Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

[Slouch]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

I am not a frequent contributor to these forums, but I am a long time listener. The last few posts have pushed me to respond.

Matt,
The Woolrich website indicates that their Civil War wool fabrics contain 15% nylon. See below:
Style Id: 5100237
Color/Pattern: 237 MILITARY NAVY
Type: SOLID
Fiber Content: 85%WOOL,15%NYLON
Weight: 21
Width: 60

All colors listed on the website have the same fiber content.

The comment about County Cloth's kersey containing unnatural fibers is nonsense. I dont know how you conducted your scientific tests or what you may have seen, but it was not synthetic fibers.

It amazes me how many "authentics" ignore the decades worth of research on Civil War material culture by people like Charlie Childs and Ben Tart and look to inferior sources for clothing and fabric. These men have conducted their own research and I am sure are proud of their products. Can you say the same for a mega corporation like Woolrich, who's biggest claim to authenticity is providing civil war fabric to the movie industry? I also believe their are many people who for some reason do not like Charlie Childs and other reputable researchers and providers of authentic reproductions and seek to spread disinformation about their product, and yet we too often hear these "haters" using information from the reputable researches as if it were their own research and conclusions (this comment is not directed at anyone that is engaged in this discussion!).

And Mr Rideout, was the purpose of your post to bust on Rob Hodge? What does he have to do with this discussion? First, his kit looks a hell of a lot better than 99% of the so called "progressives", second he has devoted more of his time advocating for civil war preservation than most of us ever will, so lets show him some respect.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

And Mr Rideout, was the purpose of your post to bust on Rob Hodge? What does he have to do with this discussion? First, his kit looks a hell of a lot better than 99% of the so called "progressives", second he has devoted more of his time advocating for civil war preservation than most of us ever will, so lets show him some respect.

Rein back. It was a compliment.

CJ Rideout
Tampa, FLorida

[SamuelCathey]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Having had plenty of hot coal accidents with CC products and having gone through my own time of experimenting with bleach, I have a serious problem with the idea that 30% poly is in anyone's repro fabric (even the stuff I don't like). The blankets with 15% poly in them look funky; if that figure was doubled, fabric would shine. I'm no spokesman for Childs, but I have spoken with him enough to have an inkling of what goes into his cloth reproductions and to know what in his background and experience put him at the top of this game. He also is not a lone man operation but has all the big guns in material culture research feeding him additional information. I would simply advise anyone questioning his (or anyone else's work) to email and find out the scoop. And you will find his sewing skills unequalled.
Enough of my babble. This is the problem with the internet and unknown people spouting info. I want to bow out of this conversation before it gets ugly and ultimately I shouldn't be concerned with how folks want to assemble their impressions and don't want to get into a pissing contest or piss anyone off. I will come full circle and rest my case on the agree to disagree concept. Besides it's Friday!!!

Sam Cathey

[Spinster]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

I am not a frequent contributor to these forums, but I am a long time listener. The last few posts have pushed me to respond.

Mike, that's quite understandable. Its an area folks feel really strongly about.

That said--look a little closer here. Yes, the GREAT majority of Woolrich's 'civil war line' does list the 15% man-made content. That material is not useful for us on a number of levels.

But go through ALL their samples and get all the way down to the cotton/wool jean, and it purports to be just that--cotton and wool, with no man-made.

My own early testing on some of the original runs of Woolrich jean produced results indicating a man-made content. Those samples were taken right at the selvedge edge. We later sent samples taken from the main body of the cloth to a Phd textile engineer---and got a result indicating that the cloth was exactly what it purports to be--cotton and wool, with no man made fiber content in that sample. It did have an additional finish applied, possibly as a fire retardant, that produced an odd result on a burn test.

Now, each run of cloth can be different--can have different content. And the hand of the cloth, the feel, how it drapes and performs is just as important a factor as pick count or ply in warp or weft.

I've been using two suppliers for my own wool needs for a decade (better have two, folks go out of business). My prime supplier is consistent and reliable--and I test each and every time I go to the mill, and hand pull my shipment. Because things do change.......

All of this continues to be a journey--there are no perfect solutions to these dilemmas, no be-all and end all answers to authenticity.

Only our Best Efforts.

