Making do, length-wise...

[Reno]

Hello all! I've got a question regarding kilt lengths. I'm fortunate enough to own an 8 yd. Irish National kilt by Alexis Malcolm, with a length of 26 inches. The kilt-jones has set in deeply, and I'm looking/hoping to add to my collection in a big way. As I investigate your various suggestions regarding kilts, I see that the "standard" length is 24 inches. Question: has anyone purchased and/or worn kilts that are shorter than their "correct" length? I can see just wearing a 24 incher a bit lower on the waist, but I don't know if I could make up a 2 inch difference; and if I could, would the overall dimnesions of the kilt be thrown off in such a way as to make it uncomfortable. Any suggestions?

Ta!

[MacTavishOfJapan]

If you are talking about a traditional 'tank' then I'm not sure there is a standard length, just the correct length. In my opinion traditional kilts worn too long or too short look silly. You want the bottom of the kilt to be around the (upper) knee.

Welcome from Japan none the less!

[cavscout]

It will definitely "feel" different but it will not be uncomfortable at all, and once you get used to not having the kilt touch your rib cage you won't even notice it

My philosophy is decide where you want the bottom of the kilt to be and measure up from there to determine the length of your kilt. Some would say pick the position for the top of the kilt first and measure down but mens fashion has been so different from kilts that men have no idea what is a comfortable height for their kilt compared to a low riding baggy pair of pants.

I know the look I want so prefer the bottom edge to be within 1" of the top of, but not below, the knee so I measure up from there to whatever height allows me to bend comfortably with a belt on.

[JBfromBS]

I think what he might be asking is about some "off-the-rack" kilts, like Stillwater, etc. that usually come in a 24" length. I say yes, by all means order one and try it! You can wear it a little lower on the waist, and if it comes to somewhere around the top of the knee you have a great deal! Of course if it still too short, you can always return it (just remember not to take the basting stitch out). If you are custom ordering one, of course go with your measured length, not some arbitrary "standard" length.

Joe

[Schultz]

I have a similar problem. My "ideal" kilt length is 26" as well. My USAK casual is 24" long and is wonderful, but it's also made to be worn at the hip. I am, however, reticent about getting one in that length in, say, a SWK, at this point. I don't want to drop $100 or so on a kilt to find that I don't like the way it looks and/or feels.

One of us is just going to have to bite the bullet and do it.

[Blu (Ontario)]

... I see that the "standard" length is 24 inches. Question...

"Standard" is a misnomer. "Average" or "median" would be a better descriptor. One might be misled into thinking that greater or lesser than "standard" is non-standard.

The correct length is one that suits ones height and proportions correctly. It is possible to wear a kilt of the correct length, incorrectly though.

.

[Andrew Green]

Quick note:
If you are buying a made to measure kilt, have a friend do the measurement from your waist to the top of your kneecap... if you bend over to do this, the measurement will be off.

[Martin S]

Length seems to be a matter of taste and comfort.

I recently ordered a new 5-yarder, sending my measurements calculated very carfully, both on my body and on my other kilts.

I asked for waist-to-knee : 22 inches.
Reply from supplier : this must be a mistake; it is too long for a man of 66 inches height.

Go understand !

Looking at old British military photos, I see kilts were worn just above the knee.
Looking at North American kilt wearers, it is often below the knee.
I was told, 40 years ago, a kilt should barely touch the ground when kneeling.
Today, some kilt-makers recommend the bottom edge should be an inch & a half from the gound.

Added to this, we are all shapes and sizes and all wear our kilts in different ways. What may look too long one one man will be appear to short on another.

Martin

[McClef]

What has been considered the correct length has indeed varied, my first kilt, which I was given, came to slightly above the knee and I was advised that this was the "correct Highland length".

Most "off the peg" stuff seems to be either 23 or 24" which suits me fine but can be a nuisance for those who don't meet this assumed average.

But I am surprised that Martin's supplier should make a similar assumption especially he is the one who is going to be wearing it and not them!

[Pleater]

I'm 65.5 inches and I wear my kilts 24 inches long, and they are just short enough not to be caught behind my knee when worn with a 1 inch wide belt - the wider the belt the shorter they are, unless I wet the leather and wear it pulled tight until it dries, which curves it and so it rides lower.

If 2 inches shorter, that would put the hem at the top of my kneecap - slightly brief for me, I think, but perfectly acceptable for many.

As for 22 inches being too long - maybe if the kilt is down around the hips - but hipster kilts tend to be worn long anyway -

But -hey - it's your kilt - if you order it 22 inches then you should get one 22 inches.

These days a length of 26 inches should not be all that unusual. People are growing taller these days, and if the kilt is being made from a 56 inch wide fabric there should be no problem if there is a good selvage. Even 28 inches long could be done using a few extra inches of cloth for the waist band and belt loops instead of taking them from the spare strip in the middle.

It might mean that many cheaper kilts are not going to be suitable - but it might also mean that there is less competition for those kilts which come onto the market which are the right length.