Kangaroo Wested

mufflowne · Post by **mufflowne** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:37 am

Was there ever and would you buy a - Kangaroo leather Indy Jacket?

If there was one I'd totally have to buy myself one for christmas.

What do you folks think? Maybe we can bully Peter into offering one.

I personally would love to see a prototype of a Kangaroo jacket, maybe even out of natural-tan hide. Hehe.

Post by **Michaelson** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:52 am

There was, and it was offered by U. S. Wings for a while. Had a reddish tint.

Regards! Michaelson

binkmeisterRick · Post by **binkmeisterRick** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:40 am

And when you dropped it, it would bounce.

coronado3 · Post by **coronado3** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:42 am

I had a nice big pocket in it... you could fit about 12 grail diaries in it!

C3

Captain Ron Solo · Post by **Captain Ron Solo** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:03 am

I'm no expert on hides, but wouldn't kangaroo have all of the qualities that are loved in the lamb skin, but with toughness similar to goat?

Ron

FLATHEAD · Post by **FLATHEAD** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:54 pm

I know California, New Jersey, and New York were on the non-import and sale lists....

US Wings had several kangaroo hide jackets, like the Indy jacket that
_ owned here:

and a few other models like an A-2 ect that they sold up until
a few months ago.

I was under the impression that they made those in their New Jersey
factory. Or did/do they make those somewhere else?

The Kangaroo hide jackets have a nice russet top coat, but the base
color of all the ones I saw was black. So, as you wore it, and it began
to get distressed, you would see black distressing marks all over, not
the nice lighter tan/brown you get from Goat/Cow/Lambskin as they
age.

Flathead

Post by **Michaelson** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:00 pm

Would you please reduce the size of the photo. It's HUGE!!

Thanks!

Regard! Michaelson

FLATHEAD · Post by **FLATHEAD** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:01 pm

Done! I hit the wrong one before I pasted it into my reply.

You could see alot of detail though huh?

Flathead

mufflowne · Post by **mufflowne** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:01 pm

_, so UK is not on the list of import either?

It's strange cause it seems entirely possible to buy a kangaroo hide on ebay.

Do you think that if I shipped some to Wested they would make me a roo jacket? (Hey, Peter, if you're reading this hollar at me, can't get through email to you.)

CHECK THIS OUT:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A967948260

That article dates to 1981. Does that mean Kangaroo hide is legal again?

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f ... =printable

It's much more complex than it seems. And it seems it's STILL a legal struggle. But from that article above, it looks as if online sales are not affected. Though I wouldn't blame Peter if he didn't wanna take the risk of running into this legal stuff.

mufflowne · Post by **mufflowne** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:14 pm

You know, all these restrictions make me want a Roo jacket twice as much now.

It's true what they say....forbidden fruit always tastes better.

JulianK · Post by **JulianK** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:36 pm

I suspect that due to the reasons given above, this might end up being a very expensive jacket. Prohibitively so to most people's budgets!

CM · Post by CM » Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:30 pm

Roo is a really, really tough leather. I have a jacket that's around 10 years old made of it and it shows very little wear. Although people will tell you Roo is light - all the jackets I've seen are slightly heavier than cowhide. And the leather is nothing like lamb in feel. It's quite a dense leather - it takes ages to soften up.

Sadly, Roo is largely unavailable here in Australia. My favourite leather jacket manufacturer here can't get it in any more. It's mainly sold to overseas markets.

Cheers - CM

hanson · Post by **hanson** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 6:49 pm

i bought some roo boots a few years ago and they were not shipping them to Ca, only at that time. last week i saw an add for chippewa or browning hunting boots and they were also not available in Ca.regards,hanson.

Browncoat · Post by **Browncoat** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:16 am

I had both the US Wings Indy and the A-2 a few years back (circa 2000) or so. If I recall correctly the leather was smooth, nongrainy in texture and lightweight but it was a tough skin. Almost like an old, worn, and balding football.

However, I didn't keep either very long. I wasn't fond of the color and it seemed like just about anything would scratch the coloring off of it (not in a good way).

I didn't know the roo hide was no longer legal in CA. Had I known, I would have kept at least one of the jackets just because!

