Machine made or hand stitched?

[Emmet]

The one exception would be leather kilts where a machine is necessary and hand sewing a leather kilt would be almost punishment.

OT: I've just made a hand sewn semi-traditional, ~6 yards fell stiched pleats unstitched below pleats cut out and properly interfaced, handsewn leather kilt last november I've been putting it through its "abuse" trials as I've termed it wearing it as much as possible not hanging it up after wearing it all day leaving it in a crumpled pile on the floor (due to the gf tearing it off me near constantly) stuff I wouldn't do with one of my wool kilts or any other kilt really and it still has sharp pleats and looks great I'll be unveiling it soon in the DIY section

[KiltedKnome]

Just wondering how much noticeably difference there is between the two? I was looking at Gordon icholson kilts and saw that their hand stitched ones are around £100 more than the machine sticthed ones.
Do people think this is really worth it? Like would their definitely be a difference in quality between the two?

There are two different questions here. One deals with visible differences between a handsewn and a machine sewn. Due to the different techniques, there will be observable differences -- visibility of steeking line, stitching down of the fell, etc.

The second question deals with difference in quality. A handsewn is not necessarily of better quality than a machine sewn, and visa versa. If both types are made to a high quality standard, then they are both of equal quality. Readers of the forum will remember some recent threads which pointed out the variability of quality between kilts when the latter were deconstructed.

A true craftsman will seek to attain the highest quality possible, regardless of the construction technique that he or she adopts.

[Blackrose87]

The second question deals with difference in quality. A handsewn is not necessarily of better quality than a machine sewn, and visa versa. If both types are made to a high quality standard, then they are both of equal quality. Readers of the forum will remember some recent threads which pointed out the variability of quality between kilts when the latter were deconstructed.

A true craftsman will seek to attain the highest quality possible, regardless of the construction technique that he or she adopts.

Hmm, this is what I was getting at really. If they would be of similar quality and build, will the hand stitched kilt really will worth an extra £100?
I could put the saving towards a nice sporran.
However if the hand stitched kilt is going to last longer, or be of noticeable better quality, then I'd consider the extra money to be worth the extra investment.

I guess the best bet would be to pop over to the shop, and ask to look at samples of both

[KiltedKnome]

Hmm, this is what I was getting at really. If they would be of similar quality and build, will the hand stitched kilt really will worth an extra £100?
I could put the saving towards a nice sporran.
However if the hand stitched kilt is going to last longer, or be of noticeable better quality, then I'd consider the extra money to be worth the extra investment.

I guess the best bet would be to pop over to the shop, and ask to look at samples of both

One of the valuable things about this forum is the education members can get on the construction of kilts, including the "behind the scenes" components (stabilizer, etc.). The more informed you are, the better you are able to make decisions that are right for you. I think your "popping over to the shop" and talking with the proprietors, is the way to go. Make a list of the questions you want to ask beforehand. A shop that prides itself on the quality of the product that leaves its premises will be only too happy to discuss the differences and the pros/cons of each. Good luck!

[Alan H]

having made a wide variety of kilts, from 100% hand stitched, to a combination of hand/machine, to completely machine made, I'd say that you're comparing apples to oranges....or maybe apples to baseballs.

What's very commonly done, and I personally do this a lot, is hand-stitch the pleats in the fell and machine-stitch everything else. The waistband for example.... Look, the waistband area takes the most cinching/tightening load. It makes perfect sense to use a machine to stitch in the waistband, as tightly done machine-stitching is a LOT stronger than hand sewing, unless the person doing the handsewing has the patience of... of.... well, lemme tell ya, *I* don't have that kind of patience. Because of how a waistband is made, if it's done right, the stitching is invisible. It's also pretty straightforward to machine stitch the fringed edge of the over-apron and make it invisible as well.

Machine stitching inside the pleats can also be done invisibly (I've done it...maybe on two kilts-one was a box pleat and had fewer lines of stitching) but it takes practice, lots of practice. Rocky and Kelly have it *down*.

Like Ms Knome points out, it's not necessarily the QUALITY of the kilt that is indicated by machine stitching vs. hand stitching. Honestly truth... personally I think that a top-stitched, machinee-stitched (in the fell) kilt is stronger than the overwhelming majority of hand-stitched ones....but it definitely doesn't look the same.

