DuPont Process

[hargist]

I picked up a Hopkins Baltimore fedora on my last trip to Indiana. It's a nice looking hat, but I don't know anything about that brand. Does anybody out there know anything?

A feature of the hat that I discovered stamped on the sweatband is this: DuPont Process, Shape Retaining, Water Repellent.

I've never heard of the DuPont Process. Does anyone know anything about it because I was thinking about reshaping the hat. It currently has a teardrop crown and I was thinking about reshaping it myself into a diamond. Right now, it looks too perfect, like a machine did it. I much prefer hat shapes that look more hand done.

But if this DuPont Process will inhibit me from shaping it the way I want, I won't do it. If anyone knows anything about it, I'd love to hear it.

 

[deanglen]

Wool, perhaps? I wouldn't think fur felt needs treatment like that. Got any pictures of the hat? Never heard of the process or the hat brand.

dean

 

[tonyb]

Right off the top of my head, I can think of a couple of vintage fur felt lids -- a Disney and a Lee -- among my collection whose sweatband embossings indicate they were given some DuPont water-repellency process back when new. For whatever it's worth to you, if it weren't for that embossing, I'd have no clue whatsoever that they had been so treated.

 

[Feraud]

A couple of my hats note this feature too.
This was discussed... a water repelling treatment from what I recall. A search should bring up more info.

 

[hargist]

Wool, perhaps? I wouldn't think fur felt needs treatment like that. Got any pictures of the hat? Never heard of the process or the hat brand.

dean

I'll see if I can get a picture up tonight. It's definitely fur felt. I'm just wondering if I can reshape it without a problem considering that this DuPont process is "shape retaining." I wonder if that means that the hat will want to keep the shape it's currently in even after I reshape it.

 

[jamespowers]

The DuPont process is a water repellent. Just as mentioned before, other brands had their own name for water proofing. The Mallory called it Cravenetted. Stetson had Aquanized and a host of others were present. I wouldn't worry about it effecting the shaping. I never noticed in my Hopkins. I'd love to see a picture as Hopkins was noted as quite avante garde in the hat arena. I'll have to get a picture of mine. The edge is bound with denium.

Regards,

J

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Steam will deal with it. The DuPont process is no match for steam. But its effects will be retained after steaming.

Given that Dupont was a plastics/petrochemicals company, i assume they treated the fur with such a chemical. After the mercury era, one had to stop the felt shrinking/tapering somehow . . .

bk

 

[Feraud]

Given that Dupont was a plastics/petrochemicals company, i assume they treated the fur with such a chemical. After the mercury era, one had to stop the felt shrinking/tapering somehow . . .

bk

This process was used after and not in additon to the mercury era?

 

[Baron Kurtz]

I dunno, i was speculating again . . .

Frankly i'm convinced the majority of these "revolutionary processes" were mere marketing ploys, and didn't actually represent a change in production methods. Colour me cynic.

bk

 

[hargist]

Good information, gentlemen. I will definitely be steaming it soon and I'll see about posting some pics tonight.

The color is light brown. I suppose taupe is more accurate. The band is olive green and so is the edge.

 

[hargist]

Stetson had Aquanized ...

I think "Aquanized" is my favorite. It sounds so... futuristic!

 

[Feraud]

I dunno, i was speculating again . . .

Frankly i'm convinced the majority of these "revolutionary processes" were mere marketing ploys, and didn't actually represent a change in production methods. Colour me cynic.

bk

Whether or not the mercury and DuPont processes ran concurrent or not is an interesting question...

I too will try to get a picture posted of my DuPont treated hat.

 

[tonyb]

My sources indicate that mercury went out of use in hat manufacturing back in the late 1930s.
Just dug out the Disney and the Lee from the closet and noted that the Dupont process was called "Aridex." I'm fairly confident that both of those lids date from the 1940s.
Was the water-repellency stuff used as a replacement for the mercury process? Beats me. I've read that mercury was used to "carrot" the fur, so called because it imparted an orange-ish, carrot-like color. The purpose, as I understand it, was to raise the little barbs on the surface of the individual fur fibers so that they locked together more thoroughly, which resulted in a stronger, denser felt. Did this also make it more water-repellent and less likely to shrink and taper? Again, beats me. But it sounds reasonable.

 

[jamespowers]

This process was used after and not in additon to the mercury era?

It was used right along side the mercury era actually:
1918 Mallory

1937 Mallory

1936 Lee Water Bloc

Regards,

J

 

[jamespowers]

I've read that mercury was used to "carrot" the fur, so called because it imparted an orange-ish, carrot-like color. The purpose, as I understand it, was to raise the little barbs on the surface of the individual fur fibers so that they locked together more thoroughly, which resulted in a stronger, denser felt.

That is exactly what Mercury was used for. Water repellent was also used as each had its own function. A Mercury felt is just a tighter fur "weave" for want of a better term. It made the felt more cohesive. That could translate to more water repellent but the ads show that they also used various processes for water repellent along with it so it is unlikely that was all that was needed.
I just wish the factory made hats of today were so well treated. :eusa_doh:

Regards,

J

 

[Art Fawcett]

James & Tony, you are both correct, to a point. The waterproofing process is separate from the carroting process, two different functions. The carroting makes for a tighter felting and thus DID add a certain degree of water resistence, but the "Aquanizing" would be done ( most normally in the form of a spray) after the body was shaped into the rough form ( think car wash assembly line) or after making the hat from the rough felt. Although I'm sure it helped and I waterproof my hats also, I think the bigger side is the marketing realities. Every company looks for an advantage over the competition ( and still today...think the "X" system) and using a fancy word helps the image as much as the hat.

 

[Fletch]

I think "Aquanized" is my favorite. It sounds so... futuristic!

It sounds so...greenish-blue.

"I been Aquanized!"

 

[Feraud]

Here is a picture of my Lee. It is stamped Water Bloc in the sweatband.

 

[jamespowers]

James & Tony, you are both correct, to a point. The waterproofing process is separate from the carroting process, two different functions. The carroting makes for a tighter felting and thus DID add a certain degree of water resistence, but the "Aquanizing" would be done ( most normally in the form of a spray) after the body was shaped into the rough form ( think car wash assembly line) or after making the hat from the rough felt. Although I'm sure it helped and I waterproof my hats also, I think the bigger side is the marketing realities. Every company looks for an advantage over the competition ( and still today...think the "X" system) and using a fancy word helps the image as much as the hat.

Thanks for that. It clears up a few points. :eusa_clap

Regards,

J

 

[jamespowers]

It sounds so...greenish-blue.

"I been Aquanized!"

More like---I've Been Aquanized:

Regards,

J