GoodWear vs Eastman

[Peter242]

Hi all, I’ve met a another forum member and had a chance to try some of his jackets.
He had a great collection with him - one was an A-2 (Monarch) made from GoodWear. What a dream of a jacket,

Wearing this jacket was fantastic and now I’ve got a question for the experts here.

My first A-2 was a Dubow made by 5Star - made from a heavier Goatskin. The next jacket was an used Eastman Roughwear 1401. This jacket is total light weight and the leather feels totally soft.

The A2 Monarch made from GoodWear now felt heavier and much more rigid.

Is the leather used by Eastman thinner/softer or is the difference more because the Eastman was used / older?
The cut of the 1401 has more room in the body - is this due to the difference in the historical patterns?

As the PreOwner of the Eastman could tell not tell me anything about the age of the jacket. Is there a chance to reckon the age of the age of the jacket. All tags inside of the pockets are removed

Here the pics of the GW

And here the pics of my Eastman

 

[B-Man2]

Peter
Nice looking jackets .. both of them!
Nice C2 sweater as well. Regarding the differences in the thickness and weight of the different jackets . If I remember correctly the original military A2 specs called for the A2 jackets to be in the 2.5 to 3 ounce thickness area. Consequently manufactures used hides in those ranges and occasionally lighter or thicker than those ranges . Current day makers are no different and while they try to accurately choose hides in the 2.5 to 3 Oz range, they often miss the mark either over or under those numbers . I hope that helps answer your question .
Cheers
Edit : I forgot the rest of your question .
The hides loosen and soften with wear. Jackets that are worn daily will soften over time and loosen up as well . Stiffness will disappear as the jacket starts to mold to your body .

 

[Silver Surfer]

ya gotta coupla nice ones there. ALL of the current repro a-2 makers use different hides at different times, as was done during wwll. gw used to use shinki hides almost exclusively, and now uses them and Italian sourced hides. aero has changed suppliers a few times over the years, as has elc. sometimes you can dat a repro makers a-2 by the hides used. I happen to like the variation between makers and their hides,. heavier hides require a little more break in time, but when they break in, they are seriously kickass. and, with lotsa wear time your repro a-2 will become like a second skin, as it will take on your body shape due to your body movement. the trick is to just wear em....alot.

 

[entertainment]

This is just my opinion, and I would welcome the input of others. But I definitely think that Good Wear has been trending toward somewhat thinner and more flexible hides over the years. The Italian horsehide that Silver Surfer mentions is definitely much more flexible and soft than Shinki, so there is less break in. I am not sure if it is actually thinner, but it feels that way. The only way to tell is with a caliper and I am away from my jackets at the moment. I only have experience with one ELC jacket, but it was somewhat stiff. Although I think the horsehide is from the same Italian tannery that Good Wear uses. The characteristics all depend on the tanning process and what the jacket maker requests, although some tanneries allow more input than others.

 

[mulceber]

Some nice jackets there. The three main horsehide tanneries in the world are Shinki in Japan, Victoria in Italy, and Horween in the US. Good Wear uses all three of them, and I think John's preference has recently been Horween. Victoria also supplies Aero (Vicenza) and Platon. Up until recently they supplied Eastman as well, but I think Eastman changed suppliers in the last year(?). And as Burt and others have said, weight and pliability of these leathers depend on a number of factors, among them thickness and the amount of abuse the jacket has seen.

 

[MaydayWei]

Good god. What the hell are you doing man?
Buy the damned Goodwear!
Finding one in your size that is your style is difficult enough! Just pull the trigger!

 

[MikeyB-17]

Not sure if the GW is for sale? The differences in body room are indeed due to the variations in pattern between the manufacturers-each maker had their own style and way of construction. Monarch were known for a trimmer torso, whereas RW’s had a roomier body (have a look at GW’s website, where John outlines the fit characteristics of each contract he reproduces). That having been said, ELC used to have a tendency to make their jackets pretty roomy, and I have heard it said that they kept an ELC-shaped body and just changed the collars/pocket flaps etc, according to the contract-not sure how true that is. I see the ELC has a Crown zip-not sure when they started using those, but that would give you some idea as to when it was made. If you emailed them I’m sure they’d tell you.

