California Sportswear Co. (CSC) aka Californian (1930s-1950s) thread

[jeo]

Now this is becoming an argument. You thought there was an implied disagreement but there wasn’t. I cited a source of where I got the idea from, you even asked me immediately after “what is your point?” If I made an argument, you should have known what my point was. You didn’t know my point because no argument was made.

I should have known? Lol. You were extremely vague.

Sorry bud but everyone read it and understood it the same way I read it and understood it.

An argument needs to come with supporting reasoning and facts. Otherwise, it’s just a conclusion.

Exactly! You cited that thread as a response to my correction.

If you were really just citing that thread as the source of where you got the info from you have said so, but you didn't, did you?

You didn’t say “this is where I got the info from, I believe it to be correct…”. You didn’t say “I’ll correct the mistake” or anything along those lines.

You said “There was a whole thread on this rare bird, 1952:”

What can someone imply from that sentence other than you believe the info from that thread to be correct and that it is in fact a 1952 “rare bird”?

Can you now see how the above paragraph is actually an argument and what I said earlier is not?

No.

Assuming an implied message in one’s head is not a “mistake” that I’d admit. I’m not shy to “acknowledge a mistake” when an actual mistake was made.

Well you didn’t acknowledge your mistake that Oakbrook isn’t from 1952, you cited that thread lol.

Misreading someone’s implied message is a misinterpretation on your part, it’s not my mistake to acknowledge.

No, you were being extremely vague instead of making concrete statements. You left myself and everyone else reading no other option but to try to figure out what you were implying when you said: “There was a whole thread on this rare bird, 1952:”

You’re right, this has become an argument and I am done with it.

 

[jchance]

My findings are based on first hand experience.

Not on statistical analysis of data that may or may not be correct.

I can respect and appreciate your way of doing things. But expecting others to be the same as you is interesting, to say the least. People are generally different from one another. That’s a feature, not a bug, in the collective human experience.

Most people learn from their own first hand experience. I can respect that. Some, like me, are able to learn from the mistakes of others, as Bismarck once remarked. Instead of buying and owning a wide range of different quality of leather jackets to appreciate what’s the bad, good, and the best, I’d like to take the elevator to the penthouse and enjoy the highest quality of jackets ever produced. I can appreciate a Rich-Sher over a Grais (or a Sears Hercules over a Sears Leather Shop) without the need to own both. It’s not unlike why people into the vintage hunt like buy 1950s or earlier jackets—because they can recognize quality when they see it. With trained eyes, one can recognize quality over a screen. I can tell leather thickness and grains over the screen without the need to own, touch, and inspect the actual jacket in person.

People here seem to only post pics of their own jackets. That’s fine with me. I find it strange that they (for example, @AHP91) expect others to do the same. I don’t police speech on the Internet, and I expect the same from others. When I post pics of leather jackets, people can safely assume those are not my jackets. I, as a minimalist, like to keep my jacket collection small, with only jackets that I would actually wear. I can only wear one jacket at a time, and sometimes the same jacket for months on end. I don’t see the point of owning (or buying then selling) 40+ jackets.

 

[ton312]

The issue I have with these Tommy *** style threads is that they present no new information (and some misinformation). It’s already here in this forum and the original authors paid their dues to furnish it. To package it all up in threads containing other people’s images, posts, etc is bad form.

You can’t say I’m gate keeping here b/c I could literally not care any less about all of it. I have long graduated from these styles and those eras. Not interested in grandpas clothes anymore but for those that are, and those that did the hard work of posting their findings and images here….grabbing it up as your own just leaves a foul stench in the room.

I would be more interested in seeing your own collection of jackets with photos and thoughts about them.

 

[ABCD]

But expecting others to be the same as you is interesting, to say the least.

Who's expecting what? I didn't expect anything, I just observed.

I’d like to take the elevator to the penthouse and enjoy the highest quality of jackets ever produced

Quality is subjective. Some people say high stitch count and straight stitch lines signal quality, other people couldn't care less about those. A lot of people who are into high-end fashion will tell you a lambskin jacket is high quality because the leather is buttery soft and shows little grain, a motorcyclist will tell you that same jacket is rubbish.

Back when I joined TFL, Aero and CXL were all the rage. People spoke about those jackets like they were the best money could get.

I had never handled one but I really wanted one because I wanted to have a serious leather jacket and according to TFL, Aero was the best. So I drove to one of their stockist with the intention of ordering one, only to be extremely disappointed. I hated the stiffness and waxy feel of CXL and the pattern was absolutely terrible. I could not understand why people would want to wear such uncomfortable jackets. Also, the finish was quite sloppy.

Appreciating Rich Sher over Grais solely based on other people's opinions or by judging pics might make sense from a collectability perspective but as for 'quality', it's subjective. Maybe Rich Sher patterns are not suitable for your build, who knows? You'd have to try one on. Reading about jackets is not a substitute for first hand experience. 'Quality' is dependent on your preferences and frame of reference.

