SPIER & MACKAY - Official Affiliate Thread

[JTrent82]

Do their trousers have buttons for braces? None of my SM pants do.

Sadly they do not. I have to have them added if I want them.

 

[An Acute Style]

Received my recent MTM order for a green Harris Tweed herringbone I tried to style in an ivy look. Here is the configuration & customizations:
- Neapolitan, Low Gorge, Narrow (3.5") lapels (Maybe the first person to ever do a low gorge with narrow lapels combo?)
- Add flaps to hip patch pockets
- Add swelled edges
- Only two buttons total on each sleeve (functional), with a space between them
- No spalla camicia at shoulder >> however, this was not honored; jacket has shirring at the sleeve head, maybe they can't do a neapolitan without that feature?
- Size is 43 Long, only difference from default measurements is shortened sleeves.

Background: I previously did two different MTM SCs with the same 43L measurements as this tweed, which turned out great. However they were using the standard SC block. I tried this neapolitan specifically to get a lower gorge (I really dislike a high gorge).

Thoughts on fit: Jacket wears slimmer and shorter than I expected, moreso than the same measurements on the standard SC block. Some of the slimness could be from the thickness of harris tweed fabric. But also, the Neapolitan cut has a higher button point and more open quarters, which I think gives the sense of a shorter jacket due the large open triangle under the middle button. The pics probably exaggerate this aspect due to the sagging jeans as well as the jacket lifted due to holding up my phone, but still, it's an issue I don't love. Makes it feel slightly 2010s slim fit, which is not what I'm going for. (Maybe I could let out the waist 0.75" or finally lose those 6-7lbs, it might help the quarters sit more full/closed.) If I did another neapolitian, I'd lengthen it a little and add a bit more space in the waist.

Thoughts on style: The body fit of the neapolitan block really doesn't translate to a Brook Brothers/Southwick ivy look. But that's fine, I kinda predicted that might be the case and my goal wasn't some exact repro of vintage. I just wanted certain ivy features in a jacket that fits nice overall. Wish they were able to honor my request for no spalla camicia, but that's still not even a huge deal for me. I think I am in the minority on SF for liking the standard SC block better than neapolitan...I guess my ideal would be a standard SC low gorge option. However, the main ivy styling points were a success...I like the lapels (gorge height is perfect IMO, and still not particularly low by historical norms, 3.5" width, and swelled edges), the two buttons on sleeve were executed well, and hip patch pockets with flaps look good.

Looks like a nice jacket. It is way to short for ivy style IMO. My vintage ivy jackets are among my longest. They fall well below my crotch.

If possible, you should specify the button spacing on the jacket. Most ivy jackets have a 5-6 inch spacing of the buttons. I think S&M spacing is around 4 inches.

 

[JayDee90]

New linen POW shirt

View attachment 2132073 View attachment 2132075

Did you find these fit more blouse-y than the same size dress shirt (typical based on previous years)?

 

[alkydrinker]

Looks like a nice jacket. It is way to short for ivy style IMO. My vintage ivy jackets are among my longest. They fall well below my crotch.

If possible, you should specify the button spacing on the jacket. Most ivy jackets have a 5-6 inch spacing of the buttons. I think S&M spacing is around 4 inches.

Agreed on looks short for classic ivy, that was in my self critique. Adding to that short feeling, I also think something just looks somehow small in the bottom half of this neapolitan jacket. Something in the overall cut, balance, stance, design, idk. Today I looked closer at various pics of other ppl wearing S&M neapolitan jackets on the web, and I do see a similar lower-half-smallness on some of them. Ofc, it will depend on your build and how you size.

I have a hey-day ivy vintage Brooks 3/2 tweed blazer size 43L which appears on the edge of too long on me. It measures 31 7/8 down the center back, from the base of collar. This S&M tweed measures 31 1/8 down the center back, from base of collar. (my specified length was 31.75, but I guess S&M measures from top of shoulder, not center back which dips down at the collar—if I knew that I probably would've bumped up body length). So that's 3/4" inch difference in back length, which is not insignificant, but the vintage Brooks just looks so much longer and fuller in the bottom half. Perhaps moreso than the length difference would suggest?