 

[ausreenactor]

Go on the finished product in front of you and the price... consider the second hand GWs strongly.

 

[Brettafett]

Lovely jackets...
Ive had both types. Owned too many ELC RWs to count...

Second all the above.
ELCs hides have become slightly thinner over the years, just using different suppliers perhaps. My GW Monarch (Shinki) was a touch thicker/ heavier than my current Warhorse ELC Monarch, both totally accurate for wartime hides, 1.1 to 1.3mm thick (?)
Then again, you'll find originals all over, from quite thin to quite rigid and thick. Also depending on if it was hh, goat or cow etc...
(I was surprised how thin my goat ELC M-422A felt also, but almost identical to an original FO M-422A I once owned - Surprisingly my 2019 AVI 'Bronco' goat is the same thickness and weight as my ELC M-422A was, but lacking the character and hues...

RWs tend to be a touch boxier in the body than Monarchs (but not always•••), depends on the size. They are quite different as A-2s go.

Patterns have also changed a bit overt the years.
My fist ELC RW 27752 was back in 2002/3, my first ELC RW 1401 was back in 2005. Hides and patterns were quite different back then, and I'd second Mikey's points above.
ELC's pattern's definitely improved since then. The one you're wearing looks more recent, that slightly 'lighter' hide Ive seen before and the pattern looks more 'correct'.

John has also recently tweaked some of his patterns, incl his Monarch and RW1401... and some others. Not that they were incorrect before, far from it, only that he came into possession of more originals to scrutinise.
As originals also varied slightly, he has found some nuances he prefers and has elected to 'update' his patterns to reflect such. Brilliant.
(•••He had recently acquired another original RW1401 that is slightly trimmer in the torso, and this is the current RW1401 pattern he offers).

 

[Peter242]

Not sure if the GW is for sale? The differences in body room are indeed due to the variations in pattern between the manufacturers-each maker had their own style and way of construction. Monarch were known for a trimmer torso, whereas RW’s had a roomier body (have a look at GW’s website, where John outlines the fit characteristics of each contract he reproduces). That having been said, ELC used to have a tendency to make their jackets pretty roomy, and I have heard it said that they kept an ELC-shaped body and just changed the collars/pocket flaps etc, according to the contract-not sure how true that is. I see the ELC has a Crown zip-not sure when they started using those, but that would give you some idea as to when it was made. If you emailed them I’m sure they’d tell you.

No - the GW wasn’t for sale….meanwhile I’ve read about the two styles and as you sad - the RW is a boxier cut than the Monarch which is shaped more like a upside down triangle. So this explains the difference in style and the feeling wearing those jackets.

 

[Peter242]

Lovely jackets...
Ive had both types. Owned too many ELC RWs to count...

Second all the above.
ELCs hides have become slightly thinner over the years, just using different suppliers perhaps. My GW Monarch (Shinki) was a touch thicker/ heavier than my current Warhorse ELC Monarch, both totally accurate for wartime hides, 1.1 to 1.3mm thick (?)
Then again, you'll find originals all over, from quite thin to quite rigid and thick. Also depending on if it was hh, goat or cow etc...
(I was surprised how thin my goat ELC M-422A felt also, but almost identical to an original FO M-422A I once owned - Surprisingly my 2019 AVI 'Bronco' goat is the same thickness and weight as my ELC M-422A was, but lacking the character and hues...

RWs tend to be a touch boxier in the body than Monarchs (but not always•••), depends on the size. They are quite different as A-2s go.

Patterns have also changed a bit overt the years.
My fist ELC RW 27752 was back in 2002/3, my first ELC RW 1401 was back in 2005. Hides and patterns were quite different back then, and I'd second Mikey's points above.
ELC's pattern's definitely improved since then. The one you're wearing looks more recent, that slightly 'lighter' hide Ive seen before and the pattern looks more 'correct'.

