Club Obi Wan

In the complete making book it has a list of Harrison Fords clothing sizes. The jacket is stated as being 40L, im assuming meaning 40 Long. If this was the case why do all the otr jackets start in normal sizes and long is a custom thing?

1) The reference books 'facts' are often patchy.

2) Most people are not "longs".

Kt Templar wrote:1) The reference books 'facts' are often patchy.

2) Most people are not "longs".

and... 3) Ford's jacket WAS a custom!!

Kt Templar wrote:1) The reference books 'facts' are often patchy.

2) Most people are not "longs".

It shows a scan of what was originally jotted down. In any case, interesting to see his sizes.

Sizing also varies greatly between manufacturers, models etc. Plus sizing was probably a bit different back then?

still a nice tidbit.

Indiana Strones wrote:

Kt Templar wrote:1) The reference books 'facts' are often patchy.

2) Most people are not "longs".

and... 3) Ford's jacket WAS a custom!!

..4)and most people are not Ford!

mark seven wrote: .4)and most people are not Ford!

"I'm Ford and so is my wife!"

binkmeisterRick wrote:"I'm Ford and so is my wife!"

And so is my sisters car

Why are you guys automatically doubting the 40L? I mean he was around 6' tall at the time of Raiders and was fairly thin, I'd think than would be pretty accurate? I'm a 40L too and I've always felt like Harrison looked to be about the same. These documents are really the only hard evidence we see and we're reluctant to believe it, yet we're usually pretty quick to accept someones recollection of events regaring various items of this costume - I don't get that. Anyway, I think it's a great point - maybe the jackets would be more correctly based on a 40L.

Doug C

I've always read and heard it was a 40 myself, though I wasn't aware of the Long sizing.

After Raiders, I guess he started eating regularily, as the size went up to a 42, then a 44 in the last two films.

Regards! Michaelson

The reference you're referring to in "The Complete making of Indiana Jones" was for a costume fitting in 1972 for a different film.

I'm sure Harrison's measurements changed a bit over the next 10 years and also, a 1972 40L is not a 2008 40L.

Doug C wrote:I'm a 40L too and I've always felt like Harrison looked to be about the same.

Maybe his long lost brother?

The difference between a 40 and 42 wouldn't be so significant to affect the proportions a whole heck of a lot. If it were between a 40 and say a 46, ok there would be some difference then.

Surely, Harrison and I are not the only 40L...I bet Wested has made many, heck there is currently one in the Cairo Baazar right now, so it's not really a rare size.

Isn't he wearing something like a 44 in CS? If it is, I think a 40 may still fit him !!

Mechanic, it's true what you say about a 40L meaning something different until recently... I've gotten vintage leather jackets in size 40 from ebay that actually measure 20" from pit to pit and are labled 40 - that's a true forty, and I assume the practice of adding a few extra inches is a fairly modern idea.

Doug C

It is. The size used to be the actual size. If your suit or jacket was a 40, then the actual chest measurement was 40".

Now thanks to McDonalds and poor eating habits, jacket and clothing makers now pad the measurements to give you "freedom of movement".

My Gibson & Barnes is a 42R, I have an exact chest measurement of 42". The actual measurement of the G&B is closer to 46, there's tons of extra room.

I'm going to sell my 42 G&B and get a 40L instead.

TheMechanic wrote:
I'm going to sell my 42 G&B and get a 40L instead.

Really? I've seen the photos of you in your Expo and it looks really good. A 40T will be too long on you... about an inch longer than the 42R. I'd hold on to the jacket you have to be honest... at least from what I saw of your photos

So you're saying you want jackets the EXACT measurement of your chest? A jacket should have some room to go over heavier undershirts and also allow some movement when wearing. When 99.9% of people buy a jacket they are buying it to wear - not because its supposed to look like a movie.

This idea that everyone is simply fat..to some degree it's true, but people in almost all but the poorest countries are quite a bit bigger than they were a century or even fiftey years ago. This isn't only because of hamburgers, it's because of better nutrition overall. Look at some Asian countries - people have grown taller (average height has gone up in the West as well and that makes a BIG difference is the sizes of clothes), not just wider.

TheMechanic wrote:It is. The size used to be the actual size. If your suit or jacket was a 40, then the actual chest measurement was 40".

Now thanks to McDonalds and poor eating habits, jacket and clothing makers now pad the measurements to give you "freedom of movement".

My Gibson & Barnes is a 42R, I have an exact chest measurement of 42". The actual measurement of the G&B is closer to 46, there's tons of extra room.

I'm going to sell my 42 G&B and get a 40L instead.

Mech, are you going to send back that jacket you put in the wash? Will they accept that one as a return?

Raider S wrote:

So you're saying you want jackets the EXACT measurement of your chest?

No, but an extra 4 inches, which is standard, is a bit more than I need or want. Some are even more, I won't get into how wide my Todd's custom measures.

Doug C

Ok, go one size down and you should have that two inches instead of four.

Yeah, nobody wants a jacket that's the exact size of their chest. That's just how they used to size clothes. Back in the day if you had a 4o chest you would probably buy a 42.

Nowadays a 40 chest would probably fit into a 38.

No, I will not be sending my G&B back for a return.

If the 40L is an inch longer than my 42 then that's perfect since the sleeves on my 42 are about 3/4" too short. The sleeves come to my wrist and they should go down to the thumb knuckle.

If anyone's interested in my G&B, shoot me a PM and we'll talk.

Thanks.

Raider S:

Ok, go one size down and you should have that two inches instead of four.

In theory yes that should work, but from my experience it with be too tight across the shoulders and/or too short even with a long, 'cause the whole jacket is down sized not just the chest width. Believe me I've had my share of these and know how to measure to get what I want, unfortunately the makers haven't always come through.

But let's get this thread back on track - apparently Harry was a 40L at some point... and even though it would have been 11 years earlier, I can still believe it, I was the same a decade ago too. Why they'd include a scan in the book of an order size for a costume worn in 1972 is beyond me though..

Doug C

Doug C,
I think I 've read somewhere that Ford's jacket was 40R (although it was custom).

However, I wear 40R and I am shorter than HF.
I m 5'10'' and the 40R wested looks short on me. So imagine how short it would look on HF. On this basis, I think you 're right when you say it was a 40L.

Unless if Wested's 40R of 1980 and the 40R of today have different length.

PLATON wrote:Doug C,
I think I 've read somewhere that Ford's jacket was 40R (although it was custom).

However, I wear 40R and I am shorter than HF.
I m 5'10'' and the 40R wested looks short on me. So imagine how short it would look on HF. On this basis, I think you 're right when you say it was a 40L.

Unless if Wested's 40R of 1980 and the 40R of today have different length.

I think you're right. Wested of 1980 is different to today. Peter once told me that the jacket amounted to a 42 reg. But for a custom made jacket, the actual size label is kind of irrelevant. Peter custom made a jacket to fit Ford and probably didn't think in terms of 40 or 42 at teh time but translated it as those size years after the fact.

Cheers - CM