Thoughts on the new Coronado Vintage Americana Bomber

[Mr.Bits]

I don't want to set off the Shill Detector but my interest in leather outerwear grew when I bought my Coronado jacket (Classic Bison Bomber #19, if anyone is curious). I like it but as is the nature of this disease, I'm curious what is out there. So the intention of my post is to genuinely spark some conversation. I learn a lot when you guys compare and contrast. Also, pricing is pre-sale. If that saves one of you some money so be it. Again, I'm just trying to start a convo. As always thanks for your input.

Vintage Americana Bomber -Cowhide

 

[Carlos840]

It looks very thin and "mally" to me, i would not spend that much money on a jacket like that.
You could get two used Vanson for that money, or a nice used Schott.

 

[Edward]

Hard to gauge quality from a photo alone, though the drape certainly made it look like a very light and thin cowhide. The shape of it looks a little off to my eye, but that's subjective. The sleeve taper is more pronounced than I'd want on a jacket that didn't zip in on the sleeves.

For a jacket of that general kind of style the same money, my inclination would be to look for a used or trainee-made Aero Highwayman. My HWM is a trainee-made from the days before they introduced the Robin Hood label (mine carried the Blue Label). It's been a superb jacket for a decade now; a carpet beetle got to the lining which is why I'm going to have that redone, but the quality is otherwise right up with the best of my Aeros and all I've handled. Certainly wouldn't hesitate to buy trainee-made again if the right size / model came up.

 

[Will Zach]

Blousy cut, me no like.

 

[Hh121]

But it is "limited edition"

 

[ton312]

Blousy cut, me no like.

Agreed. Very generic and perfunctory design. Leather doesn't look special in the least. For the money you'd spend on one of these you could do infinitly better in almost every direction. To my eye these jackets should be priced at $200 or ↓

 

[Mr.Bits]

Hard to gauge quality from a photo alone, though the drape certainly made it look like a very light and thin cowhide. The shape of it looks a little off to my eye, but that's subjective. The sleeve taper is more pronounced than I'd want on a jacket that didn't zip in on the sleeves.

For a jacket of that general kind of style the same money, my inclination would be to look for a used or trainee-made Aero Highwayman. My HWM is a trainee-made from the days before they introduced the Robin Hood label (mine carried the Blue Label). It's been a superb jacket for a decade now; a carpet beetle got to the lining which is why I'm going to have that redone, but the quality is otherwise right up with the best of my Aeros and all I've handled. Certainly wouldn't hesitate to buy trainee-made again if the right size / model came up.

Thanks for your reply. I got a great deal on my coronado jacket and always wanted some bison leather so that was a good fit, but TFL has expanded my awareness exponentially. Oddly enough, in exploring potential "nexts", the HWM is under heavy consideration. That is why posts like yours are so great. Also, your info on trainee-made is new to me and highly appreciated.

 

[jacketjunkie]

For 550 USD you can get a used Aero Highwayman, a Vanson (even a new one depending on the style) or a Schott (used, I guess).

The hide looks flimsy and the seams down the back scream "we wanted to save money to we sewed together tiny pieces instead of going for the one piece back" to me. This jacket is priced waaay too high. I don't think this forum is the market for this product, but even the average half-informed buyer should not be happy with what he's getting for what he's paying.

 

[Mr.Bits]

I don't want to set off the Shill Detector but my interest in leather outerwear grew when I bought my Coronado jacket (Classic Bison Bomber #19, if anyone is curious). I like it but as is the nature of this disease, I'm curious what is out there. So the intention of my post is to genuinely spark some conversation. I learn a lot when you guys compare and contrast. Also, pricing is pre-sale. If that saves one of you some money so be it. Again, I'm just trying to start a convo. As always thanks for your input.

