• 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.

Getting into the weeds - Comparing Repro and Original Rough Wear 23380s

mulceber

Moderator
Introduction and preliminary photos:

Jan


A couple months back, Burt and I set out on a project comparing United Sheeplined originals (https://www.vintageleatherjackets.o...-owners-unite-and-show-us-your-jackets.24867/). The post generated a lengthy discussion and we had so much fun that, when it was done, we wanted to keep going. There was only one problem: United Sheeplined was the only original contract we had in common! I have a Cable, and Burt has a...whole mess of gorgeous originals, but no overlap. Undeterred, he asked me what repros I have, and when we discovered that he has an original RW 23380, while I have a repro of it by Bill Kelso, we got the idea of doing a nuts and bolts comparison. Since we found out around the same time that Jorge has two originals of this contract, and he had added such great material to the United Sheeplined thread, we invited him on board to compare his jackets as well.

Whereas the previous project was all about showing how much variability there could be among originals, this project aims to do that AND look at what details repro makers reproduce from originals when they copy a jacket. I will inevitably assess the accuracy a bit as I’m writing my part of the review, but I’m going to try not to make it all about accuracy, for a number of reasons. First, there’s enough variation among originals that most possible differences between my repro and the vintage jackets discussed in this thread could reasonably be put down simply to Andy having made his pattern based on an original that was different from theirs. Second, I think reviews that concern themselves only with accuracy tend to be either very negative or (sometimes) over the top in their praise, and I want this to be a kind, but balanced review. Third, I really like my BK repro and don’t want to knock it down! I say all this without having yet compared the jackets though, so I have no idea what we’re going to find.

I know that several other people have originals or repros of the 23380 by various makers. @Brettafett, @Lord Flashheart, @stanier, we’d love for you to chime in and share the details of your jackets as well.

Now, on to the contract: the 23380 was the fourth contract Rough Wear received, and was let to them the day after Christmas, 1941, on the same day as the Dubow 23379 and Monarch’s only A-2 contract. The 23380 contract comprised 12,000 jackets, at a price of $7.70 per jacket - a small contract compared to the massive orders the US would start placing just a few months later. All of the contracts placed within two months of Pearl Harbor were on a similar scale to the 23380 (the largest was the Perry 23377 in the first week of the new year: 20,000 jackets), however, so it seems likely that the AAF had enough of a back stock of jackets going into the war that their needs could be met for the moment by letting four to five small contracts, as opposed to really big ones.

Oh, one final thing: in general, the order in which the photos are posted will follow the order in which people are speaking. The only exception is this first section, where Burt's jacket is pictured first, followed by Jorge's two, with my repro bringing up the rear.

Burt

Well said Jan … I’ll just add that Rough Wear was the 2nd most prolific maker of A2 jackets during the Second World War , being awarded a total of 5 different production contracts and a total of 119328 jackets, behind Aero’s 7 different contracts and a total of 134500 jackets. If you served in the USAAF during the second world war as a pilot or a flight crew member, there was a good chance that the A2 jacket you were issued was probably an Aero or a Rough Wear.

Jorge

Well said guys! Having five contracts during WWII, Rough Wear made some of the most iconic A-2s. All I have left to say is that the cut and some of the details of this contract are very typical of other Rough Wear contracts. I have two examples of the 23380; one is a WWII issued (russet) model and the other is possibly a Korean War re-issued (re-dyed) model. That being said, I hope it will be entertaining and informative to compare both models side by side. Both jackets have the same cut, but they have seen different action during their service.

CC179035-C8A3-4990-B655-C2583EAB333D.JPG

IMG_0070.JPG

51C80F48-D362-488A-8A99-D38108C1D7EA_1_105_c.jpeg


Collars

Burt


The Rough Wear collar is probably one of the most distinguishing characteristics of all manufacturers A2 jackets. Rough Wear collars are large, no doubt about it . Compare them to a Werber or a Perry collar and they look huge. It’s just a trait of a Rough Wear regardless of the contract .

