Pants waist kilts

[KiltedBrewer]

I haven't worn my kilts frequently in some time, and I think it's partly because I just don't find it comfortable to wear them around my belly button. I tend to wear them with a polo or button down short sleeve in warm weather or a sweater in cold weather, so I think they'll still look fine at the my pants waist. What are your favorite kilts that are made to be worn at the jeans waist--both tartan and non-tartan? Thanks in advance!

[CBH]

This is a highly controversial topic. I am in your camp though.

I too tried many (expensive) traditional tartan kilts. I ordered 2 of them to be made at the pants waist, but it does not really help. For the 3rd, the kilt maker said she would only make a kilt to be worn at the traditional high point above the navel. I agreed, and learned that its even MORE uncomfortable.

Utility kilts solved my problem. I've had several made in Pakistan from non-tartan material, and I'm very happy with them. They're so much more comfy because so much more of the kilt is pleated. The pleats, of course, are where you get the space for movement - especially when seated - and it makes all the difference in the world.

Fani at ScottishKiltTailor.Com helped me with my most recent purchase.

The shop I used a few years ago is gone.

There's a recent thread here about Utilikilts, which purportedly are made here in the USA. I have no personal experience with them, but find the thread - others have been happy. As an added bonus you order them by your pants waist size.

[KiltedBrewer]

Thanks for the reply! I have a khaki Sportkilt and 2 x-kilts I made for myself a long time ago--along with a traditional wool kilt in my family (Malcolm) tartan. It's been over 15 years since I've been active on x-marks, so I thought a check in might reveal some suppliers that I wasn't as familiar with. I'm not a stickler for kilt rules, but I've definitely seen folks get pretty heated about non-traditional kilts around here in the past.

Cheers,
David

This is a highly controversial topic. I am in your camp though.

I too tried many (expensive) traditional tartan kilts. I ordered 2 of them to be made at the pants waist, but it does not really help. For the 3rd, the kilt maker said she would only make a kilt to be worn at the traditional high point above the navel. I agreed, and learned that its even MORE uncomfortable.

Utility kilts solved my problem. I've had several made in Pakistan from non-tartan material, and I'm very happy with them. They're so much more comfy because so much more of the kilt is pleated. The pleats, of course, are where you get the space for movement - especially when seated - and it makes all the difference in the world.

Fani at ScottishKiltTailor.Com helped me with my most recent purchase.

The shop I used a few years ago is gone.

There's a recent thread here about Utilikilts, which purportedly are made here in the USA. I have no personal experience with them, but find the thread - others have been happy. As an added bonus you order them by your pants waist size.

[Janner52]

Interesting comments you both make here. I come from the other viewpoint , my kilts are all made in traditional way, worn at the natural waist. I find them extremely comfortable. Much more so than modern lower waisted trousers. Nothing comes untucked and the kilt remains firmly in place.

Everyone to their own I guess.

[OC Richard]

Yes Utilikilts were designed to be worn like jeans, low cut and supported by a belt going through loops all around.

Actual kilts were not; they were intended to be worn at the "natural waist" (the space on your skeleton between the top of the pelvis and the bottom of the rib-cage) and were designed to stay up from the way they were shaped to conform to your body, without a dedicated belt. (BTW a person's natural waist may or may not correspond to where their navel is.)

Kilts in the old days didn't have belt loops in the back, and military kilts never have done. In any case the loops were to keep the sporran belt in place, no other belt being worn around the kilt itself. Yes there were "dirk belts" which were worn over the jacket or waistcoat, not under, if a dirk was being worn.

Since kilts were cut high, the jackets and kilts designed to be worn with kilts were likewise cut high. The waistcoats that came with my kilt jackets are 2 to 4 inches shorter than vests I own which were made for wear with trousers.

So all's well, until a gent orders his kilt cut low but wears a kilt jacket and waistcoat with the traditional higher cut.



The next step might be called "a solution in search of a problem" which is Pakistani makers creating absurdly long waistcoats to meet the low kilts, ditto absurdly long doublets: