Dubow Zipper Tape

[ZuZu]

So I was looking at the "What's new" section and I saw that someone posted a pic of a Buzz Rickson Dubow. It is a beautiful jacket but it has an incorrect detail I thought I'd point out. On original non-collar-stand Dubows the zipper tape is sewn all the way up the inside of the windflap and actually dives into the intersection of collar/windflap/neckhole. Here are a few examples:

On the Buzz Rickson Dubow the zipper tape is actually folded over before it reaches the top of the windflap- like an Aero and other contracts:

 

[ZuZu]

Other repro makers get the zipper pretty much right but still they don't capture the look of the originals:


Bill Kelso:

Platon:

5*

Lost Worlds is diffident- they kind of just let the zip tape kind of disappear:

 

[ZuZu]

There is but one guy making jackets who understands the whole Dubow zipper- you know...

Good Wear jackets look right because he also gets the other characteristic which Dubow zips have- the zipper tape itself is put in really wide compared to most other original makers.

 

[mulceber]

Great observation! I had not noticed that. It looks like Buzz has the right idea regarding the width of the zipper tape, but then falls down when it comes to joining the tape to the collar.

 

[ZuZu]

Great observation! I had not noticed that. It looks like Buzz has the right idea regarding the width of the zipper tape, but then falls down when it comes to joining the tape to the collar.

Sometimes (often) the zipper tape on the non-windflap side is also very wide comparatively.

 

[ZuZu]

I have a photo of a civilian Dubow with a late 40's Crown zipper and it has normal tape width. They figured it wasn't appropriate for commercial jackets? Who knows...

 

[Brettafett]

Good shout. My Platon and BK Dubow have a decent representation of this detail...

 

[mulceber]

I have a photo of a civilian Dubow with a late 40's Crown zipper and it has normal tape width. They figured it wasn't appropriate for commercial jackets? Who knows...


View attachment 86989

I wonder if it was an attempt to save a little bit (and I mean A LITTLE BIT) of leather, since the leather they were provided was all they had.

 

[jeffrey thurston]

I wonder if it was an attempt to save a little bit (and I mean A LITTLE BIT) of leather, since the leather they were provided was all they had.

I doubt it. We really don't know that much about what went on in those factories but I don't think things were that frugal. Do we know that the military supplied the leather? If so why do different contracts often have their own characteristic leather? Dubows often have a very distinct punkish russet with very specific characteristics, Monarch that orangish russet, Aero that weird overdyed seal that no one else used and etc. I admit I know squat about the factories and how the jackets were made. The big guy thinks the Dubow factory may have been lacking machinery to easily put in zippers close to the leather. That's why the later civilian jacket has the zip put in properly. It's all speculation...

 

[Grant]

Hey Jeff, speaking of speculation, I wonder if Dubow's leather sporting goods equipment manufacturing had anything to do with the machinery available to sew A-2 jackets. Just a guess.

 

[JonnyCrow]

I doubt it. We really don't know that much about what went on in those factories but I don't think things were that frugal. Do we know that the military supplied the leather? If so why do different contracts often have their own characteristic leather? Dubows often have a very distinct punkish russet with very specific characteristics, Monarch that orangish russet, Aero that weird overdyed seal that no one else used and etc. I admit I know squat about the factories and how the jackets were made. The big guy thinks the Dubow factory may have been lacking machinery to easily put in zippers close to the leather. That's why the later civilian jacket has the zip put in properly. It's all speculation...

The leather if it was like British wartime contracts was a bidding lottery to supply factories, or factories previously making clothing were forced to change to military supply and production, also mentioned machinery, they will have had to adapt or make do with anything existing in the factory already, lots of speculation methinks

 

[mulceber]

Do we know that the military supplied the leather? If so why do different contracts often have their own characteristic leather?

Actually we do know that for sure - the leather was supplied by tanneries who provided leather by contract to the government, with orders to send it to whichever manufacturer won the contract to assemble the jacket. Horween tannery still has a government contract for leather from WW2, with instructions to deliver the leather to Dubow. Same goes for the knits, hardware, thread, etc. The government didn't trust the manufacturers to use their own materials, for fear that they'd use the cheapest of the cheap materials in order to cut costs. Geographical proximity does seem to have played a part: hence Dubow's leather being supplied by a Chicago tannery.

