All the Raiders Jacket details in one place...

Indiana Jake · Post by **Indiana Jake** » Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:42 pm

Holt, what are your collar specs, as I am in the market for a jacket with just such a collar as you describe.

Indiana Jake

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:15 am

Indiana Holt wrote:These were 7x8.25.a tad big.IMO

Those pockets look just like that B&W picture of Ford holding the idol on the stairs or whatever he's doing (pre-production shot I think).

Know the one I mean?

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:40 am

Jim, not wanting to put a dampner on you but I think those might be a tad small. My personal feeling is probably about 6.5 wde by 7.5-7.75 tall.

I did some 6 x 7 on a 40 short and they looked a little small.

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:14 am

Thanks. KT.

But those are not "my" specs, just scaled down from Holt's 44 pocket size.

The first post shows the average pocket size baed on the five sizes averaged.

I used Playton's pocket size for my jacket (which I don't have yet) and scaled them up 5% larger to fit my 42 size. This added 1/4 inch to width and height to his specs if I remember correctly...

Post by **Holt** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:11 am

Indiana Jake wrote:Holt, what are your collar specs, as I am in the market for a jacket with just such a collar as you describe.

Indiana Jake

I cant tell yet.I dont know if I am getting it on my jacket.so I do not want to go out with the specs yet.

Post by **Holt** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:18 am

J!m wrote:

(Holt pockets: 6.98" tall X 6.08" wide)

these would be to small,IMO.were did you get these pocket specs from anyways?

my 44 of the rack jacket has:7x8.25 pockets.(the picture above).a tad to big IMO. my personal taste for a 44 jacket is 6.5x7.75

edit: I just want to let you know that I have an of the rack 42: and the pockets on that one is 6.25x8.25

Holt

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:32 am

I scaled your size 44 pocket dimentions as I said...

What would you suggest as the screen dimensions (on a size 40?)

I will update the post with those numbers... Or, I can delete your pocket size from the list too, your choice...

Post by **Holt** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:38 am

I can delete it myself thank you very much ;-)
just kidding man,.. ;-)

you see these jacket here are of the racks.they are outsourced from India.that means that on one 44 the pockets it can be this size and on another 44 they can be that size.there is never an answer,they make mistakes.who knows if the pockets I have on my 44 is the right size for a 44?.its just like the straps.they come all in different lengths and Box's,even though they are suppose to be the same size.go figure...

on a 40 I would have the pockets that are on Erris jacket.6x7.5
they are really nice..but this is again personal taste...

Post by **Holt** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:46 am

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:03 am

I think we can all agree that the above jacket does not have a longer collar.

Also, this looks like the "80s fit" jacket we can get today from Wested. It doesn't look though like the baggier jacket HF wears in Rotla and I doubt that it was ever used in the film as I can't remember seeing it on screen. I could be wrong of course.

Post by **Holt** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:11 am

Yep I agree completly.I said this in another thread.

but when you look at this I think we all can agree that it is bigger.

Post by **Holt** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:21 am

I believe its this jacket.

I doubt that it was ever used in the film as I can't remember seeing it on screen. I could be wrong of course.[

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:01 am

Indiana Holt wrote:on a 40 I would have the pockets that are on Erris jacket.6x7.5
they are really nice..but this is again personal taste...

That is what I was looking for... More opinions of what is sen on screen.

I will update this as soon as I can...

Thanks for the input Holt!

Rom Hunter · Post by **Rom Hunter** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:56 pm

J!m,

About the inside pocket:

IMO this is SA:

This is not:

BTW: my pocket size and placement is 100% identical to Chris' pattern now.

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:00 pm

well, I certainly prefer the first one to the other two on the bottom, but I have not seen a good screen grab myself that shows the inside pocket well enough to make that call absolutely...

If you have one (I have the whip photo in the first post) it would be a welcome addition.

Thanks for the input!

Indiana Strones · Post by **Indiana Strones** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:15 pm

J!m wrote:well, I certainly prefer the first one to the other two on the bottom, but I have not seen a good screen grab myself that shows the inside pocket well enough to make that call absolutely...

If you have one (I have the whip photo in the first post) it would be a welcome addition.