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:16 am

And if you lie on the shipping docs how customs will be able to tell if it's kangaroo or something else?

Only an expert could tell the difference, if he could.

Most people here can't distinguish goat, cow, or hh. How will the custom officers do it? Not to mention that you wouldn't be importing 10 TEU of skins, but rather 2 pieces enough to make one jacket.

codefool · Post by **codefool** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:36 am

_ wrote:To be clear - finished goods are legal in California. The skins are not...

TFA mentioned above http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f ... =printable discusses a legal battle over shoes (finished goods) made from roo hide, specifically:

The justices unanimously rejected an argument by sportswear giant Adidas that federal law pre-empts a California ban on products made from the Australian marsupials.

It would seem from this that roo hides and finished goods are taboo in CA.

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:12 am

_, I agree with your policy, but the matter is if it is worthy being truthful to a government/country that ***** you in the ***.

You have the privilige of living in the no 1 country in the world and I can say that your country is treating you fair and square. To a country like that I would be truthful too.

But the case with my country is totally different. (That's why a G&B expedition costs over $1,500 here).

Management here might not look well on members suggesting or promoting illegal acts - I think that is in the agreement you approved when you signed up for membership?

You are right about that. Well, I didn't remember the text of the agreement exactly, but in any case, I didn't suggest smuggling of illegal subtances or illegal drugs dealing, consumption or pedophelia.

Now that we mentioned that, I remember someone suggesting making a hemp jacket....

Post by **Michaelson** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:24 am

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. This applies to posting in the forum threads, private PMs between Members, and conduct at Officially Sanctioned Events/Summits. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should they see fit. As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent; the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised.

Here it is again to refresh your memory, PLATON.

I, too, remember the hemp jacket 'joke' post. It was removed immediately after it was posted, and the member sent a PM as I recall.

Michaelson

PLATON · Post by **PLATON** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:34 am

Platon - Your post is completely inappropriate and in violation of your membership agreement. To be clear - I am not trying to engage in a philosophical discussion. I am telling you to stop... Understand?

Yes, Sir!

Post by **COW Admin** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:58 am

Yes, Michaelson and _ are absolutely correct in this case. We will not, and cannot, take this lightly. Any more talk of illegal acts, even if in jest or speculation will NOT be tolerated. You have been offically warned.

GCR · Post by **GCR** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:45 am

_ wrote: I believe the EU is not allowing import of roo skins - though I believe it is for protection of domestic industry, i.e. it competes more directly with horsehide in manufacturing applications and the continent still produces a significant (and protected) horsehide harvest each year. They also ban beaver felt - the reason HJ's are rabbit...

I'm not trying to start a debate, as I sincerely do not know the correct answer, and I know this isn't the fedora section, but I just figured I'd throw this out there. Marc gets roo-skin sweatbands imported for use on his AB Deluxes, though I believe he gets hit pretty hard in taxes for them. And his 100% pure beaver felt is made right there in the EU (Portugal, I think?)...is it only the import of beaver felt that is banned? I just wanted to double check, here, as I don't want people thinking that Marc is up to no good, making hats out of contraband!

:

-GCR

GCR · Post by **GCR** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 11:08 am

_ wrote:Good questions! Hmmmm... Well, I may have misspoke when I said EU, though I thought I was correct. It may just be the UK that has the ban on beaver felt. Somehow though I think I was correct as I recall reading issues outside of the UK - as beaver is endangered over there...

On the sweatbands, it was the skins that I was aware of regarding the ban. As a "finished good" i.e. they are not raw meterial per se but a finished component, I think the bands are exempt. Your read on the taxes fits as they nail you on VAT...

Thanks! Yeah, the ban on the skins vs. the finished goods makes sense, as I think Marc buys the skins, but has them shipped to his sweatband maker (not sure where they are located) and then, in turn, has the finished sweatbands shipped up to him in Germany. Could be wrong, though...perhaps Marc will clarify.

Now, the Beaver felt mystery REALLY has me scratching my head!

And to bring this thread back on track, I voted for "not next purchase but perhaps after that". I'd love a 'Roo skin jacket, but I'm in no hurry. I've got a brand new G&B lamb that has barely seen any action yet.

