Here a very interesting article about a Dormeuil "miracle cloth","Cosak":
http://www.cutterandtailor.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=826
And here about "fabrics of tomorrow" and Saville Row:
http://www.cutterandtailor.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=655
Dormeuil "Cosak" Terylene cloth was a blend of 55% terylene (polyester) and 45% mohair.
Today these fabrics are see as "the evil" (are not brethables,sweat,etc).
But my objection is, is not depend from the blend?
For exemple,a blend 55% terylene 45 % mohair is nasty sweaty and unbreathable,or the 45% natural mohair is enough for a decent breathing?
exist in a good blend a right point in which benefits of polyester outweigh the disadvantages?
Note:
I speak about suits,coats and trousers,not about shirts or underwear.
Sounds like "Trevira" which was a 'tonic' sort of cloth favoured by original skinheads. I used to have a pair of Trevira slacks - they were itchy. They did have that tonic mohair look though, and a razor sharp crease.
^What he said. I don't mind a bit of synthetic in a blend at all.
I think it's an integral part of the look - but a part I have mostly chosen to avoid. I have several trousers that are all wool or wool blended with small quantities of mink or cashmere, and they just do not hold a crease like the classic ivy looking trousers do. But I'm prepared to make the sacrifice of stiff crease to avoid man-made fibres, although the trousers are not quite as ivy as they could be. Maybe before the 60s the softer crease was the norm anyway? I'm not sure when man-made fibres became so popular.
I do have 2 summer jackets with plastic in, but if I could locate similar jackets in cotton I'd soon discard the man-made alternative.
Last edited by Yuca (2014-10-30 01:54:03)
Last edited by Leer R. (2014-10-30 03:55:30)
The better quality raincoats were all cotton. Mostly exported to the US I believe, whilst the Europeans got the inferior goods.
Definitely think about quitting here. Definitely.
There's deffo. good poly and bad poly, and the proportions of the blend make a big difference. I've never seen a pure wool Gloveral duffel - they all seem to be about 80/20, and they're the better for it, I think. It makes them harder wearing and more water repllent. My ex-service issue duffel is great, but I've seen more used heavily examples and they're terrible for piling.
Last edited by Yuca (2014-10-30 04:08:35)
My Grenfell mac is all-cotton (has to be surely, the cloth is Grenfell, isn't it?) and it's beautiful, it's great for being out in showers, but can't cope with any serious water. I've got an NOS 60's Baracutta mac however, which is a poly-cotton blend, and that's great over a suit in heavier rain.
It depends on when they were made. Nothing more nothing less.
Last edited by Leer R. (2014-10-30 04:56:32)
Last edited by Leer R. (2014-10-30 05:07:50)
I actually like the old London Fog Calibre Cloth, which is 65 Dacron poly to 35 combed cotton. An excellent outerwear shell. Rain just rolls off it.
I am sorry for the idiot... really. I know now that you don't mean it to provoke (like I thought). Fact is... you think you are right and that's ok.
As I said it was a little tactless. Particularly for someone as sensitive - some might say over-sensitive - as you.
Btw you seem to be suggesting/implying that the mix raincoats were not inferior to the all cotton ones. Maybe they are more waterproof, but overall they are blatantly not as good - unless you can convince me otherwise of course. I'm not saying I wouldn't necessarily wear a 50/50 old school Burberrys (if I found one on the cheap I would, with pleasure), but there's no way they are as good as the all cotton ones.
I have a friend who is unfortunately named Polly Esther Cotton.
I worked with a guy named Dacron Jefferson.
Ha! You Americans and your funny names - I was talking abiut it only the other day with my friend Stephen Nylon-Trousers.