Insights on Freewheelers. Is Mulholland overpriced/overrated at the moment?

[Aloysius]

the leather you get from the tannery will have grainier and more flexible sections right off the bat. I could see a brand trying to cut down costs using more of those. could be esthetics, function, or just trying to squeeze more jackets out of less leather.

That being said, I've never seen a result like 'they used a certain section and my jacket fell apart because of it'

Yeah what I'm saying is sometimes you select a smoother panel and it has grain pop anyway, or a somewhat grainy panel that doesn't etc.

 

[MrProper]

Mullholland leather is better quality than my Eastman jacket leather

It's impressive that you can do that. I'm no expert, and I can only tell bad leather from good leather (and even that's rather subjective), but I can't tell good leather from very good leather. I might notice differences in the leather, but does that mean the quality is better? I don't think I'm the only one who feels that way.

 

[sirkris]

but I can't tell good leather from very good leather

I think the problem is: " the criteria" of a leather quality definition I am using.
Will try to explain wha I mean by it:
1. Leather smoothness on the same panel: If leather has breaks, wrinkles, different grain it is of less quality.
2. Different colour of the same leather part decreases the leather quality.
4. In case of horsehide the leather thickness. But within rational limits.
3. Visually different leather parts used for different parts of the jacket. But it is rather definition of the jacket leather quality rather than single panel. I measure it visually using percentage of the same best quality leather used for the jacket on whole jacket.

Bear in mind that quality is only one aspect of the jacket properties. Other may be :
- style,
- comfort of wearing the jacket,
- ease of fit
- weight
- used zips, buckles, buttons...
- robustness
- the way the leather is aging
- quality of stitches

Quality of the leather is only one of jacket properties. Not necessarily advantage or disadvantage.
As I mentioned I like Eastman grain and wrinkles.
But regarding to my definition the leather quality is not superb. But it matches perfectly the style.
The colour: in some jacket styles it is the advantage if varies. But as a jacket leather property treated as a separate criteria it may be a disadvantage.
My impression is that the leather quality i defined is used often interchangeably with other features which have impact on jacket value (materialistic and non materialistic value).

 

[Carlos840]

I think the problem is: " the criteria" of a leather quality definition I am using.
Will try to explain wha I mean by it:
1. Leather smoothness on the same panel: If leather has breaks, wrinkles, different grain it is of less quality.
2. Different colour of the same leather part decreases the leather quality.
4. In case of horsehide the leather thickness. But within rational limits.
3. Visually different leather parts used for different parts of the jacket. But it is rather definition of the jacket leather quality rather than single panel. I measure it visually using percentage of the same best quality leather used for the jacket on whole jacket.

Bear in mind that quality is only one aspect of the jacket properties. Other may be :
- style,
- comfort of wearing the jacket,
- ease of fit
- weight
- used zips, buckles, buttons...
- robustness
- the way the leather is aging
- quality of stitches

Quality of the leather is only one of jacket properties. Not necessarily advantage or disadvantage.
As I mentioned I like Eastman grain and wrinkles.
But regarding to my definition the leather quality is not superb. But it matches perfectly the style.
The colour: in some jacket styles it is the advantage if varies. But as a jacket leather property treated as a separate criteria it may be a disadvantage.
My impression is that the leather quality i defined is used often interchangeably with other features which have impact on jacket value (materialistic and non materialistic value).

I think the problem is you have made up randome facts that you attribute to quality without really knowing much about what makes quality leather...

By your standards this smooth hom*genous leather is "better quality":

Than this wrinkly, grainy, uneven "low quality" leather:

Which is wrong by every measurable standard!
The things you write make it obvious you don't know what you are talking about...

 

[Brandrea33]

I think the problem is you have made up randome facts that you attribute to quality without really knowing much about what makes quality leather...

By your standards this smooth hom*genous leather is "better quality":

Than this wrinkly, grainy, uneven "low quality" leather:

Which is wrong by every measurable standard!
The things you write make it obvious you don't know what you are talking about...

I know which one I’d take

 

[sirkris]

By your standards this smooth hom*genous leather is "better quality":

Unfortunately I cannot comment your post. In UK imgur photos are blocked.

 

[ABCD]

Unfortunately I cannot comment your post. In UK imgur photos are blocked.

By your standards this smooth hom*genous leather is "better quality":

Than this wrinkly, grainy, uneven "low quality" leather:

 

[Carlos840]

View attachment 747711 View attachment 747712

View attachment 747713 View attachment 747714 View attachment 747715

Thank you kind sir, you are a Gentleman.

Edit: sorry i made you look at such poor quality leather...

