Hacker News Reader

Comment by NalNezumi | Hacker News Reader

>Suits are made to be able to be tailored to the wearer’s measurements. But modern clothes aren’t. For example, even though there are high, medium, and low rise pants, I can’t adjust their rise to my proportions.

To me it seems like this is really the only point OP have, which seems to have more to do with how modern clothes are produced? (factory, based on some averaged out categories of body type)

Other than that it seems like all the things he say are "better", you can find modern variants that do as well.

And the women's cloth rant is weird. Isn't that... Same for (most common) women's suite too? Pockets being too small is enough of an issue that I know some women just buy men's jeans (smallest size) instead, if their proportions are not too different (hip) from average for men.

Also, I didn't see any defense for neckties. What's good about that?

View on HN

Even that requires a tailored suit, not an off the rack one. I just can't see the dichotomy the author mentions. Suits are clothes and they can be modern or not just like anything else. The differences are that older clothes were generally made to last longer, and that suits can be tailor made. But suits can be also cheap and low quality, they can be ill fitting, and here it doesn't matter if they're old or modern.

As for comfort, look at clothes you'd wear for relaxing on the couch or for extended periods like a long flight. A suit can be comfortable for a suit but otherwise they're mainly a matter of looks rather than comfort.

Suits generally are pretty comfortable though, other than the shirt and tie which give me something close to claustrophobia. Some of my favorite pants for lounging around the house are suit pants.

After wearing suit and tie for decades, and liking it as a work attire, I can't imagine how a suit can be more comfortable than clothing that doesn't have to follow a strict design so is free to focus on comfort. Like a track suit.

Business suits are limited by the choice of fabric and the specific cut. To make them more comfortable they would have to compromise the design, and the fabric would need to change.

Comfortable clothes usually follow the movement of the body with little to no resistance, either by stretching with the skin (tights, never wore them but I hear they're comfortable) or baggy clothes, usually with synthetic fibers.

You can find casual suits that are basically track suits with a business suit general look but I wouldn't conflate them.

Honestly, I don't mind wool. I've never felt it to be scratchy, but I hate polyester, which I do find irritating. I don't wear suits regularly because I hate collared shirts and I'm not a tophat capitalist, but I've never found them to be uncomfortable.

I don't think you can adjust all of that with suits either. Unless you have them tailor made. But you can also have your jeans tailor made. I was never happy with the state of male trousers, so I had some tailor made. It doesn't have to be a suit.

The same goes for the rest of the arguments. Buttons? Plenty of jeans have buttons. Plenty of suit pants don't.

Do you want pockets? Ever heard of cargo pants?

And jackets can certainly have advantages, but that doesn't have to be a suit jacket. There are other kinds of jackets.

It's fine to like suits if that's what you like, but none of this is unique to suits. Except ties.

Fair point. Pockets in suits are the most useful though. Easy to access and don’t drag my pants down when using them.

>But you can also have your jeans tailor made.

The result of this process would vary widely based on what you call "jeans". If it's any denim pants then sure, you can just use the same cut as suit trousers and get well fit "jeans". Some people call "jeans" only pants cut in a fashion similar to Levi's 501. Those don't have darts or pleats so even if a taylor hand stitched such a cut it simply doesn't have as many "knobs" to fit one's legs shape as well as suit trousers.

Same principle applies to any other garment. They are all made from flat pieces of fabric stitched together. The fewer pieces and fewer stitches there are, the harder it is to fit to the body shape.

">Suits are made to be able to be tailored to the wearer’s measurements. But modern clothes aren’t."

It's understandable that modern pre-made clothes have to trade off the number of sizes and fittings. Unlike tailored clothes, economies of production mean they cannot be an ideal fit for everyone.

However, what I find completely inexcusable is that modern pants' pockets are almost inevitably too small, and often even zippers are too short making changing in and out of them awkward. These are rarely an issue with suits.