Vintage Americana Bomber -Cowhide

Clarification: I'm not considering this jacket. I'm familiar with the company, and always enjoy the compare/contrast posts. So when I received an email about a new release it seemed like a good place to start.
To me, assessments that a new jacket costs more than a used jacket, are not nearly as helpful as addressing topics like leather quality and construction. Consider the new guys who will stumble onto this forum. Many like me, are seeking your expertise/experience; skills you now use to define your preferences and corresponding value for future purchases.
To all who replied. Thanks! For those of you who shared the "why", I truly appreciate it.

 

[jacketjunkie]

Clarification: I'm not considering this jacket. I'm familiar with the company, and always enjoy the compare/contrast posts. So when I received an email about a new release it seemed like a good place to start.
To me, assessments that a new jacket costs more than a used jacket, are not nearly as helpful as addressing topics like leather quality and construction. Consider the new guys who will stumble onto this forum. Many like me, are seeking your expertise/experience; skills you now use to define your preferences and corresponding value for future purchases.
To all who replied. Thanks! For those of you who shared the "why", I truly appreciate it.

The assessment made is not that a new jacket costs more than a used one, the assessment is that you can get a lot more jacket for your money.

As for why others and I feel that way:

- thin cowhide of unknown origin; i very sincerely doubt that the hide is 3 oz as claimed, if it is in fact 3 oz, then it is heavily skived down at the seams which makes for weak construction
- cheap multi-panel construction
-poor construction; on picture 8, the close up of the sleeve,you can see the hide is not folded at the seam but just cut off and sewn on with a single-stitch-construction. Looks cheap and is an incredibly weak construction that most certainly won't last a life-time as claimed in the item description.
-sleeves appear too tight in the forearms (for my taste anyway)

 

[Mr.Bits]

Thanks JJ, the "why" you've provided is insightful and immediately helpful.

My comment was somewhat preemptive to some replies I see here. I was clarifying what I wasn't looking for. The type that roughly say "don't get this, get that...it's better". Or, "you can get used cheaper". Thus my emphasis on an actionable why. The WHY establishes the value of the garment, and often times the reply itself.

With this kind of knowledge I hope to elevate my ability to identify a quality garment. Thanks again.

 

[Carlos840]

Thanks JJ, the "why" you've provided is insightful and immediately helpful.

My comment was somewhat preemptive to some replies I see here. I was clarifying what I wasn't looking for. The type that roughly say "don't get this, get that...it's better". Or, "you can get used cheaper". Thus my emphasis on an actionable why. The WHY establishes the value of the garment, and often times the reply itself.

With this kind of knowledge I hope to elevate my ability to identify a quality garment. Thanks again.

Here is a bit more explanation as to what makesme think "malljacket":

1: the leather looks super thin, no way this is 3oz even if they skived the seams.
You can see it at seams like the shoulder seams ant the collar seams, there should be more thickness there if the leather was 3 oz. On top of being thin it just doesn't look very interresting, it has a cheap couch look.

2: the use of multiple panels in the back withsingle stitched seams:

This is honestly an abomination, the only reason you would do that is cost cutting, it is also a weak spot as these seams run all the way to the bottom hem and not folded double stitched seams.

Now, some jackets have more than one back panel, the Leathertogs jackets come to mind, but i would not call that a cost cutting measure, the panels are used to shape the back with curved seams, and the top stitching is a lot mroe work than what you see on the Coronado jacket:

3: that rounded cuff shape is horrendous, and the fact that they combined it with a slit + snap on the underside is IMO wrong in every possible way.

This is what that cuff is attempting to look like:

To mee all these things make that jacket look like a cheap Pakistan made jacket that is overpriced because it is "limited". It stylistically looks bad, a mish mash of different features that don't make sens together, it also looks obviously cheapply made. I would stay well away from it.

 

[Edward]

The assessment made is not that a new jacket costs more than a used one, the assessment is that you can get a lot more jacket for your money.

