Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Claghorn, Jan 6, 2014.
JL - i still like the 48 better.
Don...short answer is yes, it can. I read up on it quite a bit in the tailors thread and have had good results when I decided that's what needed to be done...with the concurrence of my tailor. If the fabric cut is minimal, the effect on the balance will be near unnoticeable...IMO. I won't even attempt to go into details because I'm not an expert on the matter....check out the tailors thread and see what Despos and OTC had to say.
I have a preference for the 48 which IMO is a fantastic fit pre-alterations. Length is spot on for both sizes IMO - I would not go shorter. Pear-shape issue is completely gone with the new picture angle. I find both sizes quite flattering on you but the sleeves on the 50 just look too full. Re: collar, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that not much of the shirt collar height is showing above the jacket collar? I think that's primarily because your shirt collar isn't buttoned up so you're not getting the full collar band height there. Try to button (with a tie) and look again. Finally, yes of course you can let out the waist a little if you're looking for a bit more comfort - rule of thumb is whether you can comfortably slip your hand and get something in your inside chest pocket. I wouldn't let out too much because I like the S shape of the back in the profile picture right now and you don't want to lose too much of that shaping.
yeah, the sleeves on the 50 kill it for me.
Me too...other than that, I think the 50 looks pretty damn good.
Thanks. It's no big deal, just something I've been thinking of when I'm at my tailor. Usually no more than 1-2 cm is being lifted, so I guess it's indeed unnoticable in general.
I agree for AJL. It was the same for me between the 48 and 50 fits as far as I can remember now. Also looking at my old pics I had the same issue - the fullness of the size 50 sleeves on me just didn't work.
Where art thou, 50r?
but the 48 is better, yes?
AJL, have you seen sotiris' fits? if so, the above should settle your quandary. if not, have a look.
The 48 in blue looks better.
Does it feel tight in any way?
What is your chest circumference and what's the P2P on the jacket? I like about a 2-3 inch difference. ([P2P x 2] - chest circumference)
I have seen, and they are pretty darn spiffy. Between you, Murl & Sotiris, y'all make a pretty good visual case for the Formosa fit.
So collective agreement is the sleeves of the 50 are a deal killer, which I agree with, and that in most other aspects the 48 is a better fit as well, with some minor dissension. Add the fact that I might let out the waist a touch for comfort, and I'm good. The only remaining piece for me is the length issue, though most of you seem to feel the regular length is good. I'm just accustomed to a jacket length of 29" or so, which was instilled in me some years ago, possibly to make my legs appear a bit longer (I'm 5' 7", so not tall). Perhaps a comparison pic w/ shorter jacket might be instructive?
Btw, fit pics above also feature Rota linen trews (which are terrific), so pretty well NMWA'd out.
AJL, the regular length looks great. I agree with Greg, don't go shorter. Those Rota look like they are a perfect fit! I still haven't grab a pair, but plan on it sooner or later...probably sooner.
So, of the SF members, @Sotiris @AJL @Murlsquirl and I have the same suit?
@Murlsquirl must have a big grin on his face with the way the fit has turned out for him.
I'll say it one more time - with zero vested interest since I'm indifferent to you ordering short or regular - that length looks great on those pictures. If you have someone measure you (with shoes on) from BOC to floor - half of that measure (+/- 1-1.5") is your ideal jacket length
My chest circumference is approx 39", and according to NMWA the jacket p2p is 41.7", so this would fall pretty squarely within your preferred ratio.
Separate names with a comma.