[Hank Trent]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

I ran extensive bleach tests and found their kersey to contain a 30% synthetic content that was actually blended into the wool (not a filament in the center of the yarn in the case of Woolrich's classic synthetic blend kersey.)

What exactly happened in the bleach test? In other words, what did the result look like after leaving the fabric in the bleach?

Did you try any burn tests as well?

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

[Slouch]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Well said Mr. Cathey. I will follow your lead and bow out as well. TGIF

[Dan Wambaugh]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Mike,

Ben Tart was the one who originally clued me in on the issue concerning the kersey. A bleach test is a simple thing to perform. Using a clean baby bottle (or other glass container free from contaminants) place a piece of fabric in a pure bleach solution. Usually after forty-five minutes any natural fiber (be it cotton or wool) will have been eaten away. After forty five minutes a steady fuzz where the fabric had been was left (not a woven appearance, but a fuzz left from the actual wool blend itself. Woolrich kersey would appear as small worm-like filaments, almost a skeletal structure of the original weave of the fabric.) After another two weeks of soaking the fuzz remained unaltered. This test was conducted only after severe brown scorching was observed when using a commercial iron with several layers of teflon plate that normally protect fabric from scorching. This is the only woolen on which this effect has been observed, and the only woolen that we have used in our shop in the last five years that failed the bleach test. Whether Mr. Childs is aware of this issue or not is unknown, but I assure you that it is not "nonsense" and my results were originally inspired and separately confirmed by Ben Tart.

Additionally, In regards to Woolrich kersey's content, it is only their 6100 series of kersey that has the synthetic fiber. Their 9200 kersey which they have been producing since the summer of 2005 is a 100% wool product. It is not listed on their website, however, so I can understand where the confusion may have arisen.

Please don't take my comments as being indicative of any derogatory feeling on my part for Mr. Childs. Quite the contrary I have the utmost respect and admiration for him, his work, and his unparalleled contribution to this hobby. Instead I am simply stating that making broad statements degrading one business' contribution to our hobby over another is not always accurate. In the case of this last shipment of English Army Cloth, a significant synthetic content was present after the product was advertised as 100% wool, meanwhile Woolrich has been producing excellent 100% kersey for nearly 20 years by custom order, and has had their 9200 100% wool kersey available for public purchase for the last five years.

I hope you take my words in the friendly spirit they are intended, and find them enlightening.

[Hank Trent]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Usually after forty-five minutes any natural fiber (be it cotton or wool) will have been eaten away.

Showing my ignorance here, because I've done burn tests but not bleach tests, does bleach really eat away cotton?

A quick google shows some reports claim that it doesn't.

For example: http://nvg.org.au/article.php?story=20080218121955762
"100% Linen or Cotton -- any color should be removed from the fabric, but there will be no damage to the fibers themselves"

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

[Dan Wambaugh]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Hank,

You may have me there. This was just how I was instructed by Ben. Perhaps Terre can weigh in on the subject of Bleach tests?

[GreencoatCross]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Friends,

I think I can help clarify this. As I understand it, keratin proteins that make up animal fibers such as wool will dissolve in bleach. Fibroin proteins from invertebrates (silk) also dissolve in bleach. Cellulosic fibers like linen and cotton will not dissolve in bleach, neither will nylon, rayon, or other man-made fibers.

As for Dan's comment on the sample of blue-gray kersey, I too saw the iron-scorched material as well as the sample he had in a cup of pure bleach. The wool fibers had dissolved but there was a kind of web-like mesh of finely spun fibers still remaining in the pattern that the orignal cloth was woven in. This does not mean that the entire product line is being condemned or criticized. It is far more plausible that neither the mill or County Cloth knew of the synthetic content during production or upon delivery. Further, I have used a number of their materials for various personal projects and my own test at home showed no synthetic content whatsoever.

[Spinster]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Time is a factor in this.

In looking at the chart Hank referenced--well, I've got some questions. I won't say she's wrong, because there are fine points and perspective in everything, and she's put a specific time limit on her tests.

Full strength chlorine bleach can eat cotton and linen right on through--how quickly is a function of weave and twist in the threads. In the 24 hour time span listed in the chart Hank referenced--maybe not, especially on some tightly woven, highly finished goods. But bleach, or certain soda based products, is how we artificially manufacture the oh-so-fashionable holes in jeans.