As for why others and I feel that way:

- thin cowhide of unknown origin; i very sincerely doubt that the hide is 3 oz as claimed, if it is in fact 3 oz, then it is heavily skived down at the seams which makes for weak construction
- cheap multi-panel construction
-poor construction; on picture 8, the close up of the sleeve,you can see the hide is not folded at the seam but just cut off and sewn on with a single-stitch-construction. Looks cheap and is an incredibly weak construction that most certainly won't last a life-time as claimed in the item description.
-sleeves appear too tight in the forearms (for my taste anyway)

I think, too, it's also worth considering the intangibles that we tend to build into our jacket purchases around here. While a lot of folks prize variety (and I own or have owned a fair few brands myself), many of us will also have a specific, favourite to which we have a lot of brand loyalty. This can be for any number of reasons, though certainly for me it's about (in no order of priority) customer service, overall quality of product, knowing the fit works for me, available options (colour, hide, lining), and my own, preferred aesthetic style. All of those (even, beyond a certain level, what is "acceptable" quality) are broadly subjective, and something you only really pick up for yourself over time and with experience (not necessarily always linked to buying or spending a fortune, of course).

Other intangibles that may or may not matter to a greater or lesser degree to a lot of folks include:

- design skill. Obviously, we favour the vintage, not the modern, aesthetic in these parts. When you get into that, whether it's exact vintage repro (like a contract A2, or a Peter Bros bike jacket or whatever), or a "coulda been" like an Aero Dustbowl, or a synthesis of vintage style (the Aero Indian Ranger is very deliberately a synthesis of three, original slight variations on that design across the late forties, intended to produce a 'best version'), you do pay on some level for the amount of work that has gone into producing that. It's a very different skillset from producing a modern jacket from scratch, especially for a customer base (this very pronounced with the milspec stuff) for whom the very minor details really do matter. This is related to a sense of quality, but in purely functional garment terms, a different thing.

- country / condition of manufacture. A lot of folks prefer their jackets to be made in particular places - UK, USA, Japan are all popular. There's a (not always accurate) perception that the location of manufacture is a guarantee of quality, with jackets made in, say, Pakistan or China assumed to be qualitatively inferior. This is not always fair. It is, however, the case that cheaper (and therefore, as a rule, lesser quality) items tend to be produced in certain countries where labour costs are, relatively speaking, lower. This matters when building to a particular price point: a SME jacket company producing hundreds of jackets a month will have a much higher overhead per product (UK / US / Japan labour costs x fewer jackets per day x fixed overheads like keeping the lights on) as well - economies of scale definitely play a part. Other reasons people might prefer a particular location of manufacture include a preference for localised manufacture where possible - ranging from notions of supporting the local economy through such environmental considerations as reducing carbon footprint by reducing the airmiles of jacket purchases.

Customer service I've already mentioned, but as an extended variant thereon, a lot of folks like the idea of building a relationship with a company over time, notions of craftsmanship, a sense that the jacket is more organic in a way, more 'human' - made in a small factory by a person whose name you know, a place you might have been fortunate enough to visit, and so on.

How far the intangibles affect individual purchase choice may vary (certainly affordability and personal budget will come into it; I think it's fair to say that a lot of us have discovered some more affordable options in recent years with the economy not what it was that might have been dismissed out of hand twenty years ago). I think though it's worth bearing them in mind. I'm not, I stress, for a minute suggesting they don't or shouldn't matter, but it is part of the picture that will influence how folks here think about jackets.

To a lot of folks in the civilian world, they are after all just clothes. For us, it's also a hobby. (Which is the nice thing about it for me, the crossover. I've had a lot of hobbies and collections over the years that cost a lot cumulatively and ultimately had limited practical use, crucially taking up badly needed space. I am a recovering hoarder, and have to bear this in mind. My jackets are clothing and get used - it's nice to have a practical hobby (even if I'm stretching the definition of practical here once I get much beyond two or three leather jackets).