EDIT: Added pic of comparison of 43L vintage BB and 43L S&M neapolitan. You can see my thumb knuckle doesn't line up all that higher on the S&M jacket, yet it looks so much shorter/smaller at the skirt. Now, I'm not sure there's a huge point in comparing a vintage BB to a S&M neapolitan jacket as again, I wasn't expecting them to magically look the same because I styled the lapels, sleeve buttons, and pockets similarly. I guess I'm just exploring this idea of the neapolitan jacket looking a bit small in the lower half for improvements in future commissions. Furthermore, I guess at the end of the day, it's probably just a matter of going longer as well as wider in the waist if I want a more classic/vintage fit.

 

[dapperclassic]

Agreed on looks short for classic ivy, that was in my self critique. Adding to that short feeling, I also think something just looks somehow small in the bottom half of this neapolitan jacket. Something in the overall cut, balance, stance, design, idk. Today I looked closer at various pics of other ppl wearing S&M neapolitan jackets on the web, and I do see a similar lower-half-smallness on some of them. Ofc, it will depend on your build and how you size.

I have a hey-day ivy vintage Brooks 3/2 tweed blazer size 43L which appears on the edge of too long on me. It measures 31 7/8 down the center back, from the base of collar. This S&M tweed measures 31 1/8 down the center back, from base of collar. (my specified length was 31.75, but I guess S&M measures from top of shoulder, not center back which dips down at the collar—if I knew that I probably would've bumped up body length). So that's 3/4" inch difference in back length, which is not insignificant, but the vintage Brooks just looks so much longer and fuller in the bottom half. Perhaps moreso than the length difference would suggest?

EDIT: Added pic of comparison of 43L vintage BB and 43L S&M neapolitan. You can see my thumb knuckle doesn't line up all that higher on the S&M jacket, yet it looks so much shorter/smaller at the skirt. Now, I'm not sure there's a huge point in comparing a vintage BB to a S&M neapolitan jacket as again, I wasn't expecting them to magically look the same because I styled the lapels, sleeve buttons, and pockets similarly. I guess I'm just exploring this idea of the neapolitan jacket looking a bit small in the lower half for improvements in future commissions. Furthermore, I guess at the end of the day, it's probably just a matter of going longer as well as wider in the waist if I want a more classic/vintage fit.

Have you checked that it actually measures on spec or not?

The lower button stance on a 'L' size and neo cut in general can give the illusion of a shorter jacket, when in reality it is not.

 

[dapperclassic]

IIRC, Betel and Wil have relatively lean legs?

@dapperclassic I think is one with thick thighs. IIRC, I'm not sure his trousers are even S&M?

I'd be curious to know what he wears ITT.

I still have some RTW S&M contemporary fit trousers (sold quite a few pairs off), although they are not my favourites they still work ok. For my current preferences they need an extra 0.5-0.75" on the half measurement throughout the full leg (thigh, knee and leg opening) plus more front and back rise. That said, I would not consider them to be slim or unwearable by any means, and certainly nothing like the latest model pics posted on their website.

For the record, I did try a size up on the FW23 season high rise contemporary, aside from the waist being huge (as expected) they were in fact too big everywhere else. I did hear that the cut was revised for FW23 so perhaps they are indeed now fuller and a size up isn't needed.

 

[losrockets]

@alkydrinker Overall it looks good but I can sympathize about the issues w/ execution. My most recent MTM turned out shorter and w a higher buttoning point than my other ones and I'm really not sure how to chalk that up to any minor changes I made to my existing pattern. They executed the hip pockets w/ flaps and swelled edges better for you than they did me, but I don't think I was specific enough about my ask (I too went for a herringbone tweed, M&E to be precise, in the Neo cut). I'm actually pretty turned off from MTM due to issues w/ a few recent orders and I'm sticking w/ RTW since the updated Neo cut seems to work well enough for me.