As Jan mentioned in his introduction, this particular 23380 contract was made at the end of 1941 in December, which means that this was an early war production A2 jacket. Collar stands were being incorporated into the design of most jackets at that time and the Rough Wear 23380 utilized the collar stand as well. Later in the war other jacket manufacturers did away with the collar stand, in an effort to speed up production and cut manufacturing costs. However, Rough Wear never did that and if you own a Rough Wear jacket of any contract , it will have a collar stand.

Jorge

As Burt said, Rough Wear collars are one of the main characteristics of their contracts. The Rough Wear pattern is stylish, and the collar provides a truly classy look when worn.

Jan

Burt layed out the details of the Rough Wear collars, so all that’s left to me is to show how the Kelso repro stacks up. In general, BK stands up really well compared to its elders. The silhouette of the collar is correct, and I think both the original and the repro are a bit more subdued than Rough Wear collars can sometimes appear. The one area where there is an inaccuracy is in the collar hooks. If you look closely inside the collar on the original, you’ll see that the lining is protected from the sharp edges of the eyelets by tiny washers:
Screen Shot 2020-10-16 at 10.23.31 PM.png

Those washers are a feature common to all Rough Wears, but they’re missing from Kelso repros. This is a minor error, and it certainly wouldn’t deter me from buying from BK in the future. In fact, I can almost guarantee that I would not have noticed this detail if I hadn’t later found mention of it in Eastman’s A-2 guide. Nonetheless, I thought it worth pointing out. Apart from this small error, the Kelso repro is spot on, especially in terms of its pattern.

43041B84-49D5-4906-BCC4-14759BD3E008.JPG

IMG_0071.JPG

5B0FFB67-6470-4EBF-9FC0-9A9A3615C63D_1_105_c.jpeg



Epaulets

Jorge


Rough Wear epaulets are relatively wide and this contract is not the exception. Another feature is the stitching on the epaulets drawing a very square box on their edges.

Burt

My 23380 epaulets are typical of the Rough Wear epaulet design in that it has a very light, hardly noticeable taper throughout the length of the epaulet. The edges of the epaulet have a double row of stitching and are sewn down in front of the shoulder seam. There are X box stitched into each end of the epaulet at its attachment points.

Jan

My repro copies the details of the originals quite well! Relatively wide epaulets (as Jorge said), and a very gentle tapering (as Burt said), going from the end of the epaulet that attaches to the shoulder to the end that attaches underneath the collar stand. I would also add that the x-boxes are each a perfect square, whereas some other contracts, like the Dubows and Cables, have very oblong x-boxes. Apart from one of them being vintage leather while the other is liberty horsehide, the only way I can tell these jackets apart is that the corner of one of the x-boxes on Burt’s original is slightly rounded, likely due to the operator of the sewing machine being in a rush. That is a sign of rush that is not present on my jacket, although it’s not present on Jorge’s originals either.


IMG_0072.JPG

DB274E4C-EBB5-4D54-A596-5A475F3898DC.JPG

99214A26-CB62-4B67-8CE0-FBD16EF3ED3E.JPG
 
Last edited:

mulceber

Moderator
Snaps

Jorge


United Carr ball-stud snaps were used in the making of all five Rough Wear contracts. It is also worth mentioning that this snap model was used on 21 of 39 A-2 contracts, making it the most common model.

Burt

My 23380 jacket was made with the United-Carr ball stud snaps which were utilized on both the collar and the pockets. All of the snaps on my particular jacket continue to work well after 80 years. These snaps are still being utilized in the construction of high end repro A2 jackets today by makers like John Chapman at Good Wear Leather.


Jan

At the time when I purchased this jacket, BK did not yet stock original United-Carr ball stud snaps (they’ve added them as an option in the last few months). However, their reproductions are, to my eye, indistinguishable from the originals (apart from the lack of verdigris), right down to having “United Carr” imprinted on the back of the snaps.

