Graham,

If I can add a couple of words from my side of the fence. (And in Utilikilts defense)

As I understand it, the Utilikilt was never intended to look like a traditional Kilt. The Original Utilikilt didn't have aprons, it had a zipper fly front closure. It was designed to be worn with a belt, and to be an alternative to jeans and shorts.

The design of the symetrical pleats is a wonderful departure from the Traditional. An Engineers answer to how to get front pockets in a pleated garment.

I don't believe Steve was trying to make his product look anything like a Traditional Kilt. His product does not take it's inspiration from the Traditional. He was going in a totally new and different direction.

As for sizing, Utilikilts are designed and manufatured to be sold "off the rack". They concentrate on what they believe will be the most popular and all around sizes.
With the current fashion of wearing shorts below the knee, a utilikilt worn below the knee is perfect for the customer they are marketing to.

Don't lump Utilikilts in with the other Traditional Kilt and Custom Kilt manufacturers. And don't expect them to look like something they don't purport to be. Apples and Oranges here Graham.

I don't iron my Utilikilt. I never will. I don't want it to look "neat and proper".
It's different and Funky.

My Freedom Kilts are supposed to be modeled on the Traditional. The pleats are supposed to hang straight and true. The aprons are supposed to be wide and tapered. If they don't, then you can paint me with the traditional brush.
But don't look at Utilikilts that way.

Rejoice in the Utilikilt, Macabi, Pringle, Mannerrock, and all the variety. If all we had was one "Traditional" pattern Kilt, just in different colors, the world would be a poorer place.

My two cents worth.