One former factory worker has also said that it wasn't uncommon for them to run a bit short on leather. In that situation, they made the jackets smaller. So there was a definite advantage to saving leather where possible. The real question is whether doing so would have saved enough to be worth their while.

My source for all this, btw, is John Chapman.

The big guy thinks the Dubow factory may have been lacking machinery to easily put in zippers close to the leather. That's why the later civilian jacket has the zip put in properly. It's all speculation...

Now that could well be. Dubow was known primarily for making baseball gloves at the time, so they very well might not have had the equipment on hand to properly install the zipper.

 

[JonnyCrow]

Actually we do know that for sure - the leather was supplied by tanneries who provided leather by contract to the government, with orders to send it to whichever manufacturer won the contract to assemble the jacket. Horween tannery still has a government contract for leather from WW2, with instructions to delivery the leather to Dubow. Same goes for the knits, hardware, thread, etc. The government didn't trust the manufacturers to use their own materials, for fear that they'd use the cheapest of the cheap materials in order to cut costs. Geographical proximity does seem to have played a part: hence Dubow's leather being supplied by a Chicago tannery.

One former factory worker has also said that it wasn't uncommon for them to run a bit short on leather. In that situation, they made the jackets smaller. So there was a definite advantage to saving leather where possible. The real question is whether doing so would have saved enough to be worth their while.

My source for all this, btw, is John Chapman.


Now that could well be. Dubow was known primarily for making baseball gloves at the time, so they very well might not have had the equipment on hand to properly install the zipper.

Talking of unsuitable materials, I was reading that collars on cotton nylon jackets changed to knitted ones as the synthetic fur was tested and found to be a fire hazard, makes sense

 

[Grant]

Actually we do know that for sure - the leather was supplied by tanneries who provided leather by contract to the government, with orders to send it to whichever manufacturer won the contract to assemble the jacket. Horween tannery still has a government contract for leather from WW2, with instructions to delivery the leather to Dubow. Same goes for the knits, hardware, thread, etc. The government didn't trust the manufacturers to use their own materials, for fear that they'd use the cheapest of the cheap materials in order to cut costs. Geographical proximity does seem to have played a part: hence Dubow's leather being supplied by a Chicago tannery.

One former factory worker has also said that it wasn't uncommon for them to run a bit short on leather. In that situation, they made the jackets smaller. So there was a definite advantage to saving leather where possible. The real question is whether doing so would have saved enough to be worth their while.

My source for all this, btw, is John Chapman.


Now that could well be. Dubow was known primarily for making baseball gloves at the time, so they very well might not have had the equipment on hand to properly install the zipper.

Dubow didn't primarily make baseball gloves - they also manufactured leather football helmets, footballs, basketballs, boxing gloves and even baseball bats - hence the name J.A. Dubow Sporting Goods.

 

[ZuZu]

Actually we do know that for sure - the leather was supplied by tanneries who provided leather by contract to the government, with orders to send it to whichever manufacturer won the contract to assemble the jacket. Horween tannery still has a government contract for leather from WW2, with instructions to deliver the leather to Dubow. Same goes for the knits, hardware, thread, etc. The government didn't trust the manufacturers to use their own materials, for fear that they'd use the cheapest of the cheap materials in order to cut costs. Geographical proximity does seem to have played a part: hence Dubow's leather being supplied by a Chicago tannery.

One former factory worker has also said that it wasn't uncommon for them to run a bit short on leather. In that situation, they made the jackets smaller. So there was a definite advantage to saving leather where possible. The real question is whether doing so would have saved enough to be worth their while.

My source for all this, btw, is John Chapman.


Now that could well be. Dubow was known primarily for making baseball gloves at the time, so they very well might not have had the equipment on hand to properly install the zipper.

The factory worker story is heresay at best- I don't quite get it- how many jackets made smaller? A run of jackets in a smaller size- 36's instead of 38's- or a bunch of mismarked larger jackets? Did they do this all the time? Did the mismarked jackets then fall off the truck?

