Uneven lower kilt hem

[The Wizard of BC]

Actually many guys who are what we call "Gentlemen of Substance" prefer the higher waist. The front apron falls straight down from the stomach. It can be very slimming.

But yea, it does take some time to get used to.

What determines the rise or waist height though is not where the kilt is at the front but where it cinches into in the back.

If the top strap is about kidney level it is Full Rise. And yes on my guys the front will tend to rise up above the stomach looking like the old pictures of guys in pants with their waist above the stomach and their tie about 6" long.



If the top strap is about the small of the back it is Mid Rise. What is normal for mid rise kilts on guys with stomachs is that the front wants to slide down. This seems about where you are at.



If the top strap is down on the rise of the buttock this is low rise. In the front the kilt is under the stomach. Most guys feel that this accentuates the stomach. It also makes the front of the kilt really short and you may have a problem while sitting and not flashing.



Most mid rise kilt need a bit of waist sloping to look good. This is where the front of the kilt is cut away or lower than the back.

[Terry Searl]

I can tell you personally that what Steve is telling you is absolutely so. I am a portly fellow and I tell you honestly a kilt is much more comfortable to wear and looks so much better when the top of the front apron of the kilt is worn at or a bit above the belly button I also use sporran straps instead of sporran belt and chains because the chains tend to make the sporran hang to low and accentuate the tummy.You might think wearing the kilt like this will take a while to get use to but it doesn't because the kilt is so much more comfortable......... I also have suspender buttons sewed onto my kilt and wear suspenders to stop the kilt from sliding down and with a waist coat on you would never know they are there. The kilt doesn't have to be cinched too tight or if wearing a belt it doesn't need to be cinched so tight it distorts the fall of the outer kilt apron.......mind you I wear suspenders all the time so am very comfortable with wearing them.......just my opinion though

[Dragon's Breath]

Very helpful pictures, thanks. My husband does indeed wear his kilts well above the belly button, but that still constitutes mid rise by your photos; going to full rise would put the kilt waist like the 'old man pants' scenario you so accurately describe! Which scenario would cause the apron to stick out over the protrusion below, and then hang straight down from that point. Looking, like I said, like a maternity dress. So for him, the waist does have to be worn at mid rise not full rise.

I guess what I'm working with is closest to your side-view photo of the red-kilted fellow (the Habs fan!) getting fitted. And I see that you too have the issue I mentioned, about the lines of the plaid pattern no longer being parallel to the floor: in my ugly method, this happens at the hem, but even in your most correct method, it is somewhat visible at the waistband. So you know what I mean.

I now see that your way is the right way to make this modification; but unfortunately, I certainly do not have the skill to do it that way. Cutting down the waistband would involve dismantling and changing the interfacing, and worse for me, it would also involve redoing the buckles and strap locations. I never took a sewing class in my life -- I'm not up to attempting that!

Thanks very much for the information. At least I have learned that I was indeed aiming for the right end result. And since where we are, my husband might just be the only kilt-wearer to be seen, I'll just have to tell myself that no observer will be as knowledgeable as the Wizard of BC to pick out my errors. It's kind of a choice of doing what I can vs the man not wearing kilts at all....and everybody should be allowed to wear a kilt if they want, right?

Thanks again everyone.

[The Wizard of BC]

If you would kindly tell us who is the maker of the kilts your husband has, there may be alternatives that could be done with your level of sewing experience.

[Dragon's Breath]

I am a little shy to say, but the kilts are just the more economy-grade ones. Damn' Near, UT Kilt, and Sport Kilt. Some cotton, some polyviscose, one wool. (A true traditional kilt is on the wish list for future, but not at this time.) I doubt there's much to suggest for me at my price point, but thanks so much for being so helpful. Those photos you posted were vastly informative to me!

[The Wizard of BC]

Just so we are using the same terms. Polyviscose is a term that has seen a lot of misuse. The first part "Poly" refers to Polyester. The second, "Viscose" is the British term for Rayon. So Polyviscose would mean a fabric woven from a blend of Polyester and Rayon fibers.

The term Polyviscose or P/V for short has been use by some makers incorrectly for almost any synthetic fibers. Perhaps the most misuse has been by the makers from Pakistan. They seem to have attached P/V to fabrics woven from Polyester and Cotton, Polyester and Acrylic, and even 100% Acrylic fabrics.

As the term would apply to a very specific blend of Polyester/Rayon, true P/V fabrics are actually not that common. The only reason I am pointing this out is because the cost of enough fabric to make an 8 yard kilt will usually be more than the total selling price of some of the kilts offered by the names you mention.

OH, and it is perfectly acceptable to name manufacturers here. Accurate information is what we are all after.

As most of the names you mention do not have the internal structural elements of stabilizer and interfacings, they are very simple to alter.
In some cases with some of the names you mention it is only a matter of removing to top waistband or narrow waistbanding - cutting the top of the kilt to the required shape - and restitching the waistband or waistbanding back on.

On most of the kilts from the names you give if there is some sort of what looks like lining inside the kilt, that lining is only there for show. Because traditional kilts have a lining. If you unstitch these false linings you find that there is nothing behind them.

The lining of a traditional kilt is there only to cover all the internal construction. The pleats are cut away if the back of the kilt needs to be made thinner so you don't sweat too much. The stabilizer is added to resist the stress of strapping the kilt on, so those stresses are not transferred to the stitching or to the fabric itself. Interfacing is added to give vertical stiffening to the garment in much the same way boning is used in corsets.

If these elements are not used, there is no need for the lining. But some makers do put a lining in. It is done just for show as it does not actually cover anything up.

[The Wizard of BC]

And a further clarification. In my photos above the top red kilt is worn at full rise.
The dart team kilts are mid rise.
The lower kilt worn below the belly is a low rise kilt.

We don't look at where the kilt fits in the front. We look at where the straps fit in the back. The hem of the top kilt is actually horizontal and even to the floor. The bottom of the Fell where the pleats are no longer sewn down is also completely horizontal. Only the top waistband of the kilt is angled so that in the front the apron does not rise above the stomach. This is called "Slope".

[Dragon's Breath]

Yes, in fact the one "PV" one is actually 65% viscose and 35% acetate! The wool one has got a lining and there is a stabilizer, from the buckles back and around to the other side buckle. The cotton and "PV" ones have interfacing all around the waistband.

I see what you mean, and the next time a new kilt is added to the wardrobe I am going to have a close look and see if I am brave enough to follow your method. Thanks again!