• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

ELC Star Sportswear VS. ELC Monarch fit...

Tim P

Well-Known Member
I love my ELC B-6. bought within ten minutes of the stall opening.
I think it actually makes good sense to have a standard fit now I think about it. It will never be a real A-2 so inches (or fractions of) here and there arent the real nuance. Hide choice, leather colour and texture and collar details, contrast with stitching and knits etc etc are deal breakers for me. never mind that in a size 42 the taper of a no-name 21778 was trimmer by 1/4" than a Bingo leisurewear 27730. I dont decry the value of that to the absolute purist I really dont but FFS 'This ones trimmer than that one' ought to be enough for most mere mortals.
and honestly, which airmen in ww2 went to the QM and said, half an inch off the sleeves to prevent tunneling and a bit more grain on me flaps please sarge..
 

Chandler

Well-Known Member
TankBuster said:
Chandler,
The Star and Roughwear are different patterns as I stated in my post.

You made no mention of the RW in the post I quoted. I guess it fell under the "rest."

Chandler
 

Chandler

Well-Known Member
Swing said:
From what I can tell, the Monarch and Star are the same body and sleeve.

So the ELC Monarch has the "set in" sleeves? And was the original Monarch manufactured that way?

Chandler
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Chandler:
I've talked with Charles in the past and he's spoken of the direct copying of the various maker patterns ELC produces, not a base shell with add-ons

Really! - they must have gotten hold of some pretty weird jackets! Never seen originals that fit quite the way Eastmans do- definitely not with pockets so far apart (except possibly one or two contracts Eastman's NOT copying!). I think the first theory about them using two generic patterns is correct- the big "Roughwear" type pattern and the slimmer "Star". You're definitely not getting an exact copy (or even as close to an exact copy as humanly possible in 2008). You're getting an Eastman!
 

Grant

Well-Known Member
Sorry to disagree with you again! My sz. 42 ELC Cable and sz. 40 house jacket fit me the closest in overall fit to all my sz. 42 originals (Dubow, Spiewak, Bronco, Poughkeepise and Perry). I prefer the slightly trimmer military fit with just enough room to wear a C-2 sweater vest.

Cheers
 

Chandler

Well-Known Member
rotenhahn said:
definitely not with pockets so far apart

Whatever.

starcompare.jpg


Now, I'll hedge for yeh if you wanna complain about the pocket flap depth.
(not even sure if this is the same Star contract as the ELC...)

Chandler
 

Tim P

Well-Known Member
Nice. a picture paints a thousand words.
I dont see what can be gained by slamming ELC products. they are excellent well constructed items of clothing at worst and damn close reproductions at best. Whoever else is in the game. Pocket spacing is determined by jacket size and a host of other factors and some narrow and some wide spacing occured even within contracts I am willing to bet a buck or two.

anyway, with my Monarch en route I could not be happier that it will fit like my star....
 

Tim P

Well-Known Member
jacketimp said:


Yup.....



Many discussions take that form. eventually those who are polarised embrace the others right to feel the way they do or work out that they are talking crap and it fizzles away to nothing. I embrace the notion that others can feel as they wish about certain things and bring to mind the notion that opinions are like back passages, everyone has one, some stink more than others.

I like to see the glass as half full. If someone would rather have a sister in a cat house than a brother in an eastman jacket then so be it. I see positives in all of the manufacturers products, even in the easy comfort of the avirex.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tim P said:
Nice. a picture paints a thousand words.
I dont see what can be gained by slamming ELC products. they are excellent well constructed items of clothing at worst and damn close reproductions at best. Whoever else is in the game. Pocket spacing is determined by jacket size and a host of other factors and some narrow and some wide spacing occured even within contracts I am willing to bet a buck or two.

anyway, with my Monarch en route I could not be happier that it will fit like my star....
If you guys have to believe Eastmans are great that's fine. Let me explain the pocket thing though- as Eastmans go up in size the space between pocket and windflap gets bigger CONTRARY to most WW2 jackets including Roughwear and Aero. A size 44 Eastman 1401p has a 4 1/2" gap- too big- sorry. This gives the wearer a potbellied incorrect look- sorry!. I KNOW my WW2 Roughwears and my Eastman Roughwears- the Eastman pattern isn't quite right and when you add up all the little not right parts you get a weird looking not quite WW2 jacket- sorry!My WW2 size 46 Roughwear has 3 1/2" p[ocket spacing- my 4 (count 'em -4!) Eastman Roughwears all had 4 1/2" pocket spacing giving even l'il ol' me a potbellied look! As far as your photo post- I'd say you fudged 1/2" or so (subtly of course) but to my eye the original looks to have a 3-3 1/2" gap and the Eastman is heading toward 4". WW2 Stars had a relatively large gap too. I'm not SLAMMING Eastman I'm CRITICIZING their jackets. Grownups can take criticism- you guys are dead set on maintaining an illusion!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tim P:
I like to see the glass as half full.

Obviously you do... I've been down that road with repros- I'm sick of it! I want a COPY dammit- not some bespoke bullshit! And I can get that now- and so can you! Not from Eastman though...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
starcompare.jpg

In fact...
Look carefully at your comparison- it's not exactly right- the Eastman has simply been reduced in size to fit into the original's parameters. You can see this clearly if you look at the size of the pockets- the Eastman's look smaller but in real life we know they'd be the same or possibly larger! This means the gap between pocket on a properly scaled jacket would be larger (to my eye it's even larger in your gerrymandered photoshop job!).
PS- Look at how too large the Eastman pocket flaps are...
 

Tim P

Well-Known Member
anyway.

the monarch and star fits are similar. irrespective of whatever excellent work John is doing.

fair to say?


BTW what could be more bespoke than a jacket made to your specs? mate, knock yourself out, buy ten. I will get one as and when because I like them. I am already decided on a noname contract due to the ample shoulder and arm dimensions alluded to on the website and I agree with all you say about them.
you have a problem with ELC stuff, write to them. or must you turn every pissing thread into a goodwear asslik?
You Like John's jackets.... fine. So do many of us. many of us will also use the services of other vendors and many of us are tired of every thread that dares to mention Eastman ending up in this impasse.

so.. again.. irrespective of pocket spacing the monarch and star are in the same stable fit wise.
good.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tim P:
you have a problem with ELC stuff, write to them. or must you turn every pissing thread into a goodwear asslik?

Yes- I must turn every 'pissing thread...'- I remember all those days walking, looking in store windows or mirrors, squinting my eyes trying to make an Eastman or Aero look like a WW2 A-2 in my imagination. They simply didn't- $700 or $800 later- they simply didn't! So I'll post all I want about this 'til the Great Moderator decides to kick me off. As far as "asslik" - is this some new form of gaiety you Brits have invented or just you Timmy...
 
Top