IMG_0080.JPG


E607410D-F286-4506-84E4-A114CB003AD0.JPG

0094D3D6-CACF-45F6-AEAD-B84E4C2B62A4.JPG



Sleeves

Burt


The sleeves on the 23380 contract were similar to the United Sheeplined contract in that they were Flat sewn to the jacket. As was previously mentioned this was a time saving maneuver in that flat sewn sleeves can be attached to the jacket much more quickly and enable a sewing machine operator to complete the 23380 jacket in less time than an inset type of sleeve.

Jorge

I think Burt has covered all the details about the sleeve construction.

Jan

Yep, flat-sewn sleeves. There’s not a whole lot more I would add. The arm holes on mine are rather high, which is less comfortable for my body type than it is for others (I’m looking at you @Brettafett). Meanwhile, the sleeves on mine are rather short. They look fine when my hands are at my side, but ride up something crazy if I lift my arms, or if I’m driving. If I could do it all over again, I’d order a long, or a size larger. That said, it’s still a great jacket.

18459C21-F1CC-4228-8EFE-267C2D166E1C.JPG

IMG_0081.JPG

99214A26-CB62-4B67-8CE0-FBD16EF3ED3E.JPG


Body Panels & General Comments on the Jacket

Jorge


Having owned different Rough Wear contracts (16159, 23380 and 27752), I can tell by experience that the pattern of this manufacturer is very stylish, and this contract shares many details with the other 4 contracts. Besides being very comfortable when wearing it, this jacket has a sharp look. Also all the features correspond to the description in Eastman’s manual.

Burt

By way of Gary Eastmans book we have learned that a far larger number of A2 jackets were made from cowhide than we had ever expected. The 23380 Rough Wear was one of those contracts. The jacket has aged nicely and if Gary had not actually done DNA testing on jackets from this particular contract, I sincerely doubt if anyone would have ever known. So once again, hats off to Gary Eastman for his research and his documentation on this issue.


Jan

I think both Burt and Jorge managed to bring in different but complementary points about the jacket. I’m going to focus here on how BK reproduces the color of this jacket. In a lot of ways, it isn’t fair to compare the colors of the leathers here. “Seal” and “Russet” really are sort of misleading because the reality is that A-2 jackets came in many different shades of brown, and any manufacturer that has a house leather is going to be forced to pick a couple shades of brown that they think are a good compromise, and go with that. Eastman, for example, ends up using the same shade for their RW 27752 and their Star Sportswear, even though originals of these contracts don’t look much alike. That said, comparing BK’s Liberty Russet to Jorge’s un-re-dyed original, the color is a good approximation. It’s maybe a little less red, but if you order this contract from BK, you won’t be far off.


Zipper:

Jorge


According to Eastman’s guide, the 23380 comes originally with the M-41 Crown No. 5 bright nickel zipper.

In this case, the WWII issued example bears a M-39 Type 1 zipper, which most likely was a replacement done at some point.

The re-issued example bears a correct M-41 Crown No. 5 bright nickel zipper.

Burt

As you can see in the photo, my 23380 is equipped with the prescribed M-41Crown zip No.5 auto lock in bright nickel. This was the correct zip for this particular contract as documented in Gary Eastmans reference book “The Type A2 Flight Jacket Identification Manual,” I can’t say enough good things about this book, if you haven’t gotten one, I would highly recommend it.


Jan

I’ll second what Burt said about the Eastman A-2 manual. I go back to it again and again. It’s just a wellspring of information. My second recommendation after Gary’s book though, would be John Chapman’s CD. The Eastman guide is invaluable, but there are mistakes, almost all of which boil down to Gary having seen 2-3 examples of a contract and assuming all jackets from that contract were like the ones he saw. Any time I’m trying to find out what zipper, leather color, or snaps a contract had, I’ll check Eastman first, and then go to John’s CD and look at all the examples he has.