 

[DapperPhilly]

Did you find these fit more blouse-y than the same size dress shirt (typical based on previous years)?

Maybe a tad more blouse-y. I did notice that washing cold and drying on medium-high heat they (bought two) didn't appear to shrink.
I have two small gripes.
1. The sleeves could be a bit slimmer
2. I wish the overall shirt was shorter. I am 5'11 and the tail still goes below my rear by about 2" making it looks too sloppy untucked.
I might have one altered to be worn untucked with no tail.
The material is nice and soft.

I would add that for $34 I really have no right to complain.

 

[A12321]

Agreed on looks short for classic ivy, that was in my self critique. Adding to that short feeling, I also think something just looks somehow small in the bottom half of this neapolitan jacket. Something in the overall cut, balance, stance, design, idk. Today I looked closer at various pics of other ppl wearing S&M neapolitan jackets on the web, and I do see a similar lower-half-smallness on some of them. Ofc, it will depend on your build and how you size.

I have a hey-day ivy vintage Brooks 3/2 tweed blazer size 43L which appears on the edge of too long on me. It measures 31 7/8 down the center back, from the base of collar. This S&M tweed measures 31 1/8 down the center back, from base of collar. (my specified length was 31.75, but I guess S&M measures from top of shoulder, not center back which dips down at the collar—if I knew that I probably would've bumped up body length). So that's 3/4" inch difference in back length, which is not insignificant, but the vintage Brooks just looks so much longer and fuller in the bottom half. Perhaps moreso than the length difference would suggest?

EDIT: Added pic of comparison of 43L vintage BB and 43L S&M neapolitan. You can see my thumb knuckle doesn't line up all that higher on the S&M jacket, yet it looks so much shorter/smaller at the skirt. Now, I'm not sure there's a huge point in comparing a vintage BB to a S&M neapolitan jacket as again, I wasn't expecting them to magically look the same because I styled the lapels, sleeve buttons, and pockets similarly. I guess I'm just exploring this idea of the neapolitan jacket looking a bit small in the lower half for improvements in future commissions. Furthermore, I guess at the end of the day, it's probably just a matter of going longer as well as wider in the waist if I want a more classic/vintage fit.

Every 0.25" counts (giggity). But in all seriousness, it does matter and can affect the overall proportions. In your case, a 0.75" difference in length will definitely shift things around. From your photos though, it looks like your BB jacket has a higher buttoning point than the Neo. This will make a huge difference in how the lower half looks - even if the buttoning point is higher by just 0.5".

I would also add that I agree with you on the Neo looking short for it's true length. If you compare the size guide for S&M's Neo and other fits, you will see that the Neo's are cut longer by 0.5" to compensate for the open quarters giving off a shorter look.

This is the main reason I also went with MTM. Their Neo cut is too short for me in S, and a drop too long for me in R. So instead of buying RTW and paying $150+ on alterations, I went MTM with the hopes of getting a finished, real ready to wear product.

I got my order in about 3 weeks and most of my requests were followed correctly. The jacket came out a drop bigger than my other S&M Neo RTW suits, especially in shoulders even though I did not change that measurement.

The trousers, which I made very minor adjustments from the 32-cont, came out with a lot of issues and needed about $60 in local alterations to fix. The QC was not good on the trousers and I expected better.

I did place a new order recently with some minor changes from my first order. Hopefully the issues will resolve.

 

[mhip]

I have ordered the new t-shirts.
Same size, same color. One 2-ply, one modal.
I'm going to do an in depth comparison of which is best, which will involve standing in front of a mirror and saying..."hmmmm"

 

[XxLogo]

I have ordered the new t-shirts.
Same size, same color. One 2-ply, one modal.
I'm going to do an in depth comparison of which is best, which will involve standing in front of a mirror and saying..."hmmmm"

I am tempted to try them, so looking forward to the review. Can you also see if the front neck seam is secured so it doesn’t bulge after a wash cycle and stays down? That’s my main reason for wanting new ones…

 

[spacenegroes]

Thinking of buying my first S&M suit, but unfortunately I'm in the UK, so exchanges and returns are a big hit. Wondering if people have general sizing comparisons to share with the only suits I own, JCrew Ludlow?

I'm quite slim/V-shaped - I fit pretty well into Ludlow 36R, especially at the waist - there is a slight bit of lapel gape and small shoulder divots, so I assume my chest is slightly too big for that size.

For S&M I fit very well into their 15/34 Extra Slim shirts if tucked in, and pretty well into the Slim shirts if I'm after a more casual fit. Untucked the Extra Slim come out noticeably wide at the hips so they look a bit silly. I'm 6'0 and about 165 lbs.

I'm not opposed to some alterations up to maybe £150; I just don't want to have to return the whole thing and waste that amount in shipping and duties for nothing.

Thanks in advance.

 

[JTrent82]

Thinking of buying my first S&M suit, but unfortunately I'm in the UK, so exchanges and returns are a big hit. Wondering if people have general sizing comparisons to share with the only suits I own, JCrew Ludlow?

I'm quite slim/V-shaped - I fit pretty well into Ludlow 36R, especially at the waist - there is a slight bit of lapel gape and small shoulder divots, so I assume my chest is slightly too big for that size.

For S&M I fit very well into their 15/34 Extra Slim shirts if tucked in, and pretty well into the Slim shirts if I'm after a more casual fit. Untucked the Extra Slim come out noticeably wide at the hips so they look a bit silly. I'm 6'0 and about 165 lbs.

I'm not opposed to some alterations up to maybe £150; I just don't want to have to return the whole thing and waste that amount in shipping and duties for nothing.

Thanks in advance.

It sounds to me like you're wearing the Ludlow a size too small. You should be primarily looking for a good fit in the chest and shoulders for an OTR jacket- any alterations tailor can take in the waist easily. I'm almost your weight but four inches shorter and I feel most comfortable in a 40R contemporary, but I can also wear a 38R. I suggest you get an accurate chest measurement on yourself. If you're between sizes, size up. And remember, a jacket isn't supposed to fit like a glove, it's supposed to fit like a jacket.

 

[spacenegroes]

It sounds to me like you're wearing the Ludlow a size too small. You should be primarily looking for a good fit in the chest and shoulders for an OTR jacket- any alterations tailor can take in the waist easily. I'm almost your weight but four inches shorter and I feel most comfortable in a 40R contemporary, but I can also wear a 38R. I suggest you get an accurate chest measurement on yourself. If you're between sizes, size up. And remember, a jacket isn't supposed to fit like a glove, it's supposed to fit like a jacket.

Height and weight numbers are, in my experience, not great to draw conclusions about someone's size. Everybody's weight is distributed differently. I've tried out 38R in Ludlow and it's definitely too big for me, even when I'm at my bulkiest. Here's me in 36R Ludlow (fairly slim currently, so you don't see the shoulder divots, but you can sort of see the lapels buckling a bit):

 

[JTrent82]

Height and weight numbers are, in my experience, not great to draw conclusions about someone's size. Everybody's weight is distributed differently. I've tried out 38R in Ludlow and it's definitely too big for me, even when I'm at my bulkiest. Here's me in 36R Ludlow (fairly slim currently, so you don't see the shoulder divots, but you can sort of see the lapels buckling a bit):

View attachment 2133735

View attachment 2133729
View attachment 2133731

I mean it looks pretty good to me, but I would be concerned if the lapel was bowing at all while at a resting stance, because it's going to be even more noticeable in motion. If you're happy with the fit,though, just take measurements on that jacket and compare to S&M's size charts. They're *fairly* accurate. Sorry I can't be more helpful, I had a different body the last time I wore the Ludlow.