Now, some jackets have more than one back panel, the Leathertogs jackets come to mind, but i would not call that a cost cutting measure, the panels are used to shape the back with curved seams, and the top stitching is a lot mroe work than what you see on the Coronado jacket:

This is a point that bears repeating. When I first got involved with TFL, it was all "single piece back and hefty hide or go home". Some of this was influenced by certain historical cues, not least the popularity of milspec jackets, especially the A", where certain things were hallmarks of quality and 'correctness' - a one piece back being big there. There was a view abroad that anything multi-panel was almost inevitably qualitatively compromised. Of course, as Carlos notes, while multiple panels can be a sign of cost-saving by using more, smaller pieces in order to ensure fewer offcuts / less wastage of materials, it's not alone a guarantee of low quality. Always reminds me of the three-bolt neck on a 71-81 Fender Stratocaster: CBS-era Fender went for a stack 'em high / sell 'em cheap business model with quite a cavalier approach to QC. The three-bolt neck design (as distinct from having four bolts holding the neck on previously) was given the blame, a myth that solidified when Fender upping its game again in the early eighties coincided with a return to the original, four-bolt design. Correlation is as often coinkydink as it is causation.

More generally, for the OP...

When it comes to a leather jacket, the first thing I look for is style. These are, ultimately, clothes. I care what I look like, and if I hate the look of a jacket it doesn't matter how well made it is, I won't wear it. (Obviously in general terms; we're not talking about situations here where it's a case of "you look stupid, but it's safety gear and you'll die without it".) Then it's a case of availability in my size, and whether the pattern fits my shape. No point in a jacket I can't wear.... After that, it's a case of quality of raw materials (hide properties, durability, lining, hardware...), then construction. Both matter. Buying online as often seems to be the only option for things I like these days, reputation (and return policies) matter. For expensive items, this is where location - in terms of point of sale - can be important. It could be lethally expensive to return a jacket to the Far East, for example. And then there's taxes involved, which can also often make a very significant difference in price, especially when local currency is weak.

 

[Mr.Bits]

Here is a bit more explanation as to what makesme think "malljacket":

1: the leather looks super thin, no way this is 3oz even if they skived the seams.
You can see it at seams like the shoulder seams ant the collar seams, there should be more thickness there if the leather was 3 oz. On top of being thin it just doesn't look very interresting, it has a cheap couch look.

2: the use of multiple panels in the back withsingle stitched seams:

This is honestly an abomination, the only reason you would do that is cost cutting, it is also a weak spot as these seams run all the way to the bottom hem and not folded double stitched seams.

Now, some jackets have more than one back panel, the Leathertogs jackets come to mind, but i would not call that a cost cutting measure, the panels are used to shape the back with curved seams, and the top stitching is a lot mroe work than what you see on the Coronado jacket:

3: that rounded cuff shape is horrendous, and the fact that they combined it with a slit + snap on the underside is IMO wrong in every possible way.

This is what that cuff is attempting to look like:

To mee all these things make that jacket look like a cheap Pakistan made jacket that is overpriced because it is "limited". It stylistically looks bad, a mish mash of different features that don't make sens together, it also looks obviously cheapply made. I would stay well away from it.

Wow. You could have given me a fish but instead you taught me how to be a fisherman. This is very helpful and I truly appreciate your response.

 

[Mr.Bits]

I think, too, it's also worth considering the intangibles that we tend to build into our jacket purchases around here. While a lot of folks prize variety (and I own or have owned a fair few brands myself), many of us will also have a specific, favourite to which we have a lot of brand loyalty. This can be for any number of reasons, though certainly for me it's about (in no order of priority) customer service, overall quality of product, knowing the fit works for me, available options (colour, hide, lining), and my own, preferred aesthetic style. All of those (even, beyond a certain level, what is "acceptable" quality) are broadly subjective, and something you only really pick up for yourself over time and with experience (not necessarily always linked to buying or spending a fortune, of course).