Back on topic. The zip is the area in which my repro falls down the most, but not by the fault of the people who made it. Eastman owns the rights to Crown zippers, so they are the only company that offer repros. Originals, meanwhile, are difficult to acquire. Good Wear’s site says they no longer stock them, although he sometimes can offer a work-around. Kelso offers original Crowns for an extra £300. I like accuracy, but not THAT much. Mine has a repro M-42 Talon. I guess I’ll pretend mine was one of the ones that got a repair zipper. ;)

IMG_0085.JPG

IMG_0086.JPG

6B422B8F-F6A8-468A-BC4F-75CFFFEF5864.JPG

13BA5FAF-8E22-40AD-8C65-B75E8121E3DF.JPG
 
Last edited:

mulceber

Moderator
Knits:

Jorge


The knits seem to be original on both examples, although you can observe a slight difference in the shade, due to the different level of fading on each jacket.

Burt

An examination of the knits on my Rough Wear 23380 reveals that they were replaced at some point during the life of this jacket . The repair was well done and with the correct color knits which leads me to believe the work was done by an experience professional or possibly by a period repair replacement depot technician. Not much more I can share in this area of the jacket.

Jan

My knits are actually replacements as well, after a stupid project where I tried to stretch the jacket and only ended up depriving the knits of their elasticity. Both the previous knits and the current ones generally match the originals we’ve seen quite well. The ones posted by Jorge look like they may be very slightly darker, but the difference is hardly noticeable, and may even be down to different lighting or cameras.

IMG_0087.JPG

IMG_0088.JPG

827C0E40-921E-492A-B04B-D5267F33FCD2.JPG

CC3430B5-129E-4814-AD4F-2241B4255120.JPG


Pockets and Pocket Flaps:

Burt


The design of the pocket flaps on just about all Rough Wear contracts are fairly consistent throughout the range of jackets made during the war. There really isn’t much difference between the 23380 contract and the 27752 contract. The design of the pockets are consistent as well.

Jorge

As Burt said, the pattern used in this contract is very consistent with the soft curves and rounded center point used by Rough Wear.

Jan

Comparing the pocket flaps on my repro to Burt’s and Jorge’s originals, there’s a slight difference. Bill Kelso does a good job representing the subtle asymmetricality of the rough wear pocket flaps, but the “point” of the flap on this jacket is a bit more pronounced than on the three originals under consideration. Their pockets most closely resemble the pocket on the left of Jorge’s un-redyed original. In fairness to Bill Kelso though, the pocket flaps on the 23380 repros produced by both of their major competitors, Good Wear and Eastman, also have similarly “pointy” pocket flaps, so it seems likely that all three companies are reproducing a detail that does not appear on Burt’s and Jorge’s originals.

BC6699D1-A89A-4060-95BC-F23547CBD42C.JPG

IMG_0089.JPG

7355B95E-AFFF-4D4F-81FE-35EF79135E23.JPG
 
Last edited:

mulceber

Moderator
Lining:

Jorge


The lining is original dull orange colored cotton on both examples, although you can observe a slight difference in the shade, due to the different level of fading on each jacket. For sure they have seen a lot of action during their service.

Burt

The lining on my particular 23380 jacket is the standard rust colored cotton type lining with the normal acceptance stamps associated with an A2 jacket. However, one unusual characteristic about the manufacturer’s label of this contract is that there are two labels. The top one is a standard manufacturers label, and the second one below that is a “Property Air Force US Army” label.


