Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

My New SM Wholesale A-2

HPA Rep

Vendor
Messages
855
Location
New Jersey
Sorry for the offtopic here, but I want advantage of the opportunity and ask about it.
Charles, given what you said, how do you assess in terms of the authenticity of the weight A2 Eastman Star Sportswear?

It depends on the size, Flightengineer, as well as the hide consignment. We had some A-2's from the winter that were superb in weight, being about as good as they have been since ELC changed to the newer tannery in 2011, but Gary Eastman said it was just luck of the draw and not an intentional shift in weight.

By and large, ELC remains fairly close to vintage, but still some ounces heavier vs. older ELC A-2's, most of which had the weight pretty well dialed in. I am speculating based on past hands-on encounters with other high-end repro A-2's, that ELC A-2's are still lighter in weight, but I suggest everyone perform their own weigh-ins to be sure.
 

HPA Rep

Vendor
Messages
855
Location
New Jersey
Does SM Wholesale have a store front in Newport Beach? I’d like to check it out.

I don't think it's designed as a store, but I do think you can set an appointment with Steve to drop by the factory and warehouse. Give him a call and I'm sure he'll work with you as his busy schedule allows.

I've known Steve personally since 1991 and have never been, but I was at his house before we went to dinner in February. We hadn't been in each other's company since the late 1990's, and this time worked on GREYHOUND together. I also was on the phone with him just yesterday to help with specs. for U. S. Army cotton twill.
 

Technonut

Practically Family
Messages
842
Location
West "By Gawd" Virginia
CBI, I am not really talking about the thicknesses, though this can be a bone of contention with repro makers; rather it's the total jacket weight. It can, I think, have something to due with tanning methods available today, at least where the thickness seems pretty close to vintage but the weight is notably in excess. Please note that the hide thickness wasn't specified, just the hide weight in ounces/foot, so you could, in theory, have thicker hides that had the same weight as a thinner example. It may sound counterintuitive, but it could play out.

Vintage A-2's of the same approximate measures and with all elements being roughy equal, just aren't 3 1/2 lbs. Even 3 lbs is often hard to find! For me, usually a size 40 in vintage, seeing the majority weigh a few ounces under 3 lbs. is most typical. These were really nothing more than leather windbreakers, hence the designation Summer Flying Jacket, intended to keep water, gasoline, and oil from penetrating and soiling the under clothing and wind out, with some inherent degree of durability. Sweaters, sheepskin, and heated clothing (available in the 1930's) were for warmth.

You have undoubtedly handled many more originals than the few I have over the years, and do agree that the few I've handled were much lighter than expected. However, I usually have noticed a direct correlation between the thickness of hides on many different types of vintage leather jackets I've owned over the years, and weight...Being the lighter weight / 'thinner' hides weighed less than the 'thicker' hides, vice versa. (speaking within species, such as between goat, cow, horse, etc...)

I do appreciate your plausible explanation concerning the tanning method / weight correlation however regarding the A-2 specifically. Definitely a theory worth considering, but doesn't explain my experience with other leather jackets which would have been tanned by similar methods of the same period as the A-2.
 

HPA Rep

Vendor
Messages
855
Location
New Jersey
My great grandfather (on my mother’s side of my family) was a tail gunner in a German reconnaissance plane in WWI. Unfortunately we don’t know much about him; it’s a shame that so much verbal history and personal recollections is being lost every day with the passing of our elderly veterans.

You may have luck searching the Bundesarchiv, if not the German records we have at NARA. Of course, a lot was lost in WWII, but I'm always surprised at what turns up. A friend managed to get the full history on a soldier for whom he only had his ID card, which was taken from his dead body at the Reichskanzlei in April 1945. It was quite remarkable just to have the ID card from such a ruinous place not in the western zone, but to get the full history was amazing. Turned out the man became part of the Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler in 1938, and thus died in that same capacity at the end.
 

HPA Rep

Vendor
Messages
855
Location
New Jersey
You have undoubtedly handled many more originals than the few I have over the years, and do agree that the few I've handled were much lighter than expected. However, I usually have noticed a direct correlation between the thickness of hides on many different types of vintage leather jackets I've owned over the years, and weight...Being the lighter weight / 'thinner' hides weighed less than the 'thicker' hides, vice versa. (speaking within species, such as between goat, cow, horse, etc...)

I do appreciate your plausible explanation concerning the tanning method / weight correlation however regarding the A-2 specifically. Definitely a theory worth considering, but doesn't explain my experience with other leather jackets which would have been tanned by similar methods of the same period as the A-2.

Please accept my sincere apologies for the error made in addressing my reply not to you but to CBI. I was thinking about the OP and my mind left my fingers to their own devices. :-(
 

HPA Rep

Vendor
Messages
855
Location
New Jersey
You have undoubtedly handled many more originals than the few I have over the years, and do agree that the few I've handled were much lighter than expected. However, I usually have noticed a direct correlation between the thickness of hides on many different types of vintage leather jackets I've owned over the years, and weight...Being the lighter weight / 'thinner' hides weighed less than the 'thicker' hides, vice versa. (speaking within species, such as between goat, cow, horse, etc...)

I do appreciate your plausible explanation concerning the tanning method / weight correlation however regarding the A-2 specifically. Definitely a theory worth considering, but doesn't explain my experience with other leather jackets which would have been tanned by similar methods of the same period as the A-2.

Totally agree that thickness usually has a direct correlation to weight. I've only noticed the disparity noted with hides in the current era, not vintage, and tanning processes were indeed different between them) chrome, chrome w/ veg re-tan, and full veg. There may be something at hand regarding fat content, which is cited frequently in vintage specs. It seems if there was more or less of this, weight could vary and/or hand, and maybe thickness. This is all just speculation, though.
 