The process is *much* quicker with wool--and I tend to hurry it along by warming the bleach in the microwave for 30 seconds, then dropping the sample in, at which point it about fizzes. Clamp a saucer on top of the pyrex measuring cup, because the fumes make me wheeze and leave. In 15 minutes or so, all thats left is.......nothing much. Or maybe some long clear strands of nylon that are hard to see at first, but can be fished out with a glass rod.

Testing must be done carefully and using multiple types. The center of the Woolrich cotton/wool jean referenced above *absolutely* failed the smell portion of the burn test, with a high petroleum odour, but passed a bleach test, and further, passed microscopic analysis by a professional. At the same time, there were respected researchers who viewed the hand and looseness of the weave as highly problematic

And the next run off the mill could behave entirely differently.


The idea that a particular fabric is produced *on the same looms* as other high quality fabric is only a small part of the picture. It speaks to the capability of the tool to do the job, but not to the actual job. My best 20th century loom was inherited from a nationally known custom handweaver of fine silk brocades. It came with all the reeds, shuttles, heedles and such--even with her drawdowns and charts, with samples. Hell will have frozen over, thawed, evaporated, and the deep snows come again before anything I weave on that loom would remotely approximate what the last weaver made on that loom.

[Spinster]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

. It is far more plausible that neither the mill or County Cloth knew of the synthetic content during production or upon delivery. .

BINGO!!
A number of industrial factors come into play here--not the least of which is the use of reprocessed wool in the manufacturing process. This stuff can get spun into the yarns and passed on---especially so since so much of this happens out of country........

[Dan Wambaugh]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Folks,

Please allow me to clarify my statements above as I can certainly see how my intent may be misconstrued. It is not my intention to pick on Mr. Childs, or invoke the name of Mr. Tart in doing so. Nor do I ever wish to engage in slamming other vendors publicly, or on forums where Mr. Childs, Mr. Tart, Mr. Kline, or their counterpart at Woolrich Mr. King do not check and post. I consider it very unprofessional to do so and it is not my intention.

That said, I must stress that in the industry with which one pays his bills and feeds the mouths at home a high level of pragmatism is required. I have had issues at one time or another with every fabric vendor in the business today. One produces jean that has a synthetic filament in the selvage edge which is easily removed. One sold me jean for years without informing me that it was unfinished or pre shrunk (which resulted in a number of ruined garments and refunds and replacement) and another did the same thing with a blouse flannel. Heck, I myself am guilty of using that blouse flannel for years without knowing its shrinking properties and as a result had to undergo the largest and most embarrassing product recall in the history of this industry.

We are all fortunate to work at the feet of some very talented and devoted individuals. If I had the work ethic of Pat Kline, the genius of Ben Tart, or the vision and guts of Charlie Childs I would be better off than I am today. As it is, I am fortunate to call a couple of those men friends, and am able to work with the products of all. Personally I can think of no better way to spend an evening than to sit with them around a fire and pick their brains.

The salient point in my posts is simply that the product lines of different fabric vendors are just that: different. One product may be perfect for one project, one for another, but I see nothing accomplished by the degradation of one to the praise of another. We are none of us perfect, myself included.

Thanks for reading.

[flattop32355]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

An enlightening discussion for someone who knows nothing at all about the subject. Knowledge has been dispensed: A pleasant change from the usual.
One who "just buys and wears them" thanks you all, both for the content and the tone of the discussion.

[davis.randolph]

Re: Woolrich out of Jeans Wool

Hi all, I am not a frequent contributor or visitor, in fact this is my first post ever and will probably be my last. I am a long time Park service volunteer and museum professional who has seen and studied my fair share of Confederate enlisted costumes, and even dabbled in making my own reproductions.

First off, I can assure you that Sam Cathey is certainly not generalizing all Confederate garments. As former staff at Harper's Ferry National Park and long time living history volunteer with advanced history academic credentials to boot, he has seen plenty of Confederate garments, including three just over a month ago at MoC, and I know this because I was there with him. Say what you will, but I can assure you Sam is not at all a generalist.

