got myself some new duds.

Just got this suit:


that one's a little blurry. here's one with my Stetson Twenty:


I bought two other suits a few weeks ago (both late 30s double-breasted suits). This one was made in 1948. That's pushing it a little, but it was cheapish and I love the color. I just happened to be trying this on last night when my wife yanked out the camera, so I thought I'd get a few pics for you. That's a NOS 40s dress shirt (took the pins out of it myself), as well as a great super-short 40s tie.

You have The Look, no doubt about that.

For me, nothing beats the look of a double-breasted suit.

I have to get one of those.

Thanks for the kind words.

Yeah, that suit's a beauty, all right. It's mid-weight and could be worn in summer without much problem. I also have a summerweight, paper-thin dark brown double-breasted from 1939, as well as a black-and-white houndstooth from the same year, also double breasted (though it's far too hot to wear that one right now). I'll snap a few pics of those the next time I put 'em on. I'm on a serious hunt now to expand my suit collection, as I'm hoping to just start wearing suits daily. Gotta have more than three to do that, though.

I have such a small waist (30) that I have an awfully hard time finding pants that fit, even when the suit fits. In these three suits, though, I lucked out big-time. They fit like they were made for me.

Where do you find those suits? I wear a 44L and it just seems like to find that, I need to buy new. I guess there are places that make new suits that have the older styling.

I'm not trying to sound gross or anything, but from what I have seen, older pants have bigger crotches in them. That is to say, they are longer in the stride than newer pants.

This was very noticable to me in the James Cagney film, "The Picture Snatcher". He opened up his double breasted suit jacket to hide a picture he had stolen, and his pants went way past where people wear their pants now. If I can, I'll try to get a picture that shows what I mean, if I'm confusing you guys.

You are one old-fashioned* looking dude!

Great suit!

David

*Golden era

Zohar I know exactly what you mean. I've never thought about it until you mentioned it, but you are absolutely right.

Beautiful suit Bob

You are very lucky to be thin and slender, as I cannot find such a beautiful suit in my 44 S size. Art has tons of nice stuff, but unless I grow (taller) it's not gonna happen. About the crotch thing..yes the suits were cut differently back then...
Guess less infertility problems in that generation due to "extra cooling".

Basically, the pants were made to be worn exceptionally high (like above the belly button). The first time I wore a pair of these pants, I happened to walk past a mirror, and I stopped dead in my tracks and said: "That's it! That's the element I was missing! High-waisted pants make it!" I have four or five pair of them, and they are great, though it took a little getting used to having a waistband above my bellybutton. Now I feel weird wearing lower pants. Go figure.

Anyway, yeah, because the waistband is made to sit so high, they had to make the crotch pretty long.

I love that suit... congratulations.

Your PM box still says full... what gives?

hmmmm...I'll clean it out again.

Very nice, Havershaw. That?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s a great look for you. I love double breasted suits, both 6 x 2 and 4 x 1. Very elegant.

For those interested, I did a bit of research on the English high-back brace trouser at the time of my last bespoke suit purchase. It must be remembered, however, that proper trouser cut and line must be in balance with jacket cut or the overall effect can accentuate a man's least admirable anatomical features.

Proper dress pants should be cut to be worn on the natural waist , which is the transverse area above the depressions in the hip bone. If you place your hands akimbo on your waist, thumbs toward the back and press, you should be able to feel a sort of depression at the anterior prominence of the hip bones. The area defined by the transverse circumference is generally considered the natural waist (at least in the sartorial world). Pants should be suspended from the shoulders and positioned on the natural waist, preferably by use of braces, for proper line and drape. Most Savile Row tailors worth patronizing will gladly make English high-back brace trousers, which have a pronounced V-sharp cut into a high rear waist band that allows the braces to attach and suspend the pants to the most elegant effect. Some may contend that the look is odd, or that the line of the trousers is broken by this design, but it must be remembered that strict protocol dictates that a man not remove his jacket while in public. Perhaps a somewhat dated notion, but one that is sartorially sound.

Obviously, trousers so cut must be of sufficient rise (fullness of pants from lowest point of crotch to waist band) to avoid binding, loss of line, and physical discomfort. When properly cut, these trousers have a graceful fluidity in which full double pleats subtly converge into a sharp and well defined crease, and gradually taper to a gentle break on the throat of the shoe. A hallmark of the elegant dresser of the 1930's, this style trouser continues to be indicative of a man of sartorial discrimination and elegance.

I've always been of fan of split back pants, and nothing holds a pants crease better than suspenders with well placed buttons.

Well said

Rayk that was excellent. I remember the gangster "Curly" in KEY LARGO wore the same type of pants with braces (and a belt) in the movie. They had the high back and I believe the "V" cut. Very good look.