Other intangibles that may or may not matter to a greater or lesser degree to a lot of folks include:

- design skill. Obviously, we favour the vintage, not the modern, aesthetic in these parts. When you get into that, whether it's exact vintage repro (like a contract A2, or a Peter Bros bike jacket or whatever), or a "coulda been" like an Aero Dustbowl, or a synthesis of vintage style (the Aero Indian Ranger is very deliberately a synthesis of three, original slight variations on that design across the late forties, intended to produce a 'best version'), you do pay on some level for the amount of work that has gone into producing that. It's a very different skillset from producing a modern jacket from scratch, especially for a customer base (this very pronounced with the milspec stuff) for whom the very minor details really do matter. This is related to a sense of quality, but in purely functional garment terms, a different thing.

- country / condition of manufacture. A lot of folks prefer their jackets to be made in particular places - UK, USA, Japan are all popular. There's a (not always accurate) perception that the location of manufacture is a guarantee of quality, with jackets made in, say, Pakistan or China assumed to be qualitatively inferior. This is not always fair. It is, however, the case that cheaper (and therefore, as a rule, lesser quality) items tend to be produced in certain countries where labour costs are, relatively speaking, lower. This matters when building to a particular price point: a SME jacket company producing hundreds of jackets a month will have a much higher overhead per product (UK / US / Japan labour costs x fewer jackets per day x fixed overheads like keeping the lights on) as well - economies of scale definitely play a part. Other reasons people might prefer a particular location of manufacture include a preference for localised manufacture where possible - ranging from notions of supporting the local economy through such environmental considerations as reducing carbon footprint by reducing the airmiles of jacket purchases.

Customer service I've already mentioned, but as an extended variant thereon, a lot of folks like the idea of building a relationship with a company over time, notions of craftsmanship, a sense that the jacket is more organic in a way, more 'human' - made in a small factory by a person whose name you know, a place you might have been fortunate enough to visit, and so on.

How far the intangibles affect individual purchase choice may vary (certainly affordability and personal budget will come into it; I think it's fair to say that a lot of us have discovered some more affordable options in recent years with the economy not what it was that might have been dismissed out of hand twenty years ago). I think though it's worth bearing them in mind. I'm not, I stress, for a minute suggesting they don't or shouldn't matter, but it is part of the picture that will influence how folks here think about jackets.

To a lot of folks in the civilian world, they are after all just clothes. For us, it's also a hobby. (Which is the nice thing about it for me, the crossover. I've had a lot of hobbies and collections over the years that cost a lot cumulatively and ultimately had limited practical use, crucially taking up badly needed space. I am a recovering hoarder, and have to bear this in mind. My jackets are clothing and get used - it's nice to have a practical hobby (even if I'm stretching the definition of practical here once I get much beyond two or three leather jackets).



This is a point that bears repeating. When I first got involved with TFL, it was all "single piece back and hefty hide or go home". Some of this was influenced by certain historical cues, not least the popularity of milspec jackets, especially the A", where certain things were hallmarks of quality and 'correctness' - a one piece back being big there. There was a view abroad that anything multi-panel was almost inevitably qualitatively compromised. Of course, as Carlos notes, while multiple panels can be a sign of cost-saving by using more, smaller pieces in order to ensure fewer offcuts / less wastage of materials, it's not alone a guarantee of low quality. Always reminds me of the three-bolt neck on a 71-81 Fender Stratocaster: CBS-era Fender went for a stack 'em high / sell 'em cheap business model with quite a cavalier approach to QC. The three-bolt neck design (as distinct from having four bolts holding the neck on previously) was given the blame, a myth that solidified when Fender upping its game again in the early eighties coincided with a return to the original, four-bolt design. Correlation is as often coinkydink as it is causation.

More generally, for the OP...

