Montrose jacket length

**Lehane** · 27th January 20, 01:47 PM

I am thinking about a Montrose doublet. How far down should the jacket fall? I have seen measurements for a 'long' where the bottom of the jacket is 28". That is where the tail of my PC would fall. A PC falls fairly short comparatively just covering the 'waist' of the kilt and just covering the shirt. Correct?

Since the Montrose is 'belted' would it fall longer so that the belt loops and belt would be that low. My normal sports and suit jackets are longs and are in the 33-34 inch range.

How long should a 'long' Montrose be? My PC is about 22 to cover.

Any tailors out there? Thanks in advance?

**RichardtheLarge** · 27th January 20, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Lehane

I am thinking about a Montrose doublet. How far down should the jacket fall? I have seen measurements for a 'long' where the bottom of the jacket is 28". That is where the tail of my PC would fall. A PC falls fairly short comparatively just covering the 'waist' of the kilt and just covering the shirt. Correct?

Since the Montrose is 'belted' would it fall longer so that the belt loops and belt would be that low. My normal sports and suit jackets are longs and are in the 33-34 inch range.

How long should a 'long' Montrose be? My PC is about 22 to cover.

Any tailors out there? Thanks in advance?

IMO the bottom hem of the jacket should extend an inch or so below where you would wear your normal kilt belt—close to the natural waist. It is cut short like this on purpose—no tails and no “tashes” (the flaps on a Kenmore or Sheriffmuir).

You can see the proportions in this photo: The top of the belt, in this case, is a couple of inches below the natural waist: https://www.kinlochanderson.com/mont...loured-worsted
With that being said I would recommend thinking about another style of doublet—I can’t imagine how hot wearing double breasted barathea or velvet buckled firmly at the waist must be—and you’re in SC! Other doublet/jacket types allow venting body heat at the neck, chest, and waist, depending on the style.

**Lehane** · 27th January 20, 02:59 PM

Thanks! Just toying with the idea. I have a Sherrifmuir that I wore to Burns night and was totally comfortable. The Montrose is sooooooooo cool LOOKING lol

Just pondering the idea. I still think I am about 30# too heavy for a Montrose. Right now it would look like someone stuffed a very, very large haggis under my belt. One has to have a chest that hasn't fallen to Dunlop's disease to wear one. ;)

I can dream ( and exercise) and perhaps some day.

Don't think I would wear one outdoors in South Carolina in summer for sure.

**McMurdo** · 27th January 20, 05:27 PM

At your Natural Waist.

**Lehane** · 27th January 20, 05:56 PM

Okay so bear with me now, I am new to this. Great picture and as I see it the bottom of the jacket is where the kilt belt should be if it were there.

I thought the top of the kilt is at the natural waist (aka navel) so if one was measuring you would don the kilt place it across your navel/waist and then measure from top of collar to bottom of kilt belt? plus a tad. So it would be longer than a PC to the hem but not as long as to bottom of PC 'tail' correct?

No Scot tailors, not tailors at all near me - out in the boonies of SC. ;)

**RichardtheLarge** · 27th January 20, 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by Lehane

Okay so bear with me now, I am new to this. Great picture and as I see it the bottom of the jacket is where the kilt belt should be if it were there.

I thought the top of the kilt is at the natural waist (aka navel) so if one was measuring you would don the kilt place it across your navel/waist and then measure from top of collar to bottom of kilt belt? plus a tad. So it would be longer than a PC to the hem but not as long as to bottom of PC 'tail' correct?

No Scot tailors, not tailors at all near me - out in the boonies of SC. ;)

You’re basically right, but the natural waist isn’t necessarily at the navel level—for many people it is, for heavier people like you and me the navel is often below the natural waist, as the navel generally changes position (height) with weight loss and gain.

If you lean sideways with your legs and lower spine straight and upright, the place where your body bends is your natural waist.

Also note: McMurdo is wearing his doublet with a higher waist/hem than featured in the Kinloch Anderson photo I linked. McMurdo’s is the traditional length, whereas the KA doublet has been “modernized” with its lower waist, not dissimilar from buying suits today with waistbands several inches below the natural waist where they were worn decades ago.

Edit: I retract this last point: on closer inspection the proportions of the doublets look quite similar.

**Highland Logan** · 28th January 20, 03:05 AM

Just a point here gentlemen, regardless of any limitations, the "natural" waist is just under your bottom ribs. Your navel has no bearing here. The fact that many modren causal paints such as jeans are below the navel, does not make it the "natural" waist.

If you start with some of the fundamentals wrong, you'll end up with problems ordering online, or self measurements.

Frank

**Lehane** · 28th January 20, 07:08 AM

Originally Posted by Highland Logan

Just a point here gentlemen, regardless of any limitations, the "natural" waist is just under your bottom ribs. Your navel has no bearing here. The fact that many modren causal paints such as jeans are below the navel, does not make it the "natural" waist.

If you start with some of the fundamentals wrong, you'll end up with problems ordering online, or self measurements.

Frank

Frank,

Thanks! Yes I do wear my kilt slightly higher than my navel. It is both more comfortable and 'stays put' better. I am trying to lose weight since I am one of those who carries weight around the middle. Hard to look good in any clothes without a waist, natural or no. LOL

And a Montrose on a fat boy would look ridiculous so I am waiting until I can fit in it with dignity. I've lost most of my subcutaneous fat but the belly fat is stubborn and unsightly - Out, out damn fat! (apologies to Shakespeare)

I think you are agreeing (?) that the Montrose is longer than the PC hem? Put on the kilt properly and match the belting positions? That would put the hem somewhere near the 'crest' of the hip bone and make sure that no 'shirt' shows.

Jim

**OC Richard** · 3rd February 20, 06:34 PM

The point about traditional waist-position and modern low-waisted clothes is an important one to keep in mind.

Nowadays many people are wearing their kilts lower and lower, having them made shorter, and then having their jackets made longer to compensate.

We get so used to seeing traditional Highland Dress that we usually aren't aware just how high the waistbelts were worn. (Not only Highland Dress but European men's dress in general.)

Here's a photo of a soldier- see where his waistbelt falls in relation to his elbows.

So naturally when the Montrose jacket (it's not a doublet) was invented (c1920) it followed the longstanding cut of Highland doublets.

Not a Montrose per se but obviously based on it are these 1950s jackets, note the high waist has been kept

But you have to have your kilt properly made, with a high traditional waist! Or stuff like this happens

The Pakistani firms have had to follow their American customer's desires for shorter and shorter kilts and longer and longer jackets

compared to a Scottish-made doublet

**Lehane** · 4th February 20, 06:34 AM

Thank you for the reply and the pictures! I see your point and my fear in that picture with all the shirt showing. I will have to measure carefully. I do wear my kilts on the natural waist not as hip-huggers. ;)

When I was younger we use to satirize 'high' pants as old mans pants. Now that I am an old man IDGAS. LOL

Or maybe it's just that I don't have any hips anymore since my physique has gone from a 'K" to an 'H." But I am working on that.

Thanks again very informative.

Jim