Men's Trouser Fit Check

[peterle]

Not sure what you are trying to say here?  What do you mean by "harmonic"?

sorry for that germanism. I meant your inseam line doesn´t have a nice form above the knee. the curve is too hard and sudden. It should be a smooth curved line from the knee to the crotch. your´s seem to be two straight lines connected with a small french curve. compare it to a pattern draft from a book and you will know what i mean,

[jruley]

Thanks, I understand you now.  The curve should be smoother, with no visible "kink".

In English "harmonic" usually refers to a progression of vibration frequencies, musical notes, or terms in a mathematical expression.  If they are multiples of each other they are said to be "harmonic".

[Schneiderfrei]

I would say Peterle is referring to a visual harmony.

[peterle]

Exactly, yes.

Seems this word is used more widely  in German than in English. Here nearly everything can be harmonic, not only in music but also colours, tastes, and even relationships.

[Thom Bennett]

I think what you really mean, peterle is harmonious, you are right in the wide ranging use of the word in both German and English.  JR if the runs don't look right then they probably are not.  The lines should be smooth and flow in a harmonious way, there should be a relationship,  a synergy between the top and underside inseams.

Anyhoo, just passing by. 

[jruley]

Well, looking at the illustration with Mansie's original draft, I concede that it should be a more smooth flowing curve:

http://movsd.com/BespokeCutter/index.php?topic=56.0

But does anyone really think this is what's causing the fitting issues?

[peterle]

Maybe that´s not the only cause. But especially in trousers small alterations (a few mm can be nough) can cause huge effects. And sudden direction changes in lines cause folds, that´s for sure.

To analyze the run of a curved line in a given pattern, just place your ruler,  running from lets say, point 5 to 14 and observe the room between the ruler and the curved line. So you can see where the peak of the curve is, how far it is from the ruler ecc. Makes it a lot easier to copy.

[Greger]

Sometimes putting your eye right down like an inch above the paper and look down the line you can see if it will work or not. Looking down on a line is different than looking down the length of the line.

[jruley]

OK.  I smoothed out the curve in the back inseam from fork to knee, so it better matched the front.

I also lowered the backs 1/4" relative to the fronts.  This seems to have helped take some of the bagginess out under the seat.

I'm thinking this is probably about the best I can do without changing the seat angle.

[jruley]

Here they are, as finished as they are going to get.  I hemmed the legs on a slant, to minimize the break in the front crease.

[jruley]

Since the last post, I made two more pairs from the same pattern.  Material is a light weight, soft 100% cotton corduroy.  The blue pair is newly finished; the tan ones have been folded over a hanger for awhile.

The only ironwork done was moderate stretching of the back fork.  The back inseam was stretched 1/4" from hip to knee (i.e. knee notch of back lowered 1/4") as was done with the previous pair.  These are hemmed on an angle (front 3/4" shorter than back) as were the previous pair.

















Maybe this material is better at hiding imperfections than the stretchy cotton used in the last pair, but they seem to fit better in the back, at least to my untrained eye.   I think I may know the reason.  I stretched the upper backs of the last pair out of shape a bit in making the darts and pockets, which added width at the back waist.  Rather than full this on to the waistband I took a deeper crotch seam, adding 1/2" to the seam allowance.  This also lengthened the crotch seam, resulting in the messy back.  I could try correcting it, but the trousers are comfortable and fit well enough for casual wear IMO.

Any comments on the new ones?

[hutch--]

They seem to look fine Jim, for a reasonably loose fit with a fair bit of leg room, I doubt you will get the back of the legs to fit much better. The lighter coloured pair could probably do with pressing if you have something like an Elna or similar press. The test for a pair of trousers of this type is if you can comfortably sit in them and if so then they probably cannot be improved by much.

If you have a look at any of the historical photos of "Ivy League" designs from before WW2, yours are a much better fit.

[Thom Bennett]

Hey Jim, the fronts look clean and the length is perfect for your loafers but I still feel there is a little work mainly on the underside pattern for the trousers to get them to hang cleaner, this is just a thought and, maybe backed up by peterle et al:  Have your wife pin from the top side seam (zero) to centre back creating a small wedge of about ⅜ - ⅝", you might have to scoop out the curve in the seat seam to accommodate the alteration; in fact I expect you will have to take cloth from this area, remember that the seat is cut on the bias so one can stretch the seam allowance/inlay out so it doesn't 'cut' the wearer in two.  I have a very flat seat, my CB is much lower than proportional at ¾" above the actual waistline lifting up the undersides for a cleaner hang.

To get the trousers to look even better at the hem IMHO would drop the hem by some ⅛s". I drop mine by ⅜, Rory by ⅝, if you look at some older drafts you will see that the front and back hem line are angled helping the flow of the silhouette; I drop mine less due to my footwear.  Even though your high hip remains the same you seem to shift your legs changing the shape of the seat and the hind legs, study the two rear images (blue & tan) side by side ad you will see what I mean.  I would say that one side needs to be treated slightly differently from the other however due to your changing stance you probably need to alter each side by the same amount, this will keep your modification for the high hip.

Tom. 

N.B. Bit of editing, hope it makes sense! 

I have noticed something else concerning the topside crease line, it deviates from your physical grain line.  If you look at the hem of your trousers they have a tendency to sway out so they no longer line up with the centre of your feet which creates a bulge at the out-seam, to remedy this you will need to swing the legs in by ⅜".

[jruley]

Thanks Tom for your comments!

I still feel there is a little work mainly on the underside pattern for the trousers to get them to hang cleaner, this is just a thought and, maybe backed up by peterle et al:  Have your wife pin from the top side seam (zero) to centre back creating a small wedge of about ⅜ - 5/8", you might have to scoop out the curve in the seat seam to accommodate the alteration; in fact I expect you will have to take cloth from this area, remember that the seat is cut on the bias so one can stretch the seam allowance/inlay out so it doesn't 'cut' the wearer in two.  I have a very flat seat and my CB is much lower than proportional, this lifts up the undersides for a cleaner hang.

I am sure the back could be made a little cleaner, but if you go 'way back to post #69 this pattern has a slightly increased seat angle to make the trousers more comfortable when walking or climbing stairs.  When I make another wool pair, I plan on starting with a straighter seat.

To get the trousers to look even better at the hem IMHO would drop the hem by some ⅛s". I drop mine by ⅜, Rory by ⅝, if you look at some older drafts you will see that the front and back hem line are angled helping the flow of the silhouette; I drop mine less due to my footwear.

Actually these are hemmed on an angle; the fronts are 3/4" shorter than the backs.  I also did this with the stretchy pair; compare the break in front crease in #98 and #99.

[Thom Bennett]

Yeh I was thinking of removing the hem line part and just saying "have you thought about dropping the hem at the back another ⅛?". As for walking I would have bought one would increase the stride to stop the roping that occurs when this is out of balance.  When sitting you would need to widen the seat slightly, I have learned that 1" over the seat measure is ample for the spread of said area when squatting or sitting. What ironwork did you do on the underside, specifically at the inseam/fork area?