Agree 100%!

Erri · Post by **Erri** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:24 pm

I would be interested to see a photo too

Post by **Holt** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:34 pm

well to give you the truth about the jackets is that we never can really know for sure.they may all have the heavy inbound inside pockets and maby just oneof the jackets had the slit pocket.what do we know?...

I mean look at this production LC jacket.anything familiar with the pocket?

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g182/ ... ket_10.jpg

Erri · Post by **Erri** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:37 pm

I've never seen that picture buddy! Good reference.

Unfortunately I don't remember the pocket in Temple of Doom jacket that I've seen but afterall I've never seen a raiders jacket so as far as I'm concerned, I only want a pocket with not too much leather around and that's what I got, happy with that.

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:43 pm

I agree with Rom hunter about the inside pocket.

So the upper picture is the 'slit' pocket?

Rom Hunter · Post by **Rom Hunter** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:21 pm

AFAIK the upper one is called a 'slit' pocket, instead of a 'piped' pocket.

This picture shows it, Holt:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3170/287 ... c20d_o.jpg

Doesn't look like a heavy inbound LC pocket to me.

Post by **Holt** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:13 pm

no,I think you guys missed the point.I said what IF the raiders jacket were all these heavy leathered pockets and only one of them was with a slit?(and the jacket with the slit was used the most in the movie).I never said they all were heavy leathered pockets.this is just like the other details on the jacket that we not complelty know for sure.like one with a huge collar and one with a smaller collar.one with bigger pockets and one with smaller.etc.etc.

I myself do not believe these were not slits. the odds says that these were all that kind.

but its just something to think about.we never truly know.

crismans · Post by **crismans** » Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:38 pm

The problem is that we're having to go by (for the most part) screen grabs and memories from production people who had no reason to try extra hard to remember details. Add to the fact that there were several production jackets with varying details and you can see the problem. For instance, my grail Raiders jacket is the Hovito temple. Someone else's might be the Flying Wing jacket and the differet set of details.

I'm not trying to rain on the parade here. I think this thread is excellent and serves a valuable function but it's sort of like trying to catch a rainbow. It's going to a fun, interesting journey but you'll probably never catch it. ;-)

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:38 am

Didn't Nowak just have a screen jacket in his hands?

We know it was only used for one scene, but knowing what THAT pocket looked like might shed some light...

Any Nowak owners (or Tony's own pics from the jacket he had) care to post some pictures to add fuel to this discusion?

Rom Hunter · Post by **Rom Hunter** » Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:18 am

crismans wrote:The problem is that we're having to go by (for the most part) screen grabs and memories from production people who had no reason to try extra hard to remember details. Add to the fact that there were several production jackets with varying details and you can see the problem. For instance, my grail Raiders jacket is the Hovito temple. Someone else's might be the Flying Wing jacket and the differet set of details.

I completely agree.

Perhaps breaking the specs up into the main different Raiders jacket types would be an idea for the list?

(Or perhaps just make a specs list of the jacket that was used most often in the intro of Raiders.
I don't think too many SA fans would have a problem with that.
After all, it was the jacket Indy was introduced in).

J!m,

Please replace my old specs list with my current one:

• Size 40
• Raiders style
• Authentic Brown lambskin
• Standard cut
• Cotton Silesia lining for body, pockets AND sleeves
• 5 gauge NICKEL zipper with small zipper pull that extends TO THE BOTTOM of the jacket
• NO leather facing on zipper
• Storm flap should be 1.5” width with ROUNDED top corner
• Standard Raiders collar ending HALFWAY between the zipper and the storm flap
• Pockets 7.25” x 6.5” with SCALLOPED flaps and nickel snaps
• Side strap length 7”, width 1” with X-BOX pattern, DOUBLE stitched
• Two piece BLACK RECTANGULAR buckles
• Pleat depth should be 1.5”
• NO side vent stitches and NO elastic in the back
• Arm seam should be 1” BELOW the yoke seam
• Back panel should extend ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE ARM SEAM
• ONE zipper-less, less leather SLIT (not piped!) pocket ON THE LEFT INSIDE ONLY
• NO gussets

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:01 am

New specs will be placed in the second post now...