Mr. Wambaugh argues that the notion of "Woolrich's products are inferior to those of County Cloth is fallacious." I do not agree. I handled a piece of Woolrich goods just last weekend, and I found this particular piece to be stiff, almost burlap in nature with no drape, and extremely loosely woven. I also found that, in this particular piece, the wool yarns seemed to be unusually dyed with black and gray specks throughout. I have been a customer of County Cloth for over 15 years now, and I have yet no reason to question the accuracy of his goods compared with the original garments from which Mr. Childs commissions said goods. Having worked with cotton wool goods myself for a number of years, I am not surprised at all by Mr. Wickett's assertion about working with Woolrich goods.

Mr. Wambaugh also argues that jeans from different suppliers should be though of as "different tools in the tool box." I think the better comparison is that the tools of the trade, needle, scissors, patterns, measure, and most importantly, experienced hands, are in fact the tools, where as the cloth would be better compared as raw material. And I think any skilled trades person would agree, the final product can only be as quality as the material it is crafted from. And in the 19th century, jeans were made by skilled hands, and often in the American South in the skilled hands of women and slaves, not child slaves in China and India where much of this non-domestic produced jeans comes from.

I am also perplexed by Mr. Wambaugh's comments about the County Cloth goods he claims to have experimented with. First off, I am not aware of any goods that County Cloth sells or has ever sold for $40.50 per yard. Currently, County Cloth advertises kersey for $36.00 per yard http://www.crchilds.com/id44.htm, and other kerseys for $30.00 per yard http://www.crchilds.com/id41.htm. I have never conducted a bleach test but I have conducted burn tests on both CC kerseys and the Woolrich broadcloths that were advertised as 15% nylon. While the broadcloth from Woolrich melted and bubbled when flame applied, the County Cloth kersey simply burned and broke off. Just last weekend a spark burned a fresh hole in my CC trousers, and if this cloth was 30% synthetic as Mr. Wambaugh claims County Cloth kersey can be, I think that the cloth would have bubbled and melted more than in the Woolrich goods that I tested myself. I also wonder how Mr. Wambaugh determined that these goods were 30% synthetic as apposed to 15% or 50%. I also find it out of line that Mr. Wambaugh publishes on this forum some alleged illegality on the part of County Cloth about mis-advertising products, when I have heard or seen no such thing for myself or from perhaps as many as several hundred customers of CC whom I am acquainted with.

I intentionally remove myself from the forum banter, as in my brief exposure I found to be entirely disenlightening. When it comes to goods though, the model that County Cloth uses is to study original garments, and commission goods in terms of thread count, thickness of yarn and color based on the findings of his research and others, including Les Jenson, Dean Nelson, Troiani, Fred Gaede, Dennis Reen, and many others of his generation, who are museum professionals, collectors, authors, and had more or less open access to the museum and private collector vaults before it became so difficult. Based on what I have seen in this post (which is all I really know of Mr. Wambaugh), Mr. Wambaugh's model seems to be to acquire goods from various vendors, and match them to extant garments that look to him similar enough to the goods at his disposal, and then to produce garments based on that subjective reasoning. This is a different process altogether, for Mr. Childs commissions goods based on his research and specifications, and finishes and inspects said goods to ensure quality and accuracy. And moreover, County Cloth has not limited itself to producing only "high and mighty" jeans and cassimeres, and has commissioned several plain woven, 3/1 twill jeans and other un-standard cloth based on original samples. And as to his quality, County Cloth abandoned production several years ago of a line of Atlanta Depot jackets because the salt and pepper jeans he had woven did not look quite right compared to the two surviving originals.

I am not intending to insult or bash anyone, but I think a lesson here is to read, study, and read more. And I don't mean internet forums where, like all blog publishing, contributors express there own feelings and can heighten their persona to self proclaimed expert. I know because I am doing that right now, and although I have some research skills and practical experience, no one here knows that or cares. I bought some FHW cotton from Mr. Wambaugh recently (and am currently waiting for some other cotton that was back-ordered), but not because he was an AC forum approved vendor, but because they compared favorably to cottons I had seen and studied, and I liked them. I think this wonderful discipline of history though charges us with constantly questioning things, and search for answers that can only be supported with hard fast evidence.

Thanks, Randy Davis

The thread has gone off topic enough. Very interesting discussion though and I hope folks take the good advice presented here... Never stop researching and reading. Herb Coats, Moderator

This thread is closed