Seb Lucas

I'll Lock Up
Messages
7,562
Location
Australia
You have undoubtedly handled many more originals than the few I have over the years, and do agree that the few I've handled were much lighter than expected. However, I usually have noticed a direct correlation between the thickness of hides on many different types of vintage leather jackets I've owned over the years, and weight...Being the lighter weight / 'thinner' hides weighed less than the 'thicker' hides, vice versa. (speaking within species, such as between goat, cow, horse, etc...)

I do appreciate your plausible explanation concerning the tanning method / weight correlation however regarding the A-2 specifically. Definitely a theory worth considering, but doesn't explain my experience with other leather jackets which would have been tanned by similar methods of the same period as the A-2.

That's the other thing I've learned here, apart from sizing often being worn larger than I thought, the thickness is an interesting question. Any guess what the thickness might have been in general for horse and goat - 2.2oz or thinner, sometimes?
 

HPA Rep

Vendor
Messages
855
Location
New Jersey
That's the other thing I've learned here, apart from sizing often being worn larger than I thought, the thickness is an interesting question. Any guess what the thickness might have been in general for horse and goat - 2.2oz or thinner, sometimes?

Working from memory of the U. S. Army spec. (have to check later), but 2.0 - 2.5 sounds perfect. Definitely not greater than 2.5!
 

Seb Lucas

I'll Lock Up
Messages
7,562
Location
Australia
Always liked this photo of the Tuskegee Airmen/Red Tails. Some roomy A2's too.

A2 WW2.jpg
 

Flightengineer

Practically Family
Messages
581
Location
RF

HPA Rep

Vendor
Messages
855
Location
New Jersey
Hmmm ....And how about this from your website?

https://www.historypreservation.com...-jacket-star-sportswear-co-contract-no-28857/

• Correct USAAF spec. 3-ounce weight, vegetable-tanned horsehide leather outer shell dyed in a gorgeous dark brown aniline finish

That is coming from Gary Eastman. He still maintains the weight to be 3 ounces, as far as I know. In Gary's mind, 3 ounce is the correct weight, at least when the product info. was developed.

I should also add it's a bit irrelevant today regarding the terminology, because as I understand it, these EU tanneries (and those in Japan) don't use weight in "ounces" to identify the hides and do use thickness designations in millimeters. There is no exact correlation between ounces and millimeters because weight and thickness are not the same thing; generally speaking from what I have been told by Buzz Rickson's, they equate 1 millimeter to about 3 ounces, and I think Gary Eastman may also subscribe to this.

From the conversation about ELC A-2 weight now vs. 7 or more years ago, the thickness has not changed by spec. from ELC, yet the weight did, which we don't quite know the reason for. When I roll out the new HPA website this year, I'll speak with Gary to determine if a reference in millimeters may be best, or some other change in verbiage/terminology.
 
Last edited:

Technonut

Practically Family
Messages
842
Location
West "By Gawd" Virginia
Just one more to throw into the mix... :) Again, 'windbreakerish' IMO, and the majority appear to be of 'thinner' hides. I guess my point is, out of many, many, many, similar group pics, this is the most common look I've seen.....Lighter-in-weight hides than used by many repro-makers, and a more common-sense approach to a comfortable, 'working-fit' than many seek in an A-2 these days. ;)

89d2c8a897603d459aad6693b4925044 (2).jpg


EDIT: While on the upper end of my "A-2 thickness scale", this GW RW 27752 in Shinki has what I consider to be 'the look', and fits quite well. In fact, I can't see myself any happier if I would have provided measurements and ordered directly from JC himself. However, my lower-end, but accurately patterned Japanese 'Morgan Memphis Belle' A-2 is a VERY close second to being my favorite-fitting / looking A-2. :)

DSCF0235 (2).jpg



EDIT: Back to the OP... :p I would be interested in one of the upcoming HH versions, not the goat. For some reason, the goat pictured doesn't grab me. I think with the research effort going on, and some lowered pockets, it should add up to a killer A-2 at a price which would give my 'Morgan Memphis Belle' a run for it's price of admission. :cool:
 
Last edited:

Peacoat

*
Bartender
Messages
6,311
Location
South of Nashville
I should also add it's a bit irrelevant today regarding the terminology, because as I understand it, these EU tanneries (and those in Japan) don't use weight in "ounces" to identify the hides and do use thickness designations in millimeters. There is no exact correlation between ounces and millimeters because weight and thickness are not the same thing; generally speaking from what I have been told by Buzz Rickson's, they equate 1 millimeter to about 3 ounces, and I think Gary Eastman may also subscribe to this.
There may not be an exact correlation, but the below chart gives a close approximation. I haven't weighed or put the calipers to the leather, so I don't know the accuracy + or - .

Ounce MM Inch Decimal Inch
1 0.4 1/64 0.016
2 0.8 1/32 0.031
3 1.2 3/64 0.047
4 1.6 1/16 0.063
5 2 5/64 0.078
6 2.4 3/32 0.094
7 2.8 7/64 0.109
8 3.2 1/8 0.125
9 3.6 9/64 0.141
10 4 5/32 0.156

EDIT: Well, the chart all ran together after posting even though I had painstakingly separated before posting. Here is the link: http://www.rusticleather.com/LeatherThicknessChart.html
 

Forum statistics

Threads
107,260
Messages
3,032,444
Members
52,721
Latest member
twiceadaysana
Top