Jan

Yes, apparently mid-way through production of the contract, RW was informed that all labels now had to say Property Air Force US Army. They opted to add a second label. Dubow was in a similar bind with their 23379 contract, and came to the same solution:
41E5D2BB-0901-4B0F-A33C-9D1EA545D3AC.JPG


In all respects the BK liner (color is “dull orange”) and label match the original well.
IMG_0094.JPG

B16C33C5-F83E-4ED4-859B-10BB06D9A272.JPG

2A5C6522-34DC-4935-A69B-9692A8B7AFDF.JPG



Measurements of A2 Jackets:

Size 42 (repro)Size 44 #1 (original)Size 44 #2 (original; re-dye)Size 46 (original; re-dye)
Shoulders18"18.5"18.5"20.5"
Chest (pit to pit)21.5"22.5"23.75"25"
Back23.75"24.25"25"28"
Sleeves24.125"23.5"24.5"26.5"


Conclusions:

Jan

I want to thank Burt and Jorge for being such great partners on this project, and for bringing such different things to the table. Side-by-side comparisons of an original repro are rare enough, but to be able to look at several different originals is a rare treat, and, if nothing else, it was a treat just to get to spend this project looking at so many great photos of phenomenal jackets. The Rough Wears are some of my favorite A-2 contracts, and working on this project just confirmed for me why I love 'em. I learned a lot about these jackets that I didn't know before, and got to confirm that my jacket is first class repro, to boot. I hope it's as much fun to read this as it was to research it. Now we open it up to everyone else who owns one of these jackets - original or repro - to come in share pictures, provide measurements, and generally talk about the details of your jackets.

Jorge

It has been very interesting doing the review about this contract, at the same I learned more about the different rest of the Rough Wear contracts. I would also like to thank Burt and Jan for inviting me to partner up in this project. Finally, my recommendation to all the members who own an A-2 or are thinking of purchasing one is to get the Eastman’s manual, so much valuable info in it. I hope you enjoyed this review and thank you for your time.
 
Last edited:

Lord Flashheart

Well-Known Member
Great job guys and an interesting read. Thank you Jan, Jorge and Burt.

I'm interested in Jans comment that "Eastman, for example, ends up using the same shade for their RW 27752 and their Star Sportswear..." .

I have both ELC's and to my untrained eye (and here I freely I admit I don't know much about A-2's compared to most here and certainly not the authors) my Eastmans RW27752 is a flat shade of Seal Brown whilst on my ELS Star Sportswear the Seal Brown comes across as having a more coppery tone. I'm not quite so sure they are the same shade? Without taking anything away from this review here are a couple of pics. Maybe it's just me or just these two Eastmans. I'll shut up now I'm certainly not out to provoke an argument. Either way I love' em both.
ELC RW27752 & Star Exterior.jpeg
 

mulceber

Moderator
Thanks guys! We have a lot of fun doing these projects, so as long as there's a desire to read them, we'll keep writing them. :)


If any of you want to work on a comparison like this with the 1401P contract, I'd be happy to participate.

I'd be up for that! I have an Eastman repro of that contract. We'd just need to find a person (or two) who owns an original.

I have both ELC's and to my untrained eye (and here I freely I admit I don't know much about A-2's compared to most here and certainly not the authors) my Eastmans RW27752 is a flat shade of Seal Brown whilst on my ELS Star Sportswear the Seal Brown comes across as having a more coppery tone. I'm not quite so sure they are the same shade?

You're definitely right, Flash, they are different shades. I tend to think that's because they were made from different batches of leather, as I recall hearing that different batches can vary in color, but I don't know that. I've assumed that Eastman (and others with proprietary leathers) would have a limited number of shades available at any given time, due to cost if nothing else, but I could be wrong.

Amazing. The BK 23380 is the ‘next’ A2 I am looking at...

It comes highly recommended, if my enthusiasm for it wasn't clear. :D
 

B-Man2

Well-Known Member
Thanks to everyone for your kind words and interest in our projects . Jan, Jorge and I enjoyed putting this review together for all of you and appreciate your support . We are by no means experts in any of this, but we do enjoy comparing various contracts and makers jackets and thought many of you would as well.
Cheers:)
 
Top