"Heavyweight"

[Blu (Ontario)]

...Yeah...and respectfully, I don't get the tone that some posters seem to be conveying that "you just gotta get that tank or you're just piddling around with the kilt thing".

I doubt there was anything desparaging meant... probably more excitement in discovering that there is a difference.

...I'm certainly trying to work my way up the ladder and will hopefully acquire a few more from various of the kiltmakers that contribute to the group as well as trying my own hand at putting one together... AA

I started at the top and seem to be working my way down the ladder. I spent close to $1000 for that first kilt package so it was 2+ years before I even contemplated purchasing a second kilt. I'd love another heavyweight but I'll probably go for a utility kilt first. I also hope to build my own traditional kilt one of these days but I need to educate myself first.

blu

[KiltedCodeWarrior]

Blu and Bryan,

I have to agree with Auld, there have been posts by some members, none on this particular thread so far, that made it abundantly clear that the poster(s) in question absolutely did not consider anything other than a traditional 16oz wool tank to really be a kilt. On one particular thread there were days and days of arguments to the point that the thread was finally shut off. Possiblt Auld and I are new enough to this whole experience and XMarks that we interpret posts differently thant thos who have been here a while an dmight have a better handle on the individual personalities of the long time members.

Anyway, not trying to start anything, just wanted to echo Auld's thoughts and that I have felt the same on some threads.

[flyv65]

Anyway, not trying to start anything, just wanted to echo Auld's thoughts and that I have felt the same on some threads.

No, you're quite right, I think I know the thread of which you speak: but I thought that there were only one or two people who were of that mindset. By the way, I don't think I joined the list much before you did: I expect you've got more kilts than me by now, too!

Bryan...but I *am* saving for a formal sporran...

[RockyR]

Some people have the "if it's nae Scottish, It's CRAAAAPP" kind of attitude about kilts... that's a valid way to look at things.

Others have the "No WAY am I paying more than $100 for a piece of clothing" kind of attitude. That's fine too.

Still others own and wear kilts at differing levels of price and material and quality. THESE type of people tend to appreciate each garment for what it is and the price it's worth.

3 different views with "strong headed men" (let's face it... if you're in a kilt, chances are, you're an "alpha male" and pretty stubborn) in each category. Does that make any ONE right and the others wrong? No... just makes 'em different.

No one on this board is going to REALLY change anyone else's opinions on certain matters unless that person WANTS to rethink things. I think many threads get "dragged out" AFTER the REAL core of an issue is reached. There's a point when you have to agree to disagree and just give things a rest. Sorry... getting off my soapbox.

[Archangel]

All that really needs to be said is that there is a huge difference between a 22oz heavyweight, like my first kilt (at about $CDN1000 in 1972) and the modern heavyweight ($CDN250 ebay), and some contemporary models. I don't remember ever considering the wind back then. I'm going to have to scan some pics and post them.

Once people know that difference, it comes back to personal priorities.

[KiltedCodeWarrior]

No, you're quite right, I think I know the thread of which you speak: but I thought that there were only one or two people who were of that mindset. By the way, I don't think I joined the list much before you did: I expect you've got more kilts than me by now, too!

Bryan...but I *am* saving for a formal sporran...

Bryan, I agree that there were only a few with the "extreme" attitudes and I am certain that you know the thread I am referring to! Anyway, kilt count is 5 as of today (2 SWK's, AK, USAK, SK), with a UK coming Wednesday and 2 PK's on order with Jeff. Have to slow down now. Also need to decide what is my kilt wearing preference. The semi-traditional from Rocky is entirely different from the others I have, must be owrn much higher. Not sure if I like it or not (don't take offense Rocky!). Overall it seems much more formal, which will work well for our company holiday party, but not sure it is appropriate for every day go to work wear. The fact that I did not have a kilt belt to wear with it may have affected my opinion.

Sorry did not mean to digress. What type of formal sporran are you saving for? Been looking at a Freelander for myself.

[billmcc]

Also need to decide what is my kilt wearing preference. The semi-traditional from Rocky is entirely different from the others I have, must be worn much higher. Not sure if I like it or not (don't take offense Rocky!). Overall it seems much more formal, which will work well for our company holiday party, but not sure it is appropriate for every day go to work wear. The fact that I did not have a kilt belt to wear with it may have affected my opinion.

KCW,

Traditional kilts (like the USA Semi-traditional) have a higher waist than AKs, PKs and other such kilts. If you decide to go with a kilt that has a lower pants-type waist, try a USA Kilts Casual. I really like mine.

[Rob]

I agree with your (and MANY others) weight characteristics...

16 to 18 oz = Heavyweight
13 to 14 oz = Mediumweight
10.5 to 12 oz = Lightweight

So what should I call my 15 oz? Medium/heavyweight?

Rob (the confused )

[RockyR]

15's are considered heavyweight.

[Barb T]

What is now regarded as "heavyweight" seems to be getting lighter. When I see comments posted about an 11oz or 12oz kilt being "heavy" I have to scratch my head and wonder what it is being compared to.

If you are talking about traditional kilts, I honestly don't think there's been any change in a long time in what is considered "heavy weight". If someone advertises a kilt at 11 or 12 oz as being "heavy", I would respectfully say that either they don't know what they're talking about or they aren't selling a trad kilt.

A kilt doesn't have to be heavy weight (or even medium weight) to be a "real kilt". Anyone who has gone to Highland games has seen Highland dancers, both male and female, dancing in trad kilts that have all the same construction as the heavy band kilts that most band members wear. The dancers simply choose the lighter weight tartan because it's easier to dance in. Still has swing, although it is more susceptible to being caught by the wind. The mill that weaves by far the largest share of tartan that dancers use is D.C. Dalgliesh, and their tartan is 11-12 oz. It makes a beautiful kilt that no one should be ashamed of wearing. And, for someone in a hot climate, or for someone who wants to use a kilt for hiking, it's great. And, honestly, the tartan is still expensive and doesn't make a kilt that costs all _that_ much less than a heavy weight trad kilt for a person of the same size.

The _really_ heavy weight kilts (18-22 oz, commonly called military/regimental weight) are uncommon in large part because the fabric is available only in a few tartans, mostly those that were worn by military regiments. Even if you wanted a really heavy weight fabric, you've never had much choice in what's woven. House of Edgar, for example, does regimental weight tartan in Black Watch, Gordon, Cameron of Erracht, Mackenzie, Hunting Stewart, and Royal Stewart, and they weave to Ministry of Defence standards. Lochcarron doesn't even weave anything heavier than 16 oz (although they refer to their 16 oz as being a "military weight" , it's a bit on the light side for what's traditionally "military"). So, I don't think it's true that lots of tartans used to be woven in much heavier weight and that things have changed a lot in the last 10 or 15 years. Matt, you can correct me if I'm wrong about that.

Cheers,

Barb