 

[jchance]

The issue I have with these Tommy *** style threads is that they present no new information (and some misinformation). It’s already here in this forum and the original authors paid their dues to furnish it. To package it all up in threads containing other people’s images, posts, etc is bad form.

You can’t say I’m gate keeping here b/c I could literally not care any less about all of it. I have long graduated from these styles and those eras. Not interested in grandpas clothes anymore but for those that are, and those that did the hard work of posting their findings and images here….grabbing it up as your own just leaves a foul stench in the room.

I would be more interested in seeing your own collection of jackets with photos and thoughts about them.

That’s a fair analysis, I can give you that, but insisting your way as the only way, and anything else that deviates from it as “bad form” or a “foul stench in the room” is in and of itself bad form and close-minded.

Most (about 2/3 actually) of the pics sourced in these threads came from the Internet actually. The threads are meant to be more like a Wikipedia article (without the sources, adding them takes too much time and doesn’t add value imho), which others can come to revise, add, and edit later. Knowledge is free once it is out there. You have issues with “form” over function / content, but that’s still gatekeeping in a way.

Let me ask you this. You have been used to having Google AI’s summary at your fingertips, but you also remembered what it was like to scan through Google’s results and browsing each tab to locate the info you were looking for. Which was a more enjoyable experience? You’re welcome.

Most vintage leather jackets out there have already been posted and discussed ad nauseam here. I don’t see the point of posting another Hercules or Ward unless it’s new that no one here has ever seen. I’m not going to take pics (that would take too much time and effort) of my green-plaid-wool-lined Hercules (I don’t own one for the record) when I could just find pics on the web/here to repost. When I have a truly new jacket (Al Crowes, for example) that others here haven’t seen, I actually posted it. I don’t see why knowledge can’t be repackaged for the newbies to digest in an easier, more-welcoming form.

I’m not even getting any monetary profits from this, so I’m not sure why it’s “bad form” or a “foul stench in the room” actually. If I did, I can’t imagine who would be coming after me for a cut—of profits or literally.

 

[ABCD]

When I have a truly new jacket (Al Crowes, for example) that others here haven’t seen, I actually posted it.

Truly new, how?

I appreciate you posting pics of your jacket but your jacket is not new or unseen.

Same jacket, this one has a label.

 

[The Lost Cowboy]

On the hat side, we have different threads devoted to different makers or for particularly influential/desirable models. It's similar to what jchance is doing with a very important exception: the threads were started with one post and grew organically from there. They usually started with some Lounger saying something like, "Show us your Stetson 7XCB hats!" or "Whose got a Dobbs?"

Those threads then grew organically and are full of nuanced detail, analysis and history of the makers and the models. There are disagreements and arguments and facts presented that are truly priceless. There is no place for hats anywhere like The Fedora Lounge.

I have often regretted that there is not a similar treasure trove on the leather side (there are a few such jacket threads, but it is not nearly as robust a showing as on the hat side), and I can appreciate that jchance is trying to kickstart it.

But I really feel it's important to underscore the community effort of those hat threads. None of them are a one man show. And most of them are full of community members showing their own hats and nobody else's.

I never thought of it, but it is a little bit of a faux pas to post a photo of some other Lounger's hat. It is done sometimes to support an argument, but throughout all of those threads most members are posting their own items and discussing them.

That builds rapport and community and it builds truly encyclopedic knowledge.

But perhaps most importantly, those threads are a joy to read.

What I can say is this: what jchance is doing is not that. These threads might become that, but it is not that now and I think the blasts of info at the beginning of each thread might be a bit too daunting to encourage community engagement.

Time will tell. I wish these threads good luck - I have long believed that the leather side could benefit from this kind of substance. I am apprehensive about this initial approach, however.

 

[tmitchell59]

The Fedora Lounge is the largest repository on Vintage leather jackets. It has been going a long time. I always refer people here for accurate information on jackets and other outerwear.

David Himel and Dinnerman did the blog Art of the Leather Jacket years ago. It remains a great resource, but dormant. The TFL has taken that place and expanded it with new information and new ideas.

I started individual threads on several companies as a way to focus the discussion, give a history on the maker and give insight into the jackets themselves. Give them a context. a reflection of our culture.

I applauded @jchance and his efforts to organize the scattered information, I enjoy the makers back story and he has dug up some info and pics I have not seen. He wants to learn and his question having me asking questions.

 

[tmitchell59]

 

[jchance]

On the hat side, we have different threads devoted to different makers or for particularly influential/desirable models. It's similar to what jchance is doing with a very important exception: the threads were started with one post and grew organically from there. They usually started with some Lounger saying something like, "Show us your Stetson 7XCB hats!" or "Whose got a Dobbs?"