The first post 'average' will be adjusted (if needed) as well...

Thanks! ;-)

As far as breaking the specs into seperate "scene" specs, that would CERTAINLY send an jacket maker to suicidal thoughts... I think we will stick with what we have here, and let the person decide for themselves what they want their jacket too look like.

Details like the pocket size, shape and placement is a fairly easy detail to deal with for a jacket maker, as it is applied to the more-or-less finished jacket.

Not nailing down the rear yoke placement and size etc.is a far more major construction of the jacket, and a pattern change for sure.

So, it might make more sense to break the specs into "major specs" which we should make every effort to agree upon, and "minor specs" which I beleive the pockets would be able to fall into.

Those with close ties to jacket makers might want to shed some light onto what is truly 'major' and 'minor' to help us draw that line in the sand so to speak.

Does that sound reasonable?

Post by **Holt** » Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:19 am

Just a small suggestion before it takes of beyond the known galaxy...

I think that we dont need TOO many of almost the same specs from different members in this thread,it wll be to confusing.I think we need heavy new info on specs.specs seen in different light with different eyes. if your specs are 90% the same of agent5 specs and 10% your own specs with only a couple mm dowsacaled pockets and straps then it will only be confusing to read.

I suggest if you got a whole new set of specs that is different from agent5 or PLATON's then post it up. with that I mean if you have new yoke info.
collar info.strapinfo.strapplacement.backpanel.pocketplacement.amseams.
etc.etc. then post it up.I would like to havem my thread like that....

just my humble opinion.

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:38 pm

That's cool Holt.

I undestand what you're saying, but this is not a replacement for doing research- in other words, rather than search for ever to find Playton's specs, Agent5's specs and anyone elses, they can all be found in one place now.

The average (first post) is more to drive home just how close any set of specs is; essentially, exactly what you are saying.

So, I think I'll keep this as it is, but thatnks for the constructive critisism. It is apreciated!
;-)

EchoSix · Post by **EchoSix** » Sun Nov 16, 2008 9:49 pm

After reading each post of this thread fairly carefully, I've got a couple of questions, which were actually previous ones, that went unanswered... I think.

What's the difference between standard fit and 80's fit? I don't recall that being answered.

And can we get a new owner of one of Tony Nowak's new Indy1's, to compare a bulk of these measurements, to the measurements that are on his design?

And I was wondering, what's the difference between action pleats and gussets?

Post by **Holt** » Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:11 pm

EchoSix wrote:
What's the difference between standard fit and 80's fit? I don't recall that being answered.

I have made a complete post about the 80's fit.its a couple pages under this one.look for it.but in a short answer.the 80's ift has a tapered waist with full chest.regular has full cut all the way.

EchoSix wrote:
And can we get a new owner of one of Tony Nowak's new Indy1's, to compare a bulk of these measurements, to the measurements that are on his design?

most TN jackets are made after these specs in here.only slydini has the TN jacket that is copied almost 100% to what the real one was.and what I can tell about the original TN too you is that it does look nothing like the jacket we all love.BUT the TN jacket rocks anyeays!!it is copied from a different hero jacket. but it is not the jacket we want.if you want a SA TN you have to make him do a jacket after these specs found here.which some members have done.and they turn out GREAT. Tony will do anything.

EchoSix wrote: And I was wondering, what's the difference between action pleats and gussets?

pleats are the ''batwings'' that go under the backpanel to open when action movement happen.

the gussets are placed under the arms to prevent the jacket from rising up when moving your arm upwards..

Holt

EchoSix · Post by **EchoSix** » Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:15 pm

Thanks Holt!

:

Indiana Holt wrote: Tony will do anything.

How receptive is Peter to do these though? I've read that on most things he will, but like this thread states, some of this is a completely different pattern.

Post by **Holt** » Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:19 pm

Peter has done these specs fro years and years.this thread about the specs are not ''new'' specs.its a ''collect all the specs we find is SA thread'' so the newbs dont have to search and search the board forever to find the specs to make a SA jacket.its just a thread so we have it all in one place....

give Peter the agent5 specs and he'll do it.no prob.