One thing about 'Roo skin I'd love to know: how well does it distress, since it's so tough? I like my gear to distress well, be it naturally pr artificially (preferably natural, though). Would 'Roo skin be so tough that it'd look new even after years and years of heavy wear?

-GCR

VP · Post by VP » Sat Sep 01, 2007 12:02 pm

Michaelson wrote:This applies to posting in the forum threads, private PMs between Members, and conduct at Officially Sanctioned Events/Summits.

Hmm, this sentence wasn't there when I joined. So if I broke this rule you couldn't say that I am violating a rule that I agreed to, right?

Minnesota Jones · Post by **Minnesota Jones** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 2:25 pm

It's been added recently. It is still a rule of this forum and you are still obliged to abide by it. PM's are done thru this site, therefore, it's content must abide by our rules. Otherwise, use email. "Official" events are also now under this rule as well.

VP · Post by VP » Sat Sep 01, 2007 3:01 pm

Sure I'll follow it, but you can't say that somebody broke a rule that he or she agreed to abide if nobody informs the already registered members about it.

Minnesota Jones · Post by **Minnesota Jones** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:24 pm

I glad you'll follow it, because it's what we'll be enforcing. The only part that changed was the recent addition of ...Private PM's and Officially Sanctioned Events/Summits.... Everything else, including the part that mentions ...violate any applicable laws... was there beforehand. Therefore, nothing stated by any of the Staff in this thread was incorrect. So we have not said that somebody broke a rule that he or she agreed to abide by in this thread after they joined as the addition to the rule did not apply in this case. Why are you making this into a big deal? Do you feel the additional rule will be too hard for you to follow?

VP, these rules are not up for debate or for you to continually push back against the Staff with. They are rules that are simple common sense. There to protect this forum and our members, and to keep this place a family friendly enviroment. And they should be fairly easy to follow. If you feel you cannot follow the rules, whether or not we've had to modify them since you joined, you can always take your posts elsewhere.

Castor Dioscuri · Post by **Castor Dioscuri** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:32 pm

So yeah, I can't imagine a kangaroo Wested... But guessing from what I've heard about kangaroo hide, a jacket made entirely from kangaroo hide would have the same lifespan as Indy's (that is to say it would survive the course of four movies! Fluctuations of body size notwithstanding)

Swindiana · Post by **Swindiana** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:50 pm

Ville;

You can't brake new laws in your country saying you weren't informed either, you know. (Taking it as far as you're doing right now.)

Just stay informed.

Your'e informed now.

Regards,
Swindiana

Indiana G · Post by **Indiana G** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:05 pm

So yeah, I can't imagine a kangaroo Wested... But guessing from what I've heard about kangaroo hide, a jacket made entirely from kangaroo hide would have the same lifespan as Indy's (that is to say it would survive the course of four movies! Fluctuations of body size notwithstanding)

can't say you didn't try to deflect and disarm the situation eh castor?

Castor Dioscuri · Post by **Castor Dioscuri** » Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:53 pm

Indiana G wrote:
So yeah, I can't imagine a kangaroo Wested... But guessing from what I've heard about kangaroo hide, a jacket made entirely from kangaroo hide would have the same lifespan as Indy's (that is to say it would survive the course of four movies! Fluctuations of body size notwithstanding)
can't say you didn't try to deflect and disarm the situation eh castor?

Was worth a shot, eh?

VP · Post by VP » Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:47 am

Swindiana wrote:You can't brake new laws in your country saying you weren't informed either, you know. (Taking it as far as you're doing right now.)

I am informed by the Press, but I don't reread the registration agreement 24/7. IMO new rules should be posted at the Forum Rules & Public Announcements table.

My posts were completely hypothetical and were initiated by _'s comment

_ wrote:Your post is -- in violation of your membership agreement.

If some person breaks a rule that wasn't there at the time of joining, you can't actually call it _your_ membership agreement, can you? This doesn't mean that rules shouldn't be followed because the poster "didn't know" about it, it just means that calling it _your_ agreement is false. No hard feelings.