Those threads then grew organically and are full of nuanced detail, analysis and history of the makers and the models. There are disagreements and arguments and facts presented that are truly priceless. There is no place for hats anywhere like The Fedora Lounge.

I have often regretted that there is not a similar treasure trove on the leather side (there are a few such jacket threads, but it is not nearly as robust a showing as on the hat side), and I can appreciate that jchance is trying to kickstart it.

But I really feel it's important to underscore the community effort of those hat threads. None of them are a one man show. And most of them are full of community members showing their own hats and nobody else's.

I never thought of it, but it is a little bit of a faux pas to post a photo of some other Lounger's hat. It is done sometimes to support an argument, but throughout all of those threads most members are posting their own items and discussing them.

That builds rapport and community and it builds truly encyclopedic knowledge.

But perhaps most importantly, those threads are a joy to read.

What I can say is this: what jchance is doing is not that. These threads might become that, but it is not that now and I think the blasts of info at the beginning of each thread might be a bit too daunting to encourage community engagement.

Time will tell. I wish these threads good luck - I have long believed that the leather side could benefit from this kind of substance. I am apprehensive about this initial approach, however.

I appreciate the kind words and welcome disagreements and arguments where there are merits.

I’ve been wanting to get into collecting fedoras and hats too, but their threads are too long and intimidating for me to dig through. For example, the Dobbs Diner (137 pages), Pre-1940s Stetsons Station Western (61 pages).

If you have looked through my threads, each of the posts in a thread was trying to categorize and capture a design of that maker. How would I do that if I don’t use pics of jackets I found, where they be from other members or the internet? I was not making claims that those were my pics or jackets, each of my posts was more like: “hey, this post shows one design by this maker, all in one post for easy comparison. It may have 4 jackets of different colors, linings and patinas.” But if you read through the first 1-4 pages of a thread, you should have an idea of most available designs by that maker. To me, that’s very useful. The Wolf/Edgo thread (not mine) did an excellent job of this, and I wanted to apply that idea to other brands.

After I have captured 80+% of the designs of a maker, other members could chime in with their own jackets or new designs they found that the thread has yet to show, if they want. That would make threads concise and less intimidating to learn and reference back. It’s more like a wiki in the first few pages, then may be take on a life of its own to later be a long discussion thread, but that’s not necessary. It’s for my own repository of knowledge, but you’re welcome to benefit for it, too.

I’ll say this again—your way of doing things is not the only way. Just because it had been always done that way doesn’t mean I have to do things your way. I have my own way of doing things. Focusing on form over function is gatekeeping. It’s that simple.

 

[jeo]

I appreciate the enthusiasm to create threads like this, I truly do.

But I am also a stickler for accuracy.

I agree with Tony, there’s nothing new in any of these threads. Not the information and not the pictures.

As Lost Cowboy said, all the information in these threads were taken from prior threads that grew organically over a period spanning years. Many mistakes were made in those threads and over time, through a collective effort, information has been adjusted, corrected and confirmed.

As such, I actually do think that summarizing the end findings into one concise thread has much utility. But only if it’s accurate and of course to give credit where credit is due.

Here are my issue with these threads; They are littered with mistakes. Too many for me to even follow.

Many declarations are made in these threads without any evidence. For instance he called woolwonders aviator a Block. No reasoning, no evidence, no nothing. He recently made a declaration that a jacket that has studs and beads is an Aldencrest again without any evidence and it’s incorrect.

My second issue has been pointed out by others. It’s one thing to post other people’s pictures and findings without giving credit and passing it off as your own. A definite faux pas (although to his defense he has never claimed that these are his findings, he just doesn’t say anything or give credit so someone reading may come to the conclusion that these are his finding) However, It’s another thing completely to copy a description word for word as was pointed out in another thread. At that point one should just quote the thread they’re taking the information from.

With inaccurate information, it just serves to muddy the waters if someone new comes on TFL and does a search.

All of this would be fine and dandy, I’m more than willing to correct a mistake when I see one, but when you have multiple TFLers that have been around for a long time, have a lot of knowledge and experience both with jackets as well as forum etiquette, say the same thing, it’s really annoying when all you get back is argumentative stubbornness.

I say all of this not to discourage the OP, but to take a second, slow down and make sure postings are accurate and credit people when applicable when taking old threads and summarizing them.

Of course, if there is a new discussion that is brought up then that is something different but OP is only summarizing old threads which means that the info should be accurate and it isn’t.

 

[jchance]

 

[ABCD]

View attachment 739829

Minnesota Woolen. The Californian label doesn't belong to the jacket.


One of my current custom projects, here's a sneak preview

 

[jeo]

CSC Snake Plissken Escape from New York jacket that just arrived.

Here’s another one of mine that has the CSC label. Original Talon zip dated 1938.