John has also recently tweaked some of his patterns, incl his Monarch and RW1401... and some others. Not that they were incorrect before, far from it, only that he came into possession of more originals to scrutinise.
As originals also varied slightly, he has found some nuances he prefers and has elected to 'update' his patterns to reflect such. Brilliant.
(•••He had recently acquired another original RW1401 that is slightly trimmer in the torso, and this is the current RW1401 pattern he offers).

Thanks Brett. I’ve began a bit to worry if the Eastman is faked because the leather was so much thinner than the GW. As the monarch doesn’t belong to me- I can’t check the thickness but after the holidays I will get a calliper and check the thickness of RW 1401. But don’t get me wrong I like the style and leather of my Eastman. I just was surprised by the difference between those two leathers as bove are horsehides.

 

[johnwayne]

Was expecting this thread to be a debate over which maker is best - God, that could have gone on forever! I’ve never been too bothered or really even considered the weight/thickness of hides in any of my jackets just more concerned about its fit first and then accuracy to it’s original if a repro but fit only with an original!! My GW Doniger 44” feels considerably lighter than my late 80’s ELC ‘house’ 42” and by far a nicer, sharper and better fit. My original Dubow 44” is prob somewhere between the two but just having an original that fits is good enough for me!!!

 

[Brettafett]

Yes, after too many jackets to count, for me personally, fit has become the deciding factor.
If it fits well, I'll wear it and love wearing it... If not, it must move on to a new home, no matter who made it.

btw @johnwayne, Id love to know more about your Doniger. Is there a thread you've posted about it. The Doniger is currently the no.1 contender for my GW...

 

[johnwayne]

No thread as such but have said here numerous times how much I rate it!
Was after an A1 on GW’s sale page some years back now but JC said it prob wouldn’t be right having given him my measurements but the Doniger would be and when it arrived it felt perfect straight out of the box and still feels the same today!! I always liked the pointy collar on Doniger’s and comparing to an original a former member here has (Roughwear) I have to say we both agreed it was pretty damn as good as you could get!!!

 

[Peter242]

Was expecting this thread to be a debate over which maker is best - God, that could have gone on forever! I’ve never been too bothered or really even considered the weight/thickness of hides in any of my jackets just more concerned about its fit first and then accuracy to it’s original if a repro but fit only with an original!! My GW Doniger 44” feels considerably lighter than my late 80’s ELC ‘house’ 42” and by far a nicer, sharper and better fit. My original Dubow 44” is prob somewhere between the two but just having an original that fits is good enough for me!!!

Hi - I didn’t wanted to open a discussion about which maker is best. I even wouldn’t have the experience to do this - as I only had tested three different makers by myself. And more important- only one jacket per maker / contract. You’re right - the fit and the historical accuracy is also most important for me.
Now I’ve learned that I first should check the difference in the patterns and then look for the maker. To tell the truth - as I saw the used Eastman on sale in my size - I’ve just pulled the trigger. So I’m really grateful that it fits good. But - and that is worse - now I’ve got to look for a Monarch

 

[Brettafett]

What size are you Peter?

 

[Peter242]

What size are you Peter?

I’m 6 feet tall and I’ve got a 46 chest size

 

[Brettafett]

My ELC Monarch would have fit lengthwise, but its a 42+ chest

 

[entertainment]

Some nice jackets there. The three main horsehide tanneries in the world are Shinki in Japan, Victoria in Italy, and Horween in the US. Good Wear uses all three of them, and I think John's preference has recently been Horween. Victoria also supplies Aero (Vicenza) and Platon. Up until recently they supplied Eastman as well, but I think Eastman changed suppliers in the last year(?). And as Burt and others have said, weight and pliability of these leathers depend on a number of factors, among them thickness and the amount of abuse the jacket has seen.

I have the impression that John is favoring the horsehide from Victoria, but maybe that just has to do with the test jackets I see in my size. Jan, you probably know better than me! John also has some nice goatskin coming in from a new source that has really wonderful grain.

 

[Nickb123]

I admit this is really snobby…but I don’t feel ELC A-2s are quite there. The collars are off. Anyhow, I’m wearing one right now so take this point as you will!