how many rabbits go into a hat?

[Richard]

to make one regualr size felt hat, how many hares? how many beavers? approx.

 

[jamespowers]

Four to six depending on the hat size, weight of felt and grade of felt.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Brad Bowers]

One rabbit, usually white in color, is all I've ever seen come out of top hats, so I'm guessing only one goes in!

Brad

 

[fedoralover]

Has anyone heard this before? That the original 10X quality standard for an excellant hat, came from the fact that it took 10 beavers to get enough quality fur to make a 100% beaver felt hat. But then as time went on the X rating became a meaningless term as everyone started making different blends. I remember reading that somewhere but I have no idea if its true or not.

fedoralover

 

[gandydancer]

Has anyone heard this before? That the original 10X quality standard for an excellant hat, came from the fact that it took 10 beavers to get enough quality fur to make a 100% beaver felt hat. But then as time went on the X rating became a meaningless term as everyone started making different blends. I remember reading that somewhere but I have no idea if its true or not.

fedoralover

I have read that and many other explainations. The most likely seems to be that originally it was precentage of beaver fur in the blend in 10% steps. e.g 1x = 10% beaver to 10x = pure beaver.

Nowadays it only tells you where the hat fits in that particular manufactures range. e.g. Presumably a Stetson 5x hat is cheaper than a 10x hat, but you can not use it to compare it to a Biltmore hat.

 

[jamespowers]

I have read that and many other explainations. The most likely seems to be that originally it was precentage of beaver fur in the blend in 10% steps. e.g 1x = 10% beaver to 10x = pure beaver.

Nowadays it only tells you where the hat fits in that particular manufactures range. e.g. Presumably a Stetson 5x hat is cheaper than a 10x hat, but you can not use it to compare it to a Biltmore hat.

I am pretty sure you are right. The X system was a system based on the amount of beaver fur contained in the hat. That is why we see some lucky people here with Stetson 100s. They are 100 percent beaver. A Stetson 25, like I have, has 25% beaver and so on. Cavanagh and Dobbs had the same rating system. A Dobbs 100 is 100 percent beaver and a Cavanagh 50 is 50% beaver. This also mean that the accessories that went along with it were also better the higher the number. The sweatband was better, the ribbon was better and the liner was better. Even the finishing was better because the 50s and 100s were finished only by the most experienced hatters. So the materials and workmanship was superior.
Robert Doran, formerly of Doran Brothers---a hat machinery manufacturer---best describes the amount of fur needed to create a "dress hat." One rabbit pelt yields about an ounce of fur. You need four ounces of fur to create a dress hat. So I suppose a fedora would take four rabbit pelts to create it. Beaver is a slightly larger animal but you cannot(or you shouldn't ) used the back hair so it takes a few more more beaver pelts to create a 100% beaver hat. Beaver back hair is coarse because the beaver keeps hitting it on its above water home as he crawls into his den. Beaver Belly fur is the best because it receives the least amount of wear and tear so it is the softest fur on the pelt.
Biltmore gives names to its grades instead of numbers---at least they do now. The Rosellini is their top grade, the Grand Beaver is next and on down the line.

Regards to all,

J

 

[fedoralover]

JP, I may have to disagree with you on this one. A Stetson 100 is not the same as a 100X Stetson. Likewise a Dobbs 20 is not the same as a 20X Dobbs. I actually e-mailed Petersbros. about this some time ago. Joe Peters told me that if a hat says "Stetson 100" it is a Stetson that cost $100 originally and isn't in reference to its X rating. I have a Cavanagh 100 and the price tag of $100 is still under the sweatband, likewise my Stetson 25 still has the price tag of $25.00 under the sweatband.

The 2 are not necessarily the same, although it doesn't mean they couldn't be. The X rating has always been in reference to the hat quality in relation to other hats by the same manufacturer. But the quality can be more than just felt content, some have more attention to higher quality liners, (maybe they are glued in and not sewn,) sweats, and even gold or silver on the buckles of some of the western hats. They could take the same felt body and finish it different and mark it up to a higher price.

regards fedoralover

 

[Aaron Hats]

According to the book "Stetson Hats and the John B. Stetson Company 1865-1970":

"A 10X hat contained 100% beaver fur. In years past this X rating system was a convenient rough pricing guide, as a 3X hat would cost $30, a 4X hat, $40, and so on. In the mid-1940's, a 10X Stetson cost $100 and was the finest hat available. Hats marked by Stetson with the phrase "Clear Beaver" were also of the highest quality, manufactured from pure, undyed beaver fur. A similar grading system was used in straw hats, replacing the X's with stars."

 

[fedoralover]

I know their book says that and I don't claim to be a better historian than whoever wrote that book, however if you have had a lot of vintage hats, what that says doesn't add up. I have Stetson Whippets with the original price tags still in them of $10.00 and one Royal Deluxe has a tag of $12.50. I have a hard time believing that these quality hats from the 40s would be 1X hats. Also I've had a 3X Stetson Open Road and it didn't even come close to the quality of my Stetson 25 Open Road. So I guess the mystery continues.

fedoralover

 

[gandydancer]

10, 15, 25, etc

This series of numbers indicate price.

I have a Stetson Fifteen given to me by Sharptoys. It says "Stetson Fifteen" and "3X Beaver Quality" on the sweatband. It also has a factory price label of $15.

That pretty much says that the 15 label is the price and the 3x label is the quality. No direct relationship between the two.

One of the things is at the time of the Korean War or thereabout they changed from numbering dress hats by price to using the Royal, Royal Deluxe, Solverign, etc. They apparently did this because of inflation made it bad to label the hat by price point. Last years 15 would be this year 20, etc. I don't think it was a suddn thing more like something they did over several years. You can be pretty sure, I think, that a number labeled hat was made prior to the early 50's, and a name labeled hat was made post WWII.

(Does anyone have more diffinitive information on this? Also when they started using plastic in the hat liner?)

Also the style name Whippet, Stratoliner, etc is not the same as the quality name royal, solverign, etc.

 

[fedoralover]

And the confusion continues. I have an original full page Stetson hat ad from a 1936 Esquire magazine that has a "ROYAL" Stetson for sale at $10.00. So I hate to play the spoiler GD, but apparently the Term "Royal" was in use long before the 50s. I have another ad from 1938 that stated Stetsons were priced from $5.00 to $40.00. $40.00 for a hat in the 30s was a lot of money.

fedoralover

 

[gandydancer]

And the confusion continues. I have an original full page Stetson hat ad from a 1936 Esquire magazine that has a "ROYAL" Stetson for sale at $10.00. So I hate to play the spoiler GD, but apparently the Term "Royal" was in use long before the 50s. I have another ad from 1938 that stated Stetsons were priced from $5.00 to $40.00. $40.00 for a hat in the 30s was a lot of money.

fedoralover

I did ask if anyone had more definative information on this. Yours seem to fit that catagory. One of the reasons for joining a discussion here it to refine your knowledge beyond what one had to start with. If one has to be "right" it is better not to post at all.

Anoother other Possibility is that Stetson used one term for hats sold in department stores, and the other for hats sold in speciality stores which was pretty common.

 

[fedoralover]

Huh???? And bye bye!!

Ah, I thought by contributing what the original hat ads said WAS helping to refine the discussion on this subject, but it was in no way meant to be the last word on it. Sorry you took it that way. However, with all due respect your statement about the labels being changed around the time of the Korean war was incorrect, as the hat ads themselves attest to. But that's okay I don't have to post here anymore. Bye Bye.

fedoralover