Post by **Michaelson** » Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:10 am

No hard feelings at all, VP.

To you, and anyone else who believes that this refining (not changing) of the existing agreement that you all signed is not valid due to those refinements/clarifications, we will be more than happy to remove your name from the membership, and you can re-apply (or not) to COW under the newly refined rules. That way you have no grey areas to worry about or debate.

Is that fair? I believe so, and you have brought a valid point to the table.

I suggest we start with you, VP, as you have always been the most vocal about arguing anything regarding rules with a moderator or adminstrator. Since you have brought it to our attention that you do not believe you are technically bound by the existing rules, especially when only refined, then you may be right. We need to drop you, and let you decide what you want to do regarding signing back up, or going your own way.

If anyone else feels the same way, please let us know. We will be more than happy to ease your minds as well.

The rules plainly state that the goals of this forum is to keep it a family friendly site. We assumed common sense would at least follow when adults were active at a forum with like interests such as the discussion of gear worn in a movie series. When it's discovered that those unposted common sense rules were NOT being followed, it was apparent the rules required clarification.

Rules such as it not being correct to be soliciting members for illigal acts or passing porno links through the PM function. Rules such as stealing money from other members at a site sanctioned function is not acceptable. One would think that anyone with an ounce of common sense would already KNOW these points to be something that didn't need spelling out. From complaints we received, it became painfully apparent it was not.

So nothing was added or changed, but was spelled out. That said, it's now apparent a few members think otherwise. Easily solved.

Discussion is taking place regarding this motion. Stay tuned.

Regards.
Michaelson

Marc · Post by **Marc** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 4:53 pm

Sorry for being late to the import discussion

I get my rawbodies from Portugal and my felter buys the fur from North America, Canada etc. On the roohides: I found a lil' tannery that still does it "vintage style" veg. tanned in huge drums. I import the hides (which IS a pain in the bum) and then forward them to my sweatband maker, who again cuts them and sews them, before I finally get them back again.

Regards,

Marc

rebelgtp · Post by **rebelgtp** » Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:04 pm

i always wanted one of those us wings roo hide jackets. in fact i found those before i found the wested

...however the price tag kept me from buying one. of course now they aren't available anymore

.

IndyK · Post by **IndyK** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:41 pm

Sorry to bother this thread by getting back to the original question: Maybe, but that would have nothing to do with Indy. Period.

I'm getting more and more fascinated by the original jacket, the Raiders, the lamb, the drape and the feel. To me a kangaroo would be just another jacket and the Raiders design would be of no importance to me.

Cheers
Indy-K

Indiana Texas-girl · Post by **Indiana Texas-girl** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 3:00 pm

I've seen the US Wings roo jacket. Although it's a beautiful leather, I wouldn't buy it for the color, it was a reddish orangey color, and not ideal if going for screen accurate coloring.

VP · Post by VP » Sun Sep 16, 2007 3:09 pm

Hey PLATON, get rid of that annoying login box.

Indiana Texas-girl · Post by **Indiana Texas-girl** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 5:03 pm

oh is he the one that makes it keep popping up on the screen.

Indiana G · Post by **Indiana G** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:42 pm

how'd you do that platon?

djd · Post by **djd** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 2:07 am

A lot of motorcycle race leathers are made of roo hide. A lot of these are manufactured in Italy. I would be very surprised if they don't import the complete skins. If they can do it in Italy, EU law makes it likely that you can import them into any EU country...

Dre · Post by **Dre** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 2:45 am

I've often thought of getting a local leather jacket place (in Melbourne, Australia) to make replica indy jackets, or even just a custom leather jacket for myself. I'm sure kangaroo leather jackets wouldn't be terribly hard to get made here.

CM · Post by CM » Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:11 am

Hi Dre,

As I wrote earlier in this thread - "Sadly, Roo is largely unavailable here in Australia. My favourite leather jacket manufacturer here can't get it in any more. It's mainly sold to overseas markets. "

Oh well....

Dre · Post by **Dre** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:00 am

CM: Oh...sorry must have missed that post. That ***** =\

Kangaroo Wested

Would you buy a Kangaroo leather Wested as your next Wested purchase?

Kangaroo Wested