When it comes to a leather jacket, the first thing I look for is style. These are, ultimately, clothes. I care what I look like, and if I hate the look of a jacket it doesn't matter how well made it is, I won't wear it. (Obviously in general terms; we're not talking about situations here where it's a case of "you look stupid, but it's safety gear and you'll die without it".) Then it's a case of availability in my size, and whether the pattern fits my shape. No point in a jacket I can't wear.... After that, it's a case of quality of raw materials (hide properties, durability, lining, hardware...), then construction. Both matter. Buying online as often seems to be the only option for things I like these days, reputation (and return policies) matter. For expensive items, this is where location - in terms of point of sale - can be important. It could be lethally expensive to return a jacket to the Far East, for example. And then there's taxes involved, which can also often make a very significant difference in price, especially when local currency is weak.

Thanks for the reply, Edward. This was immensely informative and honestly an enjoyable read.
It's comforting to encounter kindred spirits here. I love the how garments, and other things that can initially be seen as simple objects, slowly unveil themselves as we learn. As we progress we begin to see a collection of details, history, etc. Some would say art. For your investment in my understanding I thank you.

 

[Hh121]

People can teach your concept or theory but they can't teach you the experience. You really have to experience the difference by yourself.

 

[Tom71]

Reading through the comments, I thought I’d add one remark:

”Thin and drapy” is of course not a problem per se. In fact you can get high quality hides of a lighter weight, and some of them drape really well (goat, some sheep, even Greg Field’s “Pony” hide).
For the reasons given above (Carlos’ post is spot-on, I believe), this very hide just looks flimsy and low-quality, although I must admit that photos can be deceiving.

Maybe this was obvious, but I wanted to prevent an over-simplifying “heavy is good” approach (it is, of course…).

Others have commented extensively. The somehow sloppy cut is not flattering, IMO, and that sewn-together back is really unjustifiable.

 

[Edward]

Reading through the comments, I thought I’d add one remark:

”Thin and drapy” is of course not a problem per se. In fact you can get high quality hides of a lighter weight, and some of them drape really well (goat, some sheep, even Greg Field’s “Pony” hide).
For the reasons given above (Carlos’ post is spot-on, I believe), this very hide just looks flimsy and low-quality, although I must admit that photos can be deceiving.

Maybe this was obvious, but I wanted to prevent an over-simplifying “heavy is good” approach (it is, of course…).

Others have commented extensively. The somehow sloppy cut is not flattering, IMO, and that sewn-together back is really unjustifiable.

Definitely a lot comes with experience. Fifteen years ago, I was all about the heavy leather. Now, I have a range of favourites depending on the application. My likely next three jackets will all be goat.

 

[Blackadder]

I echo most if not all what Fellow loungers have said about it being unimpressive. This product is IMO a clean simple leather jackets that is easily made, easy to wear and match for a larger market/audience.
Coronado certainly have thought a lot about the marketing e.g. the name. Vintage Americana leather that is not made using any vintage method and does not look like any vintage leather. It is simple pull up leather aka crazy horse leather. I doubt the design even remotely remind anyone here of a bomber jacket. Yet those words appeal to the general public. And the limited production. All marketing ploy on a generic leather jacket design that one could have found at Gap back in the 90s. (Gap no longer have leather jacket AFAIK but if you search on ebay you would know what I mean.) It is so generic that I doubt many people would have taken another look at it if one was to see it at a shop or on someone passing by let alone have thoughts on. The name however would probably catch the attention of more. That is my thoughts looking at it.

 

[itsallgood]

Wow. You could have given me a fish but instead you taught me how to be a fisherman.

I always thought Coronado was good value for the money when it could be had on sale at Cabela's. The company's product and distribution strategy changed a few years ago. The product line has diversified from the original concealed carry vests and I suspect is still made in Mexico, but the target market has been expanded. I've been surprised how the new strategy has had legs. The marketing is top notch, but as others have pointed out, the new product lines may be a bit more pedestrian relative to the prices being asked.