Another Shinki Schott - P568H Vandals Jacket

[MrProper]

My #5 universal is working fine as well, but it's still BS form Aero side not to allow customers to choose a larger zipper. I'd go for a #10 over a #5 without any doubt. Especially for CXL.

If the #5 works well, why go for the #10? For visual reasons?
Visually, I prefer the #5; the #10 is really bulky.

 

[TartuWolf]

If the #5 works well, why go for the #10? For visual reasons?
Visually, I prefer the #5; the #10 is really bulky.

Because I prefer both the look and feel of #10s on a heavy leather jacket. #5 is "good enough" yet finicky. I feel like I need to be extra careful with it.

 

[ABCD]

And of course, this jacket is modeled after a 50s d pocket which actually had wider than normal shoulders, so it’s all backwards.

Here they are side by side, the Vandals jacket on the left and the 50s Sears Hercules on the right.

In terms of overall proportions, I think the Vandals jacket is a good looking jacket. My only gripe is the back length which is about 2" too long for the style imo.

But I do realize that a jacket with 22.5" back length probably won't be a commercial succes in this day and age of hoodies, untucked shirts and low rise pants so I totally understand Schott's decision to elongate the body.

 

[ABCD]

The short body length on this Field Leathers Windward repro looks so much better than the elongated Schott.

 

[Edward]

16.5 shoulders on a 20.75 pits and 24 back length? No thanks!
Seems like the price includes both the Schott fanboy fee and the "Shinkey is superior to everything!" fan boy fee.
And a generic nickel Schott YKK zipper for a 1900$ jacket? I'd much rather go for some brass Waldes at that price.

Overall I think the Aero KOTR is a MUCH better alternative to this. Only the typical #5 is a huge bummer as always.

If the fit was right and at a more regular price, I wouldn't say no to the Schott. As it is, though, the 'Made in USA' factor and it being Shinki aren't enough to make it worth the price to me. I'm sure though they'll sell out the limited run of these to a specific market; Schott have been round long enough that I'd be surprised if they put out something they can't sell.

This sort of a take on a D pocket the KOTR would be my go to also. I don't dislike the Schott, but the asking price is just far in excess of what it would be worth to me; other opinions are, of course, available.

If the #5 works well, why go for the #10? For visual reasons?
Visually, I prefer the #5; the #10 is really bulky.

I'm the same. I supposed a lot depends on aesthetics. These design appeal to me because I want the original, pre-1960 looks (which is of course what Aero are doing). The bigger zips that became de riguer on motorcycle jacket into the 70s and 80s particularly took away from the aesthetic for me, made it look like this sort of thing (image not entirely to scale, but it's not far oof the look of some, human sized jackets with the big zips):

Not for me, though obviously there are people who will make them that way because there's a market for that. All too modern for my personal tastes.

 

[Bfd70]

I can’t seem to find the size chart of the initial vandals offering. I’m assuming the numbers are the same?

 

[Aloysius]

My main argument is how TFLers think there is some kind of magic PTP:chest ratio that's true of all jackets, and this flies in the face of how patterning works, in any kind of clothing.

 

[Khilij]

My main argument is how TFLers think there is some kind of magic PTP:chest ratio that's true of all jackets, and this flies in the face of how patterning works, in any kind of clothing.

I'm interested in learning. Could you please elaborate?

 

[Aloysius]

I'm interested in learning. Could you please elaborate?

Patterning isn't just a matter of picking the right numbers (if it were, then the various Five Star experiments here wouldn't have been failures). But the point I'm making here is even simpler than that.

We tend to think there is a certain pit-to-pit measurement that is always correct for us, and I have fallen into this mentality myself, but this just doesn't hold. (An expensive lesson!)

Some people here have a tendency to think additional chest space/drape is a war crime. I think some of this is actually downstream from early 2010s/late 2000s raw denim culture (much like fast fading leathers are an easy analogue to denim fades) in which it was seen as correct to downsize at least one if not more, because "it'll stretch" and conform to your body better, etc.

We can look at an extreme example to illustrate the difference between straight measurements and patterning. There are a bunch of people here who are enthusiastic wearers of Swedish dispatch jackets. I decided to check one out as a result. These are--by the measurements-- massive. But if you try one on in a size smaller than your own (even though all the measurements are in your 'correct' range), it feels too small and constricting.

If you have a number of well fitting garments, whether ready to wear or bespoke, and you look at how they're put together, you'll notice they vary in measurements, whether due to fit, silhouette, or the maker's style. A poorly fitting garment is more likely too small (strain and insufficient material) than too big (which until you get to the extremes of some 90s fashion, is well within the bounds of normal drape).