I'm fed up having my smartphone, keys and coins fall to the floor whenever I sit down. The problem is even worse in vehicles as the seats tilt back further. I've permanently lost smartphones because of shallow pockets.

Unlike clothes' sizes, there is no intrinsic limitation to pocket sizes, so why do we continue tolerate pockets that are not fit for purpose?

It's not only a pants problem, shirts regularly have pockets that are too shallow to take a pen, even the upper pockets of my overalls are not deep enough for a pen let alone a notebook or 6" rule.

Surely I'm not the only person who whinges about this. Why are pocket sizes a problem nowadays when never so decades ago?

This is just as much a phone problem as it is a pocket problem. I had no issue fitting a nokia or early smartphone in my pockets.

I owned several early Nokia phones so I understand your point. Trouble is I've various brands of work pants whose pockets wouldn't even safely hold those Nokias. You'd think more attention would be paid to the depth of pockets in work pants but not so. Thus it's not one wayward manufacturer who is to blame, they're all at it.

My solution is to have my local drycleaning shop that offers an alteration service to deepen the pockets. I shouldn't have to pay extra to get right-sized pockets manufacturers should have provided.

No, I have the same problem with pockets. Ear buds love falling out of my pockets in the car.

It's the main reason I mostly wear jeans. The five pocket configuration's vertical orientation holds onto its contents better than the slanted pockets of slacks and chinos.

I would really like some slacks with vertical deep pockets. Jeans get so boring.

Right. My earlier comments are not aimed at jeans, they're pretty much the exception. Their two main pockets being positioned at the front make it difficult for objects to fall out unnoticed.

I'm guessing, but I'd imagine as jeans first became popular in the days of horse riding side pockets really weren't a practical option, the rider's motion would contribute to things sliding out of them.

My complaint is that modern clothes designers have forgotten or stopped implementing good pocket design that was fully solved several centuries ago.

"I would really like some slacks with vertical deep pockets."

So would I, and deep pockets do exist but unfortunately not in mass produced pants that are commonly available (one's regular clothing). I have some army BD fatigues/dungarees with really good side pockets. They're not only deep but they're cut in a sort of a shallow 'P' shape. The P-cut at the bottom forces keys etc. to slide down one's side at 90° to the pocket exit when one is sitting. It's thus almost impossible to accidentally lose something out of them.

The questions are why don't manufacturers just copy this excellent design and why don't more people complain. If people stopped buying pants with shallow pockets the problem would be solved overnight.

> I didn't see any defense for neckties

I've told my wife I'll wear one to my funeral.

Yeah sorry the womens clothes rant was a bit of venting off while speaking about clothing.

Regarding neck ties this was my only comment:

> Note: ties feel a bit useless but at least they hide my belly when movement slightly opens the shirt.

Also adjustments have nothing to do with comfort unless before the adjustments it was a clown suit. You'll look better if it's tailored but it's not more comfortable than a sweat suit. Whoever says a suit is more comfortable I just take as performative in the sense that they really like wearing suits for other reasons and extend that feeling to other attributes.

Huh? I have the problem that suit shirts either squeeze my neck giving me a headache, or have to be comically oversized. Like OP, I think I just have non-standard proportions.

But when my wife made a shirt after my actual measurements as an experiment, it did not squeeze my neck and was very comfortable. I loved that shirt and used it for many years until it fell apart (unfortunately it wasn't made of the finest materials, and I don't have the wife any longer either).

So I'd think adjustments can absolutely help comfort.

You can get a shirt made to measure from https://www.hockerty.com, in your choice of material and at quite a reasonable price. I have a few of them. It's basic construction, not high-end luxury fashion, but it feels really good to have a shirt which fits you exactly.

Sorry for your loss, your wife sounds like she was an amazing woman.

She's still around, she's just not married to me any longer. And sure, she was pretty cool in many ways, such as teaching herself to make shirts, but all in all I'm better off now :)

Sorry, I misunderstood. For what it's worth, it took me about a year after my divorce until I completely stopped accidentally referring to my ex as my wife in conversation! Old habits, etc.

Do you buy shirts in S, M, L, XL kind of sizes or do you buy them in neck and sleeve length? I'll buy casual shirts in standard sizes but my dress shirts are all specific measurements, any place that sells suits will probably have a shirt that fits your neck and arm length. You can definitely go further with the measurements (like the bespoke shirt your wife made) but unless your body is really disproportionate (like a distended belly or you're a body builder), neck and sleeves are good enough. Generally, the fatter you are, the thicker your neck is so that's effectively how they gauge your torso size. Sleeve length is proportional to your height so taller equals longer sleeves. Suit jackets use your chest circumference and sleeve length.

You have probably never worn a tailored suit. The difference between a good fit and a mediocre fit is in centimeters on the right spots, not the difference between a clown suit and a fitting suit. Tailoring is mainly for fit, not looks. Just the tailoring sessions shows that: about 40 minutes of measurements, and about 10 minutes of choices in wool, in pockets, in model. And to expand on the theme in OP: Super 140 wool is an awesome material on both durability and flexibility. There is a few thousand years of tech just in the wool. (Beat that cotton jeans!)

A tailored suit, but indeed, every tailored piece of clothing will always have the best fit and comfort. That's trivial. Even your sweat suit would benefit from being a tailored sweat suit.

I have non standard measurements and buying trousers has always been a chore (a cm lower shoulder, a 1/2 cm shorter leg, cyclist quads, life influences body). I've now started to use AI to pre-select brands and fits that might suit my sizing. Which is actually just moving somewhat towards at least 'fitted' clothing. The future of adult and sustainable fashion 'should' be made to measure.

Why would you take the lowest interpretation of someone's comment? I have worn them, why would I write anything if I hadn't? Just say you disagree, there's no need to assume you're replying to a piece of lumber.

Also you do make it seem like you start from clown suits, the suits I've tailored start already pretty good and go to great. They don't start with all that extra fabric you describe in a way that would make them uncomfortable.

Wasn’t meaning to insult, sorry. Didn’t take the lowest interpretation though (“performative”, “clown suit”). And I didn’t go for the ad hominem about men in sweat suites.

I guess we need the distinction of made vs. made to fit (a suit that is tailored post-production) and made to measure (a tailor-made suite; each piece of cloth size for a unique product). Best fitting is made to measure and that is what I am referring to.

> “Tailoring is mainly for fit, not looks. … every tailored piece of clothing will always have the best fit and comfort. That's trivial.”

It isn’t trivial; any time a piece of clothing pinches or pulls that is what makes it uncomfortable, and loose clothing doesn’t do that by definition. That means any kind of shaped or fitted clothing including tailoring can only be less-comfortable than loose clothing and approach being equally-comfortable as an upper limit, getting closer with a more skilled tailor.

That means tailoring is mainly for looks - I.e. the only reason tailored clothes exist at all is because wearing a looks bad; start with a super comfortable ‘bag’ and cinch it as close to your body shape as possible so it doesn’t look like a bag, and looks better, get as close as possible without losing that comfort.

I don’t think looseness is always more comfortable. You need looseness in the right areas which is what tailoring provides.

Maybe it’s cold and the extra airiness is working against you.

Maybe the clothes rustle and rub more when you move.

How do (non-elastic) pants stay up, without some minimal measurement for the waist?

I own some more baggy T-shirts and layering with a sweater feels more uncomfortable because the clothes will fold in places you don’t want them to with a sweater on, which is not a problem for more trim fit clothes.

> The future of adult and sustainable fashion 'should' be made to measure.

The future is already here. You can order custom sizes from many designers quite easily on the web, it's just not cheap. Few people are willing spend a few hundred or thousand on every outfit when the same thing can be had for $20 mass-produced.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com