Which one first?

[Ian.MacAllan]

I forgot to mention length; sorry.

"Proper length" is very much a matter of personal taste, though the concensus of the fashion mavens seems to be between the top and the middle of the kneecap. I wear my kilts between two inches above the top of the kneecap, in hot weather, and the bottom of the kneecap in bitter cold weather. I just put the kilt where I want it and secure it there with a kilt belt. This may mean that, in some people's opinions, none of my kilts actually fit me; if so, well, so be it. I'm happy with them.

And IMHO lengths below the kneecap or more than three inches above it quickly cease to look masculine; a cultural bias perhaps, but there it is.

I have one SK, the microfiber Hiker, and I agree with Finn that its elastic waistband is not satisfactory. The waistband does not hold the kilt in place. A kilt belt solves that problem.

One of the basic decisions you have to make in buying anything is whether to go for cheap or for quality, and the difficulty comes from there being good reasons on both sides, depending on your situation. In all probability, only you know your situation well enough to make a wise decision. I went both ways over the course of the first year and am, on the whole, happier with both extremes than with the middle. But high, low, and middle are themselves subjective; my high ($200---$300) is not high to many people.

Best wishes.

.