 

[Khilij]

Patterning isn't just a matter of picking the right numbers (if it were, then the various Five Star experiments here wouldn't have been failures). But the point I'm making here is even simpler than that.

We tend to think there is a certain pit-to-pit measurement that is always correct for us, and I have fallen into this mentality myself, but this just doesn't hold. (An expensive lesson!)

Some people here have a tendency to think additional chest space/drape is a war crime. I think some of this is actually downstream from early 2010s/late 2000s raw denim culture (much like fast fading leathers are an easy analogue to denim fades) in which it was seen as correct to downsize at least one if not more, because "it'll stretch" and conform to your body better, etc.

We can look at an extreme example to illustrate the difference between straight measurements and patterning. There are a bunch of people here who are enthusiastic wearers of Swedish dispatch jackets. I decided to check one out as a result. These are--by the measurements-- massive. But if you try one on in a size smaller than your own (even though all the measurements are in your 'correct' range), it feels too small and constricting.

If you have a number of well fitting garments, whether ready to wear or bespoke, and you look at how they're put together, you'll notice they vary in measurements, whether due to fit, silhouette, or the maker's style. A poorly fitting garment is more likely too small (strain and insufficient material) than too big (which until you get to the extremes of some 90s fashion, is well within the bounds of normal drape).

Thank you very much! I think I understand now.

 

[Aloysius]

Thank you very much! I think I understand now.

I made a thread with some video resources a year and a half ago on the topic if anyone is interested.

 

[Bfd70]

xs s and m sold out.

 

[Tom71]

xs s and m sold out.

Despite finding the price on this one absurdly high, I will say that the Shinki Schott used one my jacket (P617H it was called) is very, very nice indeed.
VERY substantial, with a worthy looking deep glow and a wonderful smell. Not unlike the leather on the TMC “Durable” Repro. Certainly much more impressive than the Shinki, RMC uses (nice as it is).

 

[Boulderunner]

I have been pestering Schott on IG to release another Shinki jacket but a single rider with a single piece back, and then this came in my email. I already purchased the first Schott Shinki double rider the 617h with the all black hardware and casein treated Shinki. I actually really, really like these Schott Shinki collabs. Schott has great comfortable patterns. The casein treated Shinki is really special. It reminds me of my rainbow country Hercules. I reach for the Schott far more frequently than my j24L for actual riding the biswing back is much more comfortable. The trade off being the back looks chunkier and less slim compared to j24. The black and white check lining, the softer Shinki and the pattern all make it a really nice jacket. I agree 1900$ is getting up there but I’d honestly rather have a Schott in that super nice casein treated Shinki then a Ridley. Himel now costs 3050$ for jackets, j24 is now 3k, we all looked away for a moment and everything got more expensive in jacket world.

 

[Bfd70]

Despite finding the price on this one absurdly high, I will say that the Shinki Schott used one my jacket (P617H it was called) is very, very nice indeed.
VERY substantial, with a worthy looking deep glow and a wonderful smell. Not unlike the leather on the TMC “Durable” Repro. Certainly much more impressive than the Shinki, RMC uses (nice as it is).

I mean, jacket prices have gone up substantially in the last 5 years. A badallasi ridley from aero is $1900. A Double helix deviant is $1900. A j24 from lost worlds is $2800. I don’t think Schott is too far off the mark price wise. Do i think all of these prices are obscene. Yes. Has my income gone up to match, no.

 

[Tom71]

I mean, jacket prices have gone up substantially in the last 5 years. A badallasi ridley from aero is $1900. A Double helix deviant is $1900. A j24 from lost worlds is $2800. I don’t think Schott is too far off the mark price wise. Do i think all of these prices are obscene. Yes. Has my income gone up to match, no.

Yes, fair point (@Boulderunner has equally valied arguments).

I always view prices from the point of somebody having to pay another 22% on VAT and duties. I still find the standard SCHOTT lineup extremely good value for money. Especially the horsehide variants leave nothing to be desired for those wanting a leather with "an extra twist".

I am solely agrueing that the upcharge of USD 700 on an existing pattern just for the use of shinki is exagerated. SCHOTT is basically cannibalizing in their own lineup.

I agree that compared to other offerings, this is still way within the "normal range".

 

[Edward]

Patterning isn't just a matter of picking the right numbers (if it were, then the various Five Star experiments here wouldn't have been failures). But the point I'm making here is even simpler than that.

We tend to think there is a certain pit-to-pit measurement that is always correct for us, and I have fallen into this mentality myself, but this just doesn't hold. (An expensive lesson!)