EchoSix · Post by **EchoSix** » Sun Nov 16, 2008 10:54 pm

Thanks again.

And Thank YOU J!M, for putting all this on one place. The amount of work that you obviously went through for not just the info, but the pictures ALONE... Absolutely invaluable info and resources here!

Yojimbo Jones · Post by **Yojimbo Jones** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 4:43 am

Awesome thread, J!m!

Pity the pics have been removed - maybe it's worth posting up just the links to the pics?

I for one would like to step through the thread in all it's screencapped glory.

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:06 am

Yes, it is unfortunate that the photos have been removed.

I was hoping this would be a valuable resource so people looking for what they believe to be the Raiders jacket they see on screen, they can make informed decisions about the details that are important to them on their next purchase, regardless of vendor.

Now, all the photos that indicated the things that Agent5 spoke about are gone.

I guess I will delete all of gaent5's text as well, since it is now worthless...

Pitty...

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:37 am

http://filmjackets.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6

I just re-added the pics a little while back.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more negativity in this thread. It seems whenever you want to post anything that can be labled as definitive that people come out to dispute it in more ways than one. I know my list didn't go over well with everyone and it drove Peter crazy when people started sending him the list which many of the specs were standard in the first place. The thing is though, that the pics and some of the text clearly illustrated things that some of the vendors weren't doing on their jackets.

EchoSix · Post by **EchoSix** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:41 am

Really? Peter's been driven nuts by your list?

I thought (from what Holt said), that he'd meet it with open arms.

I'm about to call them to place an order for a new custom jacket.

Post by **Holt** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:42 am

I guess I will delete all of gaent5's text as well, since it is now worthless...

I cant believe what I am reading my friend!

so what your saying to me now, is that when or if I post my order sheet here it is worthless because iit dont have any pictures..

when I ordered with my new spec sheet I send 2 pictures on my order.

just should have kept the links on the order.I am sure that if you ask agent5 you will get the llinks back so you can ad them to the sheet.

Kt Templar · Post by **Kt Templar** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:44 am

EchoSix wrote:Really? Peter's been driven nuts by your list? I thought (from what Holt said), that he'd meet it with open arms.

I'm about to call them to place an order for a new custom jacket.

Try tuesday, I don't think he works on monday (to make up for working on saturday).

Post by **Holt** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:48 am

EchoSix wrote:Really? Peter's been driven nuts by your list? I thought (from what Holt said), that he'd meet it with open arms.

I'm about to call them to place an order for a new custom jacket.

I am just saying what Peter tells me over the phone..hes happy to do them he says..

thats all

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:58 am

I am just saying what Peter tells me over the phone..hes happy to do them he says..

This is true, but quite a few people were just mailing him the complete lists and a lot of what was on them was standard anyways. It just got tedious for him to have to read through them all and I can understand that. He will take custom specs but it would be in your best interest to do some reading and just send him the specs you want to make sure are done just to save some time. Just my 2 cents.

EchoSix · Post by **EchoSix** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:08 am

Peter was like a white knight, when I called them to try and yank Gemma through the phone for not replying to any of my communication... He held the phone with him and talked to me while he went into his office to get some things or out to their storage area and even out to HIS CAR, to get some stuff that he had just gotten back from having Noel Howard's stuff replicated.

He seems like a VERY calm, patient and helpful guy who "understands" about Gemma and her "email problem".

Which is exactly how he put it.

Good.

Thanks everyone! What a great thread!

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:13 am

agent5 wrote:http://filmjackets.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6

I just re-added the pics a little while back.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more negativity in this thread. It seems whenever you want to post anything that can be labled as definitive that people come out to dispute it in more ways than one. I know my list didn't go over well with everyone and it drove Peter crazy when people started sending him the list which many of the specs were standard in the first place. The thing is though, that the pics and some of the text clearly illustrated things that some of the vendors weren't doing on their jackets.

Thanks Agent5, that is where I got them from, as your post here was devoid of photos. I will probably delete the text portion, and post the link.

Oh, and there has been plenty of negativity, even though I am not claiming these to be the difinitive list! I wanted to present all the evidence in one place, and let the people placing the order decide what is important to them and what is not.

