Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: My "new" tux

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Vendor tonyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    My mother's basement
    Posts
    4,182

    My "new" tux

    It was over a month ago that I first tried on this tuxedo. My favorite off-the-beaten-path charity thrift shop had it marked at $100 then, a price I would have considered paying had it fit perfectly, but it didn't. It was just about spot on across the shoulders and in the length of the sleeves and the body and the trousers, but an inch or two tight at the waist. Add the cost of alterations and the price was just a touch steep, considering that I would wear the outfit only a couple of times a year, if even that frequently.

    This thrift shop has mostly women's clothes, and mostly women clientele. Many a time I've spotted a men's garment there and waited for it to linger on the rack until it was marked down. (As an aside, I've found several vintage items there, which is rarely the case at other thrift shops.) I dropped in today and saw the tux marked at $75. But all men's clothing was an additional 50 percent off today, so I was out the door for $40.65, including the state sales tax.

    Anyway, it's an old suit. This is all of the union tag that shows. What does this tell us about its vintage? Experts, weigh in please.



    Put a couple of jet engines on these lapels and fly it to Vegas.



    The pants are actually the right length for me, which is so, so hard to find in vintage stuff. (I have unusually long legs for a guy who stands right at six feet tall.) Check out those groovy suspenders.



    I'm trying like the dickens to take off another 10 or 15 pounds. That would put me at an almost ideal weight. Perhaps then it'll fit without alterations. Either way, I expect this tux will get some use this upcoming holiday season.

  2. #2
    One of the Regulars 3PieceSuitGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    176
    great suit! Beautiful & a bargain to boot! What more could you want.
    Life can only be understood backwards. It must be lived forwards.

  3. #3
    One Too Many Guttersnipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    1,801

    Nic Tux!

    Personally I like my lapels a little bigger -

    That's a a 1939, or older union tag. The part with the copyright date is covered, so it could be a 1936 as well.
    Who says the golden era has to be tasteful and dignified?

  4. #4
    Vendor tonyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    My mother's basement
    Posts
    4,182
    Yeah, I went back through that "Union Label" thread after I posted my inquiry. Without seeing the entire tag (I'm not going to undo that original stitching just to satisfy my curiosity) it's hard to get more definite. Although my reading of the info posted on steelzipper indicates it could indeed be earlier than 1939 but also as late as 1949. Or am I reading it wrong?

    Other clues ... It has a brass (or at least brass-colored) zipper with a pull that says CONMAR (as best my tired old unassisted eyes can make out). The waistband closes with two GRIPPER brand snaps. The suspenders, which I'll assume for the moment date from the same period as the tux, have narrow (5/8ths of an inch or so) dark brown leather straps in front, with brass (or brass-colored) buckle adjusters and hardware from which the button tabs hang, and a pair of elastic straps at the back.

    Other than a small hole (so small you'd probably have to have it pointed out before you'd ever notice it) on the back of the right sleeve, this suit shows very little sign of use. No snags, no fraying, no shininess. Of course, it being special-occasion attire, it probably never did get much use. It came with a cummerbund and a bow tie, neither of which is "period," I suspect.

    I have some pleated formal shirts, but now I need a pair of formal shoes.

  5. #5
    One Too Many anon`'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The old Chapman place beyond Meadow Hill
    Posts
    1,213
    Wonderful find! I think the "pristine-but-for-one-small-hole" thing is required for a tuxedo like this--mine was the same way. Perfect but for one hole.

    You got a better deal than I did, though

    Union label appears to place it between 1934 and (offically) 1949. My (completely uninformed, mind you) guess would be WWII to post-War part of that era based on a couple of the details, but that's just a WAG!

  6. #6
    Bartender Feraud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Hardlucksville, NY
    Posts
    16,484
    A great outfit and price!

  7. #7
    One Too Many Josephine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,638
    Quote Originally Posted by tonyb
    It came with a cummerbund and a bow tie, neither of which is "period," I suspect.
    You won't need a cummerbund since it's DB.

    Edit. I knew I should have read the entire thread before posting. Sorry!
    So I got that goin' for me, which is nice.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •