Wells Lamont at Wal Mart
Moderators: Mike, Cajunkraut, Tennessee Smith
Wells Lamont at Wal Mart
FYI to anyone looking for the Wells Lamont gloves, I picked a pair up at Wal Mart this evening for $8.99.
These are the Grips version with only a small mule logo embossed on the cuff of the left glove.
There are other versions with a much bigger embossed name, some that have straps to make them tighter, and rather odd stitching. So make sure to rumage around and get the ones that seem the least cluttered.
To weather I'll use the old fashioned way - working outside in the dirt!
These are the Grips version with only a small mule logo embossed on the cuff of the left glove.
There are other versions with a much bigger embossed name, some that have straps to make them tighter, and rather odd stitching. So make sure to rumage around and get the ones that seem the least cluttered.
To weather I'll use the old fashioned way - working outside in the dirt!
- myamoebafriend
- Archaeologist
- Posts: 201
- Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:26 am
- Location: Birmingham, AL
My Lowes only had the odd looking ones (I was actually needing to buy gloves for work so this is why I know) so I decided not to get any and use some gloves I already had.
Was in the Wal Mart looking for something else when I came across these in the men's clothing section on a rack next to some ugly looking hats. So check there first if wanting a pair.
Was in the Wal Mart looking for something else when I came across these in the men's clothing section on a rack next to some ugly looking hats. So check there first if wanting a pair.
- IndianaBogart
- Dig Leader
- Posts: 651
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2008 10:25 am
- Location: ...listening to a tinny piano playing in the parlor downstairs....
-
- Field Surveyor
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:24 am
- Location: Hillsborough, NC
- scot2525
- Professor of Archaeology
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 9:56 pm
- Location: Northeast of Indy
I say the top pair is artificial as the gloves really do not look worn in. The bottom pair look as if they have been worn alot even though they appear to be less dirty.IndianaBogart wrote:That's exactly where I found my Wells-Lamont gloves. On a rack in the mens underwear/sock rack. I have two pairs. One is the pair I use that got naturally distressed, the other pair I artificially distressed. See if you can tell which is which.
- IndianaBogart
- Dig Leader
- Posts: 651
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2008 10:25 am
- Location: ...listening to a tinny piano playing in the parlor downstairs....
I hate to have to say it, but the top pair is the pair that I've used the most, and hence has the natural distressing. I think the reason they don't look very broken-in is because I worked in the rain with them once and they got soaked and after they dried they became a little stiff. The bottom pair I've used occasionally, but they never got very distressed looking, so I decided to artificially distress them. It was a good guess though.
The new gloves after getting them damp then working in the yard for a couple hours. A few more hours of work and you have a perfect item. Much better than using paint, in my opinion, plus you get something accomplished at the same time. The little dark spots are rain drops during the picture taking.
-
- Archaeology Student
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:18 pm
- Location: Cincinnati OH
- Zombie Jones
- Archaeologist
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:29 am
- Location: So. California
Some people believe the gloves in Raiders were Wells Lamont model 1123, which are no longer being manufactured. However, others have stated they were definitely not the 1123's, and that the 1130's are the gloves that were used. The debate seems to focus on the suede palm patch, which was apparently not present on the gloves used in Raiders:Doug C wrote:Since there isn't a note about it on the main page's gear section, under accessories - what is the exact model gloves that were used, and is this what you guys are showing off (no palm pictures).
Doug C
Wells Lamont currently makes a glove similar to the 1130 without the suede palm patch, model number 1750. They are goatskin rather than cowhide, and (judging by the photos on Wells Lamont's website) they are considerable whiter in color than the 1130:
1130:
http://www.wellslamont.com/pg_styledeta ... style=1757
1750:
http://www.wellslamont.com/pg_styledeta ... style=1774
However, my 1130's are quite a bit lighter/whiter than the 1130's in their photo (or they were before I started using them), so this may be yet another Indy gear item that doesn't photograph it's true color.
