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.

The dreaded inside pocket question

Sir Jacket

Practically Family
Messages
855
Location
London, United Kingdom
Loungers, Aero is very soon to start making my Maxwell, just in time for winter. I have ordered it with two inside pockets but Aero has been imploring me to reconsider because, yes, the dreaded pockets will eventually show through on the outside of the leather.

Problem is, without inside pockets the jacket is about half as practical – I don't like trusting my phone and keys to the handwarmers, for example.

I had been thinking of a simplified Mulligan (great name) as an alternative.

Hit me up with your thoughts.

SJ
 

Highwaymanman

A-List Customer
Messages
360
Location
Nowhere
Loungers, Aero is very soon to start making my Maxwell, just in time for winter. I have ordered it with two inside pockets but Aero has been imploring me to reconsider because, yes, the dreaded pockets will eventually show through on the outside of the leather.

Problem is, without inside pockets the jacket is about half as practical – I don't like trusting my phone and keys to the handwarmers, for example.

I had been thinking of a simplified Mulligan (great name) as an alternative.

Hit me up with your thoughts.

SJ

I would go with no inside pockets if ordering a new jacket but I think this issue is overblown. By the time the pockets are showing through the jacket is gonna look so bashed up and fantastic you'll love it all the more for it's eccentricities and foibles.
 

Seb Lucas

I'll Lock Up
Messages
7,562
Location
Australia
I love an inside jacket. Don't give a toss if you can see it through the leather - I like that look, along with the other creases, seams highlighted and fades it's part of the deal.
 

wdw

One Too Many
Messages
1,260
Location
Edinburgh
I've had both studded and zipped inner pockets, but my latest two haven't had any because in my experience they do show through. I reckon the zipped one shows through more, but the stud itself can be obvious as well. A compromise which might work is an unsecured inner pocket, as Fanch had on one of his recent acquisitions. I now just wear shirts with pockets :)
 

Plumbline

One Too Many
Messages
1,271
Location
UK
Always had inside pockets (2) .... never been an issue other than on my 30+ year old brown FQHH Highwayman ( where you could just about see the outline ... but then by that time you could see the outline of almost every pocket and seam including the handwarmer pockets and the chest pocket and the jacket was bagged and creased and buffed to the point that these all added to the character IMHO. Never had an issue with Black or Corovan.

The practicallity of inside pockets far outweighed the possibillity of the leather backing showing through in years to come. For me a jackey without inside pockets is like a bike without a saddle ... it's where I put my "stuff" wallet, phone, passport ( when I travel), keys, bits of paper, loose money/change and glasses cleaning cloth. Then this is probably due to me hating the feeling of things in the pockets of my jeans / trousers.

Jackets are where I carry my stuff and for that I need pockets ( handwarmer pockets are for exactly that ... warming hands)

HTH
 

Sloan1874

I'll Lock Up
Messages
8,418
Location
Glasgow
The Mulligan is an interesting idea - it's a very flexible jacket in terms of look - and you'd certainly never have to worry about losing your stuff with it. If pockets are really important, I'd consider going that way. As far as the inside pockets go, my DB has none but the hand warmers are very deep so if I stick something in them I pretty much know they'll stay there. I suppose it comes down to balancing their utility against to how annoying the prospect of them eventually shining through is, and whether an extra £20 to £40 is worth this irritation. [huh]
 
I don't understand. In all my years of collecting and hundreds of 30s/40s leather jackets, I've yet to see visible pocket outlines on the outside of the leather. How do Aero manage to make it happen? What do they use for pocketbags? I can't imagine that silesia or sailcloth would be bulky enough to show through after even the most rigorous wear.[huh]
 

wdw

One Too Many
Messages
1,260
Location
Edinburgh
Aero add a full FQHH patch inside to reinforce the opening and it's that that shows through. I did wonder if leather was necessary at all and whether or not corduroy or moleskin would do the job less obtrusively, but there must be a good reason for it.
 

simonc

Practically Family
Messages
918
Location
United Kingdom
My thoughts, or what I've toyed with, to avoid the brick in the chest mark, would be to lower the gun pocket down to say under your chest/pecs, put the entrance to the pocket in the lining leather panel without a press stud, just a slit and make the pocket bag big enough reach down to the hem of the jacket, this way the inner pocket hides behind the hand warmers, hope this helps.
 
