Looks like someone tried to add a bit of girth

[Curtis Bias]

Surfing the Internet, I stumbled across a retired military kilt. The waist measurement was originally a 33", but it looks like it has been altered to fit a soldier with a larger waist. Is that what you folks with more trained eyes see here? I can see a distinctly different tartan fabric has been added. I also see a new piece of lining material in a tan color. It also looks like the leather strap and buckle have been reattached and sewn by hand. What do you experienced kilt makers or wearers have to say about this alteration? Does it look like it was done properly? Will it cause problems with the fit of the kilt, or with the way the apron hangs? What size would you estimate the altered waist size would be if the original kilt was a 31" (a rough estimate will suffice)? https://m.ebay.com/itm/Rare-Original....c100930.m5375

I figure it would fit me considering my waist, measured at the belly button is a 36". It looks like it has been enlarged to fit someone who is about my size or possibly even more rotund. I have been in a bit of a bidding battle on this one. I'm looking to step into my first tartan kilt and I thought this one looked interesting.

[Arnot]

Yes, they have added in additional fabric in a different tartan to extend the under apron. Looks like a Black Watch variant or something. It could have been done to make the size bigger. Some old kilts only had buckles on the right side and the under aprons were shorter. The under apron was just tucked into position and was held there when the other buckles were tightened. I have a kilt that was like that originally. I use a slightly longer strap where the seller, or whoever has extended the under apron. The buckles were probably changed when they added the additional strap. The other two would likely have been the old two-prong buckles and would not have matched. They are a pain to deal with as well. In fact, I changed out buckles and straps on a Cameron of Erracht kilt brought to me by a piper from 4th BN, Royal Regiment of Scotland the other week for just this reason. The kilt was old and still had the two-prong buckles.

[WalesLax]

I'm sorry, I don't seem to be seeing what you are seeing. Can you be a bit more specific about where you see the addition of fabric that you talk about.

Look at phots 7 and 10 on the listing. You can clearly see the added material he is referring to in the different (Blackwatch?) Tartan.

Its certainly unique. The poster says it adds ~2”, but I’d have thought more just by looking at it.

Rob

[Tobus]

The buckles were probably changed when they added the additional strap. The other two would likely have been the old two-prong buckles and would not have matched. They are a pain to deal with as well. In fact, I changed out buckles and straps on a Cameron of Erracht kilt brought to me by a piper from 4th BN, Royal Regiment of Scotland the other week for just this reason. The kilt was old and still had the two-prong buckles.

The shiny replacement buckles were the first thing that leapt to my eye when I looked at the photos.

On that subject, though, I love the original two-prong buckles on my QOH regimental kilt. Yes, they're a bit of a pain to get the tiny prongs in the holes at the same time, but they sure do lay nice and flat. Modern buckles are lumpy and uncomfortable by comparison.

If you kept those original buckles that you replaced (or have others from previous replacements), I'd sure be interested in them!

*edited to add: for those who aren't familiar with them, these would be original style military buckles:

[Arnot]

The shiny replacement buckles were the first thing that leapt to my eye when I looked at the photos.

On that subject, though, I love the original two-prong buckles on my QOH regimental kilt. Yes, they're a bit of a pain to get the tiny prongs in the holes at the same time, but they sure do lay nice and flat. Modern buckles are lumpy and uncomfortable by comparison.

If you kept those original buckles that you replaced (or have others from previous replacements), I'd sure be interested in them!

*edited to add: for those who aren't familiar with them, these would be original style military buckles:

I have one of those QOH kilts as well. It still had the basting stitches in the pleats when I bought it. I didn't really care for the original buckles, though. To each his own. I have the modern military black buckles on it now.

Unfortunately I have already given away the buckles. The QOH buckles went to OC Richard, another set from my Cameron Highlanders kilt went to another XMarks guy in SW England. If I change out another set for someone else, I'll keep you in mind.

[Barb T]

Because so much has been added, the pleats now are conspicuously narrow in comparison to the aprons, so it's likely to look odd when worn (apron will come around too far on both sides because the pleats are no longer balanced with the apron).

The other thing that will make this kilt look odd is that the apron won't even come close to covering the underapron. Even if you could buckle it into the tightest hole of the underapron strap, you'd still see a couple inches of the unpleated underapron beyond the fringe edge of the apron (see below). That just doesn't look good and makes it painfully obvious that the kilt doesn't fit.

[The Wizard of BC]

Adding fabric to the left edge of an under apron will not affect or change the size of the kilt.

Evidence of a size alteration would be seen in the relocaion of the right side buckles.

[Barb T]

Adding fabric to the left edge of an under apron will not affect or change the size of the kilt.

Evidence of a size alteration would be seen in the relocation of the right side buckles.

Actually, it would change the size of the kilt, but the pair of buckles would have to be moved or you wouldn't be able to buckle the kilt. Adding material is basically like adding strap extenders.

[The Wizard of BC]

um - if fabric were added to the outer apron, or to the pleated section, then yes the kilt would be larger. I don't see where fabric was added to the outer apron or to the pleated section.

If an attempt had been made to make the kilt larger by adding to the under apron only - the result would be the right side of the under apron showing from under the right side of the outer apron. In this case we should see some evidence where the buckles and straps had been moved. I am not seeing that.

[Barb T]

um - if fabric were added to the outer apron, or to the pleated section, then yes the kilt would be larger. I don't see where fabric was added to the outer apron or to the pleated section.

If an attempt had been made to make the kilt larger by adding to the under apron only - the result would be the right side of the under apron showing from under the right side of the outer apron. In this case we should see some evidence where the buckles and straps had been moved. I am not seeing that.

It looks to me like someone larger than the most recent owner added the fabric, otherwise there would be no need to have the underapron strap sewn on so far back from the edge of the underapron. Given the length of the strap and the distance across the underapron to the underapron strap, my bet would be that you could just barely reach the buckles at the fringe edge with the buckles where they are. My guess is that the person who originally added the fabric would have had to move those buckles but that the most recent owner, who was smaller, would have moved them back, as he did with the underapron strap.

Or, maybe the original person just used strap extenders - that's what the folks in our band do when the underapron edge shows a whole bunch and the fringe edge straps can't reach the buckles. And that's actually preferable to moving the buckles into the underapron, which you'd have to do if the kilt was way too small. There isn't enough support for the buckles in the fabric of the underapron, so strap extenders are a better choice.