- Michaelson
- Knower of Things
- Posts: 44486
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 12:55 pm
- Location: Out here knowing stuff and things and wishing I were with the family at Universal Studios Orlando
I'd say that based on the screen caps they were not Midwest gloves, but the Wells Lamont. I think it was speculative for a while but newer screen caps put that one to rest, or so I thought. One thing is 100% though, they were not 1123's.
Do all of your new gloves have the palm patch?
Not at all. The older 1130's had no palm patch until about 2003 or so. The debate is about the pattern of the glove, not the palm patch.The debate seems to focus on the suede palm patch, which was apparently not present on the gloves used in Raiders:
Do all of your new gloves have the palm patch?
Leave the patch on and use the gloves is my opinion.Indiana Rich wrote:Hi,
Picked up a pair at Walmart last night. Now I need to remove the grips. Any ideas on the best way to do this? I am especially concerned on where the grips meet the seam on the side of the gloves?
Any help would be appreciated
Thanks
IR
Do some work in them and in a few hours they'll be weathered. I'm actually a little shocked people will pay extra for pre-distressed gloves. Simply put them on, stick your hands under water for a minute, then work in the yard for a couple hours - grab a shovel and play in the dirt.
- Michaelson
- Knower of Things
- Posts: 44486
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 12:55 pm
- Location: Out here knowing stuff and things and wishing I were with the family at Universal Studios Orlando
Not really. Several of us saw the set invoices years ago, and MidWest was as well represented as Wells Lamont for use on set by all parties involved.agent5 wrote:I'd say that based on the screen caps they were not Midwest gloves, but the Wells Lamont. I think it was speculative for a while but newer screen caps put that one to rest, or so I thought.
I remember when all the screen cap discussion were going on, and it was assumed that door had been closed. It was for many, but not for all, as it only proved those screen caps had Wells Lamonts represented. It didn't remove the fact that MidWest gloves were also available on set, and from production personnel conversations, were used by the actors too.
With that, you can find Mid-West gloves at Wal-Mart too, but out in the Lawn and Garden area. Why they sell them in two completely different departments of the store is beyond me! I have found that the MidWest glove fits my hand better than Wells Lamont too!
Regards! Michaelson
- Zombie Jones
- Archaeologist
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:29 am
- Location: So. California
Thank you for correcting me. Most of the online discussions I've read regarding these gloves focused on the palm patch, and I didn't realize the pattern was a larger issue. Quite frankly, except for the palm patch I don't see much difference. But then, I can't tell one film-used jacket from another, so...agent5 wrote:Not at all. The older 1130's had no palm patch until about 2003 or so. The debate is about the pattern of the glove, not the palm patch.Zombie Jones wrote:The debate seems to focus on the suede palm patch, which was apparently not present on the gloves used in Raiders:
- Kt Templar
- Legendary Adventurer
- Posts: 4715
- Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 4:32 am
- Location: London.
I'm like the 0122 at gloves online, gun cut and no palm patch.
http://www.gloves-online.com/proddetail ... od=WK-0122
http://www.gloves-online.com/proddetail ... od=WK-0122
- Zombie Jones
- Archaeologist
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:29 am
- Location: So. California
- Michaelson
- Knower of Things
- Posts: 44486
- Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 12:55 pm
- Location: Out here knowing stuff and things and wishing I were with the family at Universal Studios Orlando
- scot2525
- Professor of Archaeology
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 9:56 pm
- Location: Northeast of Indy
Raider S wrote:Indiana Rich wrote:Hi,
Picked up a pair at Walmart last night. Now I need to remove the grips. Any ideas on the best way to do this? I am especially concerned on where the grips meet the seam on the side of the gloves?
Any help would be appreciated
Thanks
IR
I removed the patch and still use the gloves around the house when doing yard work. Removing the patches was easy, I slipped a small knife under a couple of stiches and cut them on top of the patch and this opened a small little hole between the patch and and the glove and then just ran the knife along the rest of the stitching. After this is done you have the patch hanging off the side. Take a pair of really sharp scissors and cut the patch off as close as you can to the seam. Took laess than 5 minutes to do it