Ray Fittedtted".
]

The xray fitting thing was all the rage up till the 50s. My mom had her feet xrayed at the store multiple times as a child. She had cancer twice frown.gif
post #184 of 1150
Thank you for the info and dating. I've read that Americans feet have grown over the decades due to weight and diet, but I'm pretty skinny, and my 8D foot couldn't even partially pry their way into those. There was a pair of women's boots as well that were so small and narrow I can't imagine the size of the original owner.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post

The receipt says 1938 actually but in truth - from the look of the heels and that black treatment to the instep and that they are probably kangaroo (hence not dried out like calf that age would be) - I would place them as made in the very late 20s/early30s for manufacture purposes.

They may have already been on the shelf or in a depository when they were purchased.

Isshi might like to chime in here but the whole vibe of those shoes is more 20s than late 30s to me.

What intrigues me to this day is that people in the USA (un)commonly had AA or AAA width feet. People were thinner of course in the Depression with no excess weight but eBay vintage websites to this day are full of unbought AAs and AAAs and B fittings.

Of course why you still have them was (as Jelly Roll Morton) once commented the ideal footwear was a pair of Edwin Clapp boots.

Interestingly on that point a person on eBay not long ago sold a pair of boots from a house damaged in Hurricane Katrina which had been possibly left behind by Jelly Roll Morton - a previous tenant. I am killing myself I did not buy them on a whim.

Hopefully I was correct in my research at dating my earlier BB coat. I'm trying to remember how I original came to the conclusion that the number on the tag was the year it was made. I feel like someone messaged me, but can't find the message.

[/quote]And I picked this up for my wife yesterday. BB cashmere topcoat, dated (if I'm reading S Allen P's tag correctly) also from 1962, belt back with large MOP buttons. Sorry for the crappy pics, it really needs a good cleaning and pressing.
post #185 of 1150
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by s_allen_p View Post

dated (if I'm reading S Allen P's tag correctly) also from 1962

I didnt know thats how you date those old BB tags. Thats useful, thank you!
post #186 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpooPoker View Post

I didnt know thats how you date those old BB tags. Thats useful, thank you!

I'd hate to be the source of misinformation, so, I've contacted BB to make sure what I was told is in fact true. easye is basing his date off a earlier coat I dated based on someone telling me the a number on the tag referred to the date. I figured if that was wrong this is the place I'd be corrected. Now that It's being referenced as truth, I'd like to confirm with BB.
post #187 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post

What intrigues me to this day is that people in the USA (un)commonly had AA or AAA width feet. People were thinner of course in the Depression with no excess weight but eBay vintage websites to this day are full of unbought AAs and AAAs and B fittings.

When I read this the other day it sparked a thought...

I'm just finishing up a biography of John D. Rockefeller (Titan, by Ron Chernow - I highly recommend it). Anyway, it talks a little about how the Rockefeller Foundation funded widespread initiatives during the 1920s to eradicate hookworm from the US, particularly in the deep south. Millions were positively affected. One of the negative effects of having hookworm is being physically underdeveloped and not just a little, but a lot. I wonder if there's some sort of correlation between the great amount of physically underdeveloped people during that period and the plethora of narrow shoes.
post #188 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by FaceOfBoh View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post

What intrigues me to this day is that people in the USA (un)commonly had AA or AAA width feet. People were thinner of course in the Depression with no excess weight but eBay vintage websites to this day are full of unbought AAs and AAAs and B fittings.

When I read this the other day it sparked a thought...

I'm just finishing up a biography of John D. Rockefeller (Titan, by Ron Chernow - I highly recommend it). Anyway, it talks a little about how the Rockefeller Foundation funded widespread initiatives during the 1920s to eradicate hookworm from the US, particularly in the deep south. Millions were positively affected. One of the negative effects of having hookworm is being physically underdeveloped and not just a little, but a lot. I wonder if there's some sort of correlation between the great amount of physically underdeveloped people during that period and the plethora of narrow shoes.

 

Interesting.  AA and AAA are indeed quite narrow, even for me.  I am someone who recently purchased some new-in-box deadstock Hanover chukka's in narrow widths, 9B and 9.5A, which I can squeeze into.  The 9.5A pair are L.B. Sheppard's, which means they are not new, but not depression-era old either.  There were other pairs in AA and AAA that obviously weren't sold then (I think in the 60's) and will likely never be sold to someone intending to wear them (except maybe a large-footed woman? Ebay suggestions for bras and bikinis popping up for my purchase seem to indicate so...).  But, for those of us today who have slim, low-volume feet, it's a vintage quality footwear feeding frenzy! Of course deadstock calfskin is a chore to restore...  Oh, and for reference I'm about 5'9" and 135-140lbs.

For the record, I do suspect a strong correlation between physically underdeveloped people and the narrow shoes.  Unfortunately, there are probably also colluding variables such as the fact that people today are overfed on processed foods that may come from livestock fed hormones and antibiotics.  Also, I wonder how many people in the developed world today (in the US especially) never wore heavily cushioned shoes when growing up.  [side note: UK sizing rarely uses a combination last, unlike in the US, indicating less forefoot splay]  I have noticed my shoe size shrink in both length and width (though not girth) since changing my running style and wearing almost exclusively heeled leather-soled shoes, and UK sizing is definitely better for me.  I'm pretty sure undeveloped foot and lower-leg muscles in today's developed world may contribute additionally to splayed feet due to atrophy.  I doubt also that most of today's fine footwear consumers have relied on walking or running as a primary means of transportation throughout their development; some people walk a bit in cities, but I wonder about the compared mileage, especially in non-cushioned shoes.  Many factors, of which I suspect malnutrition is a big one.  However, it would be interesting to learn how whatever physical afflictions might affect development of the bones and the muscles/tendons/ligaments/fat separately, as a narrow width indicates a foot that has grown in length to normal proportions (developed bones of the foot) whilst being low in girth (?).

Anyway, sorry for digressing, and for a less-than-eloquent post from a late night.  Nutrition and foot mechanics naturally interest me as a runner.

post #189 of 1150
Those Clapps are wonderful. Back then lasts had very contoured ankles, this leads to a better fit along with an interesting look. Thanks for sharing.
post #190 of 1150
Is it possible selection bias is at play? Maybe the very narrow shoes are over represented because those are the one that didn't sell as well?
post #191 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by sagitar View Post

I picked this up yesterday at a thrift store.  Looks like both these jackets are from the same person really rich, nice and with no defects.  Looks like its been well maintained.  There are no brand or size tags but it fits me perfectly, so I think its 44R.  The union tag places these jackets somewhere between 1962 to 1976 probably the later years as the tag # is in black color.






Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

these are great
post #192 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by s_allen_p View Post

All three of

NOS French Military Winter Issue Pants - I was hoping they were WW1 era, but I took them into Mister Freedom and the owner dated them WW2. The wooden buttons are fun.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

wow. how's the fit?
post #193 of 1150
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThinkDerm View Post

wow. how's the fit?

My guess is theres about a 15" rise on those pants.
post #194 of 1150
heres a cool vintage cashmere sport coat i found last week. it fits great so id guess it to be a 44r. Just need to figure out how to pull this off.


post #195 of 1150

This is gorgeous by any standard. The tweed hacking jacket and matching waistcoat is very contemporary, I've a RL Rugby in herringbone  but this is better. Why choose cotton ...if you can find silk?

 

Akco is a vintage British brand that I rate very highly, probably 1950s onwards, judging on their square cut bow ties. I collect their stuff where-ever I can, I've a really nice moleskin waistcoat with 7-mirror buttons from them.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Official Vintage Clothing and Accessories Thread