Was the government procurement a matter of distrust or just efficiency? Without documents we don't know- just speculation really.

I think that the geographical proximity hypothesis is probably right- but who knows? Apparently there are some people in Japan, England and New Jersey who DO but their knowledge at this point is a guarded secret. Gary Eastman's book has some of the answers but I don't have it.

I doubt that the zip tape on Dubows was put in wider to save a 3/16" strip of leather on the body panels. The history of the actual making of American WW2 and 50s leather flight jackets is mysterious- it wasn't until the 7823A G-1 that there was a standard pattern for any leather jacket. After that it's a sad downhill slog to the Avirex and Cooper A-2s and the Excelled and DSCP G-1s.

 

[mulceber]

Hearsay is only inadmissible in a court of law, where innocent people can go to jail (or worse) if you’re wrong. We can afford to be a little less strict here. But you don’t have to believe me, if you prefer not to.

I don't quite get it- how many jackets made smaller? A run of jackets in a smaller size- 36's instead of 38's- or a bunch of mismarked larger jackets?

Since factories tended to make only one size in a given week (in order to avoid the mistake of a careless worker attaching the sleeves for a size 36 jacket to the chest panels of a size 40), if they didn’t have enough leather that week, they’d calculate the largest size they did have enough for, make the whole week’s orders in that size, and then attach the size labels for the size they were supposed to make.

From the factory’s point of view, it was either do that, or complain to the government that they didn’t have enough leather, which would result in a lot of back and forth, and all the while they’d be running behind, which would likely result in them not getting another contract. Far better to have a reputation for punctuality, even if some of the jackets came in a bit small.

 

[ZuZu]

Mulceber:
"Since factories tended to make only one size in a given week (in order to avoid the mistake of a careless worker attaching the sleeves for a size 36 jacket to the chest panels of a size 40), if they didn’t have enough leather that week, they’d calculate the largest size they did have enough for, make the whole week’s orders in that size, and then attach the size labels for the size they were supposed to make.

From the factory’s point of view, it was either do that, or complain to the government that they didn’t have enough leather, which would result in a lot of back and forth, and all the while they’d be running behind, which would likely result in them not getting another contract. Far better to have a reputation for punctuality, even if some of the jackets came in a bit small."

I gotta ask- where did you get this information from? Very detailed! Sounds great but without a reference or some documentation it's just speculation- even if it came from the Big Guy!
I'd really like to learn this stuff. Is it in Gary's book?

As far as the Factory story- it's not a matter of me believing you- I've heard it before- it's more a matter of me taking the anecdote with a grain of salt...

 

[mulceber]

For the bit about the government contracting out for the leather (and other materials) to make the jacket, my source is Gary's book (pages 30, with photos of relevant documents on pages 32-47). For the rest, my source for this is, as you guessed, John. He tells me he got this from talking to people who worked at the factories that made these jackets. That's good enough for me. You don't feel the same way and that's okay. Different folks are going to have different burdens of proof.

 

[ZuZu]

Yeah- I need more. It's a plausible scenario and from a well-informed (God knows probably the best informed) scource but absent a memoir from an actual participant (machinist, manager, inspector- whatever) or some kind of factory document it remains speculation only. Factories made one size a week? Better to have wrong sizes and be on time? I don't know...

 

[blackrat2]

Interesting thread and sadly with each passing year there are less and less people that can probably tell us
It makes sense making a set size jacket, rather than heighten the chances of the wrong size panels being fitted, the closet manufacturer presently to my mind anyway, still producing an A2 on a large enough scale and with a sense of pride is arguably Eastman…has Gary spoken to enough workers to have any definitive answers on the manufacturing process??, if yes then what would have been the problem of writing about it in his book, surely after all these years there are no “issues” of knowing about these things.

I have never had a any real dealings with Gary, perhaps there are folk on this site who would be better placed to ask him if he knows anything about this subject and if he would be happy it was shared.
John and Ken might be able to elaborate if they had the time or happy enough to come on the site and enlighten us.