If we're talking about any sort of contemporary kilt..as in not the tartan wool "tank", then I, personally would topstitch, machine-stitch the fell every time, it's MUCH faster, stronger and you don't have all the "rules" associated with the Scottish tartan kilt to worry about. However, if what you just *HAVE* to have is the full-on traditional 8 yard tank and you're one of those guys whose size doesn't change for years on end, what the heck. Spend the $$ for hand stitching and treat it nicely.

[Blackrose87]

If we're talking about any sort of contemporary kilt..as in not the tartan wool "tank", then I, personally would topstitch, machine-stitch the fell every time, it's MUCH faster, stronger and you don't have all the "rules" associated with the Scottish tartan kilt to worry about.

What do you mean by contemporary? The one I'm planning on getting would be 100% wool tartan.
But I've been to pretty much every shop in Edinburgh city centre, and I haven't seen any that aren't tartan. I guess some of cheaper ones may be made of another material, but theyre still tartan.

[Alan H]

What do you mean by contemporary? The one I'm planning on getting would be 100% wool tartan.
But I've been to pretty much every shop in Edinburgh city centre, and I haven't seen any that aren't tartan. I guess some of cheaper ones may be made of another material, but theyre still tartan.

I see that you're from Edinburgh, so it's possible that you're not aware of a movement, which I suppose started in the USA in the pacific northwest, where kilts are made from material other than wool tartan.

Utilikilts is what most people think of when they say "contemporary kilt" but Ms. Knome, who posted in this thread, is married to the forum owner, Steve Ashton, who owns Freedom Kilts. Freedom Kilts makes contemporary kilts, primarily out of cotton/polyester twill, but they will also happily make you a kilt with pockets etc. out of very nice tartan.

Amerikilts is another company. Even Scotweb offers a camouflage-material kilt, now. Paul Henry is a kiltmaker in the UK who makes both "contemporary" kilts out of all sorts of material, AND very traditional tartan wool kilts.

A Scottish company (not tartan junk, an actual Scottish-owned company) called Marton Mills makes a range of about 80 tartans in a polyester/viscose blend. It sounds horrid on first hearing, but in fact the material is very nice and the tartans are pretty true to color. They're a bit light, the weight is 11 ounces, whereas most kilting wool is 13 or 16 ounces per yard. The material is teflon-coated so it resists staining and is easily machine-washable. Try THAT with your wool kilt!

Again..."teflon coated".... it sounds dreadful. Trust me, it's not...not at all. I make a lot of kilts for Highland Games athletes and I ALWAYS encourage them to have me make a Marton Mills Polyester-viscose kilt.

[Alan H]

Here is a picture of me wearing a contemporary kilt. This design is called the "X-Kilt" and it's designed (by me) to be sewn up as a do-it-yourself project for someone who can't afford an expensive kilt, like a Utilikilt or a Freedom Kilt or wants to tackle a project on their own. Literally hundreds of these have been made. Other X-markers, notably sydnie7 and TartanHiker have made a lot of these, so there are DIY resources here on X Marks for those that want to try their hand at it.

[

This is what I mean what I write "contemporary kilt" though other people might mean something else, entirely, when they use that phrase.

BTW, the X Kilt CAN be made to as high a quality as any other kilt, but you'd have to go pretty far beyond the basic instructions to achieve that. The X-Kilt is a "quick and dirty" kilt that you can make yourself and not worry about beating it up. You'll learn from the process, and that's half the fun.

Freedom Kilts and R Kilts, in my humble opinion, are the jewels of the contemporary kilting world....but I haven't seen a kilt (in person) by Paul Harvey yet!!

[KiltedKnome]

Utilikilts is what most people think of when they say "contemporary kilt" but Ms. Knome, who posted in this thread, is married to the forum owner, Steve Ashton, who owns Freedom Kilts.

Alan....my secret is out! And here I have tried to be low-key.......

[Blackrose87]

Ah right, of course. I've seen these on the forum, but I wasn't really sure what they were.
I don't think I've ever seen them here at all. Interesting concept though.