Some people here have a tendency to think additional chest space/drape is a war crime. I think some of this is actually downstream from early 2010s/late 2000s raw denim culture (much like fast fading leathers are an easy analogue to denim fades) in which it was seen as correct to downsize at least one if not more, because "it'll stretch" and conform to your body better, etc.

We can look at an extreme example to illustrate the difference between straight measurements and patterning. There are a bunch of people here who are enthusiastic wearers of Swedish dispatch jackets. I decided to check one out as a result. These are--by the measurements-- massive. But if you try one on in a size smaller than your own (even though all the measurements are in your 'correct' range), it feels too small and constricting.

If you have a number of well fitting garments, whether ready to wear or bespoke, and you look at how they're put together, you'll notice they vary in measurements, whether due to fit, silhouette, or the maker's style. A poorly fitting garment is more likely too small (strain and insufficient material) than too big (which until you get to the extremes of some 90s fashion, is well within the bounds of normal drape).

Very much so. I remember back in the Lauder Years, when Aero had an "anything goes" culture, seeing a Highwayman somebody had specced up seeking a slim fit (something akin to a Cafe Racer with a shirt-style collar on it, or the later Original 59er model) The final jacket didn't look like a slim fitting jacket, more just a regular Highwayman downsized and worn too small.

I think a lot of us who lived through the Baggy Nineties wore a lot of stuff too small when we got into vintage as a reaction. My wife once said "just because you can fasten it up doesn't mean it fits"; how right she was.

I mean, jacket prices have gone up substantially in the last 5 years. A badallasi ridley from aero is $1900. A Double helix deviant is $1900. A j24 from lost worlds is $2800. I don’t think Schott is too far off the mark price wise. Do i think all of these prices are obscene. Yes. Has my income gone up to match, no.

Across the board this is true. I find myself now realistically considering jackets at a price I would have thought obscene a decade ago, and which certainly are much more of a struggle for me to afford given beyond-inflation price rises. Schott went up massively in price well ahead of the recent curve, partly their own rises, partly the historically low value of the pound this last decade. I remember though my local Scott stockist just pre pandemic was asking about £600 for a 618, now they want a grand. They do seem expensive to me I think in part because they're working to a production scale far above what a lot of the other makers we like round here are, and in the back of my head I instinctively expect that to make them cheaper. Of course that's before you get into the complex web of marketing strategy and perceived brand value. There was a time Gibson struggled to give Les Pauls away - what saved them was a CEO who took the strategy of doubling the price. It's a funny old world.

 

[AeroFan_07]

I've withheld comment until now. However, the first and only thing I really saw when I looked at the photo of this on this thread was "golly, why don't they just give a little two-tone edging around the "D" Pocket to show how vastly oversized this is now. Maybe on a larger jacket it might look a little more proportionate?

 

[Aloysius]

I always view prices from the point of somebody having to pay another 22% on VAT and duties. I still find the standard SCHOTT lineup extremely good value for money. Especially the horsehide variants leave nothing to be desired for those wanting a leather with "an extra twist".

I am solely agrueing that the upcharge of USD 700 on an existing pattern just for the use of shinki is exagerated. SCHOTT is basically cannibalizing in their own lineup.

Reading this, I realized that the increase in Shinki up charge is probably a matter of the constitutionally dubious executive tariff policy currently in effect. So it’s whatever duties were already in effect + new Japan tariffs, which change now a dime via the executive’s social media account.

There have been quite a few products in other hobbies I saw criticised for not dropping prices with a new generation, or slightly increasing them, and when I ran the numbers it corresponded almost exactly to the aluminum tariff.

They do seem expensive to me I think in part because they're working to a production scale far above what a lot of the other makers we like round here are, and in the back of my head I instinctively expect that to make them cheaper.

I’ve mentioned this before but this really is not the case. Everyone on TFL thinks Schott is Nike or something. Schott’s factory is a fairly small building in an office park, which includes both offices and factory floor. It’s smaller than Vanson, probably slightly bigger than Aero.

Wouldn’t be surprised if Rainbow Country or other JP OEM factories are larger.

 

[Tom71]

Reading this, I realized that the increase in Shinki up charge is probably a matter of the constitutionally dubious executive tariff policy currently in effect. So it’s whatever duties were already in effect + new Japan tariffs, which change now a dime via the executive’s social media account.

Good point! I may have overlooked that. American makers should stick to Horween then... (only half-joking here; the pro-tariff fraction does argue that production need and will be onshored as a result. That´s not really compatible with raising consumer prices indefinitely, but we shall see...)