Yes, old German jackets (essentially the only vintage jackets I've found with leather anywhere close to the extreme weight used by Aero) pretty much invariably have a similar reinforcement setup. Maybe they use a slightly lighter leather for the inner pocket opening. Or maybe some hides are more susceptible to "showing through".

I fully suspect that any of the popular dreaded hot water treatments that act to make the leather more malleable, followed by wearing while wet, will only exacerbate any "showing through".
 

simonc

Practically Family
Messages
918
Location
United Kingdom
Anyway its just a thought I've been toying with but that is what I will do next with a biker jacket I have in mind as the D pocket will mask the lowered gun pocket.
 

Xenophon

One of the Regulars
Messages
142
Location
New Delhi (India) / Ostend (Belgium)
I have a Maxwell on order, no pockets at all, except the hand warmers, even dispensed with the chest pocket. My solution is simply to wear one of those cross-body men's purses. I know, not very 'manly' perhaps but I don't care as it's super practical with a dedicated pocket for my phone (S3, perfect fit and a quick reach), keys, cash, cards (in a compartment closed with a zipper and worn next to the body), id, cigarettes, pen and even sunglasses. I just wear it over my coat or jacket, doesn't look out of place and no bulging pockets nor fumbling whenever you deposit your stuff in a cloakroom.

To me the Maxwell looks a slimmer fit than the Mulligan but I might be wrong as I don't own either of them at the moment. In the end it's a matter of taste and what you want. But I do believe the pockets will show through eventually, if you don't mind that then by all means, go for it else save yourself the heartache and omit them or get the Mulligan.
 

schitzo

Suspended
Messages
1,472
Location
London
Sounds like you've pretty much already made up your mind SJ.

But for those who do fret over the pocket lines showing through what about the leather facings? They show through too and afaik there's jack dish can be done about that one
 

pauleway

Practically Family
Messages
655
Location
Western NY
Just go with the inside pocket and if you're worried about it showing through, don't put the stud on. I think Fanch had one like that, and I think they are deep enough that there should be no problem with something falling out!
 

winterland1

Practically Family
Messages
535
Location
minneapolis
Get at least one inside pocket. I like a snap. I am same as you. Don't feel safe with certain things unless in inside pocket.
I don't even care about if it will show through or not. Which seems to be a small percentage of the time anyways.
 

GriffDeLaGriff

One Too Many
Messages
1,203
Location
Sweden
It isnt the bulk or the stud that is the problem.

It is a square "panel" that is inside the jacket that the pocket facing is mad of/sewn onto. It isnt visibe from the inside, you can only see it when it shows through.

It is overkill with a snap, and yes the snap shows through aswell but it is imho not near as bad as the square panel. However there is no need for the snap. I never use my snaps.

I do understand why they use fqhh, because it looks great inside, it makes the look complete and whole. And when fqhh is used for the facing, I guess nothing else can be use for the support-panel because it will be too flimsy. I would think using a thin leather to make a pocket would look horrible (sewing flimsy leather onto fqhh) and that is why Aero say pocket or no pocket.

There were a person here that made an inside pocket made up from the lining, but sewn onto the lining like a shirt-pocket but inside the jacket - that might work.

Here is the only pic I have of the inside.
2.jpg


What comes through is a much bigger area then the pocket "flap/opening" that is the thickest part. Look at my avatar and you see what i mean, there is an outline around the pocket.

It also isnt only fqhh that suffers from this. Look at the midweight horsehide:
5484e282a96aaca8_7784dc858127d528_s1804-pocket1-800Lge.jpg

2714bdc8afa626ee_Caf%20Racer%20mW%20Horse%20Seal%204%20pocket%20hero%203.jpg



I suspect it is the way Aero constructs the pockets that is the problem.
 
Last edited:

Cyber Lip

Practically Family
Messages
739
Location
Seattle
An inner jacket pocket for me is a designated wallet pocket because I hate carrying my wallet in the front pocket of my jeans. But with an expensive leather jacket that I'll probably own and wear for the next 30-40 years, I'd rather go without the inner pocket and have the jacket stay looking nice, and screw up the look and feel of my jeans instead. Every time I notice how uncomfortable it is and how I've got a big unsightly square brick showing through the front of my pants, it'll remind me how great my jacket looks :p
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
107,380
Messages
3,035,620
Members
52,806
Latest member
DPR
Top