 

[sirkris]

View attachment 747711 View attachment 747712

View attachment 747713 View attachment 747714 View attachment 747715

Thank you ABCD,

As far as I can judge based on photos:
Provided that on all photos leathers have similar thickness and fibres density and both all are horsehide leathers(I cannot judge this from photos) I would say first 2 photos show good quality leather.
Photo 3: wrinkles (or grain) does not seem to vary on the photo so it is good quality - this jacket may be broken and softer so you can see wrinkles when it folds.
Photo 4: Yes - I would call it worse quality leather but when it is continuous for whole panel it may not look very bad.
Photo 5: It is nothing bad about the leather: this is continuous similar grain/wrinkles - maybe too wrinkled and softer near shoulder.
But without those wrinkles near shoulder I would say it could be better quality.

However if you compare different thickness or fibre densities leather I may be wrong - I base only on my eyes without other senses.

This is my opinion based on my taste. Ready to hear how wrong I am

 

[ABCD]

This is my opinion based on my taste. Ready to hear how wrong I am

Apparently you think corrected leather is better than full grain or top grain leather.

Corrected leather is of lower quality because it has been sanded to remove imperfections. You can probably see the pores on that vanson jacket.

 

[sirkris]

Apparently you think corrected leather is better than full grain or top grain leather.

Corrected leather is of lower quality because it has been sanded to remove imperfections. You can probably see the pores on that vanson jacket.

Maybe I am ignorant but I cannot say from the photo it is corrected leather. I thought you showing two top grain leathers.
Why shinki on Mullholland is so smooth ? I do not think it was corrected. Have the leather parts been choosen carefully neglecting non-smooth parts?

 

[Tom71]

Maybe I am ignorant but I cannot say from the photo it is corrected leather. I thought you showing two top grain leathers.
Why shinki on Mullholland is so smooth ? I do not think it was corrected. Have the leather parts been choosen carefully neglecting non-smooth parts?

The leather on my Mulholland is very grainy. I am sure, as with many natural resources, it varies from batch to batch.

Of course, corrected leather CAN be top-quality too. I remember that RMC issued a sports jacket a few years ago that was corrected and printed. Nobody suggested, it was of inferior quality, but many pointed out the oddness of such an endeavour.

As ABCD pointed out, very even leather is more often than not a result of the treatment of the leather (correction imperfection, evening out the outer part of the hide for colouring etc.) and is regularly not a telltale sign of (good or poor) quality per se.

 

[sirkris]

The leather is my Mulholland is very grainy

Just curious:
Mine jacket leather smoothness is more or less like on those photos:
https://dc4.de/freewheelers-co-mulh...tage Black,other known Shinki leather jackets.
Is yours more grainy? Irregular?

 

[Tom71]

Just curious:
Mine jacket leather smoothness is more or less like on those photos:
https://dc4.de/freewheelers-co-mulholland-spartan-leathers-sportwear-shell-cordovan-horsehide-jacket.html#:~:text=Vintage Black,other known Shinki leather jackets.
Is yours more grainy? Irregular?

Yeah, more grainy than that. Not “irregular” in the sense of mismatched panels, but it’s not really a geometrical pattern either.

I‘ll do a closeup photo once the sun‘s up again.

 

[MrProper]

This is my opinion based on my taste.

And that's exactly the point. Opinion and personal taste say nothing about quality. Quality can be proven by facts.
If you say you like A better than B, that's perfectly fine. If you say, based on your opinion, that A is generally better than B, then you may be wrong.

 

[sirkris]

Quality can be proven by facts.

Exactly. Quality is sth you should measure. It needs metrics.
I gave criteria I measure the leather quality based on.
If people thing I am wrong and I cannot estimate quality correctly they should provide measurable criteria. Then we can measure the quality. Some may agree on them, some may not. Arguments like "It looks you know nothing about the leather quality" brings nothing to the discussion. Apart from the smile on my face.

 

[MrProper]

I gave criteria I measure the leather quality based on.

Your criteria say more about your taste than anything objective about quality. But you also write that these are your own criteria and not objective ones. That's fine.

 

[Harris HTM]

I gave criteria I measure the leather quality based on.

Are the criteria you provided, such as thickness, uniformity of grain or lack thereof, etc, universal or your own perceptions?

 

[sirkris]

Are the criteria you provided, such as thickness, uniformity of grain or lack thereof, etc, universal or your own perceptions?

Mine. They may be wrong in absolute meaning. But judgement + criteria, judgement is based on, give more info than only judgement. I am happy to learn about real absolute measurable criteria defined by experts.

 

[Harris HTM]

Mine

Clear.

defined by experts.

Well, in this forum you will find many self proclaimed experts. Once upon a time they were exclaiming how better cxl fqhh is than cxl steer, until it was proven that steerhide was sold as horse. More recently other 'experts' claimed that a fifth grader can tell the difference between horse and steerhide (while people like Ken and John from Aero and GW who have collectively spend a century on leather jackets claim it is visually impossible).