The intent is not, nor was ever supposed to be, one difinitive list that is THE raider's jacket- we all know there wer several jackets, and seeing the unaltered Nowak jacket confirms that there were a few different ones.

This allows the potential customer to choose what is important to them, and place an order with the vendor of their choice.

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:20 am

Indiana Holt wrote:
I guess I will delete all of gaent5's text as well, since it is now worthless...
I cant believe what I am reading my friend!

so what your saying to me now, is that when or if I post my order sheet here it is worthless because iit dont have any pictures..

Well, the problem is that I cannot have more than six photos per post, so all the photos in the post beyond number six was deleted. Not my decision to be sure Holt! The photos are critical as they illustrate what is being said in the text!

Indiana Holt wrote:when I ordered with my new spec sheet I send 2 pictures on my order.

just should have kept the links on the order.I am sure that if you ask agent5 you will get the llinks back so you can ad them to the sheet.

Agent 5 has posted the link to another forum that allows more than six photos per post. I think it would have been better if the mod who deleted the photos all together simply convert them to links, but they did not. Obviously, that is not permitted either.

Again, to those who thought this was a good idea, my apologies. I just wanted to make a useful resource for the membership that puts all the current order specs and photo evidence to reinforce those opinions in one place. It is becoming more and more dificult to do that.

Post by **Holt** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:22 am

links are fine.the order sheet had the links in them in the first place.there was not one mod who took them down did they?

so post links away to illustrate the specs.

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:53 am

Whoever deleted the photos just hard deleted them- did not change them to links, which would have been fine with me. Having the photos there is far better as you can instantly see what is being talked about, but links are a close second. Deleted phots and links? Not much use... (I think there is room for two additional photos now, but then we won't be able to add another list if one comes along)

Now I have posted the link to that other site so people can re-read the entire thing over there.

I don't understand the photo limit- the photos are not stored on this server, and are links to remote servers anyway. I am a moderator on another site where the photos are stored directly on the site server- in that case, having a lot of photos eats up server space. Totally understandable (new members are strictly limited to number of photos they can post etc...). Having this policy here, where server space is not being 'eaten' just seems sily to me. If the photos were hosted locally, I am sure several members would cough up $20.00 or so to be site supporters to keep the thing alive. That is what we do over there- totaly volunteer- and it works great. We can house everything locally, and old threads with photos don't 'die' because the photos turn into red X's... With vendors supporting the site, you have to be sure to not step on toes of the vendors, which has become a problem with this thread. I have deleted vendor names where posible to keep the bias as low as possible. I personally do not favor one vendor over another, and am not on anyones 'pay roll', so I had no problem acomodating this mod request.

But, all that being said, I don't make the policy here. I will play by the rules!

Post by **Michaelson** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:01 am

But, all that being said, I don't make the policy here. I will play by the rules!

Thanks. That's always a method to the madness around here, and without having to reinvent the wheel, take our word for it. There's a reason.

If you want to continue this discussion, please move it to the feedback section where it can be addressed by the webmaster, not in the public rooms.

As to any lost photos in this thread, I have no idea. I haven't been on line most of this weekend, and not in this thread since last week.

Regards!
Michaelson

agent5 · Post by **agent5** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:07 am

Maybe this will help. The photos in my original jacket specs thread were on an AOL account and they deleted them, making the links dead. I had to go back and re-cap all the photos for the thread at FilmJackets.com. They were at one time all posted here but that was before the 6 pic limit went into effect. Nobody here deleted them and I can't say how it would have been handled had the links been active.

Post by **Michaelson** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:10 am

If they were just live links, they would have been left as is, '5' and untouched. If your AOL host deleted them, it's out of our hands as you say.

The only time we do get involved with links is when we discover those links take folks to a pornography advertisement, which HAS happened on AOL accounts in the past. That won't fly, needless to say.

Regards! Michaelson

JimL · Post by **JimL** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:26 am

No problem here, gentlemen.

"Nothing to see here... Move along!" (A little Police Squad for ya')

We now take you back to your regularly scheduled thread...

Agent5: I added the link to that other site so the pictures can be viewed.