Evolution.....

[Shay]

If the kilt is to be something other than that then they must become more comfortable (fit more like blue jeans), be truly wash&wear (toss in washing machine and toss in dryer), and cost signifigantly less than $500 (more like $50).

Have you check out Amerikilt? That's basically my experience with them, and I do most of the laundry/ironing in the house- throw it in the washer, hang to dry (which you're supposed to do with jeans anyway) and touch up with an iron. But they cost around $95.

[eighties]

I'd like to see more traditional looking kilts with POCKETS!

There has been a lot of experimenting with different fabrics (my personal preference will always be for wool since it has the swing and holds the pleats better than anything). I do have some PV and Acrylic that provide cooler wear in the Southern summers. The average person doesn't know or care that they aren't wool. As synthetics continue to get better more alternatives may open up. Last but not least, a reduction in price as this would open the market up to more people. Better synthetics and mass production could make that happen but is it realistic?

I think another question here is as kilts evolve will they become mainstream? There have been some attempts to mainstream kilts and other unbifurcated male garments but they never seemed to take hold. Needless to say, the more common they become, the more new spins on the designs.

[Alan H]

To go mainstream they'll have to cost less than $50, as Sir Robert says.

However, there already ARE kilts that cost less than $50. Some of the Lip Service kilts are down there, and th eStillwater Economy kilt is under $50. folks may not like the quality, but ther eyou go..It's a kilt and it costs less than $50.

When Utilikilts goes offshore and builds kilts in Els Salvador and then can sell them for $55, then look out.

Tartan will always mean "Scotland" in the minds of the general public, and that limits its acceptance.

[mkmound]

. . . I'll have to agree that solids need to get away from the UtiliKilt and AmeriKilt look, and wander on over into the traditional realm. . .

I think we already have quite a few examples of that -- the Stillwater black heavyweight is one, and Hamish has quite a few solid colors and tweeds (which to me, gives a "solid" appearance from a distance). I believe most of his are from TFCK.

To paraphrase Miah from another post . . . darn small pocketbook!

Mark

[bear]

My kilts are expensive and because they are wool, must be dry cleaned. These two togather make them formal clothing only.

If the kilt is to be something other than that then they must become more comfortable (fit more like blue jeans), be truly wash&wear (toss in washing machine and toss in dryer), and cost signifigantly less than $500 (more like $50).

The traditional kilt will be part of my formal wear, but I see myself wearing a casual kilt much more often.

My PV classic cuts and grizzly cuts have every attribute you just asked for but the price. They start at $150.00 Canadian and a lot of that is the price of fabric.
• Machine wash and dry. (Iron only about every 6 washings if you want razor sharp pleats.)
• Sit on the hips like blue jeans.

[Archangel]

Not trying to be arguementative, but I disagree.

When wearing my Pittsburgh Kilt, I ALWAYS have either my wallet, or my Smith & Wesson M-640, and a memo pad in the underapron pocket. I find it very comfortable, and the added weight ensures the underapron modestly drops between the legs when seated, and comfortingly weights the underapron in windy conditions.

BTW, in regards to putting a bottle in the underapron pocket, I agree with the impracticality comment, unless the "bottle" happens to be a flat sporran or hip flask.

This is MY experience, and opinion (which has been echoed by others). Your mileage may vary.

It's not argumentative when you're not challenging anybody's opinions and experiences. It's discussion when you bring more information into the mix.
So, my kilt has a pocket in it, it's about the size of the old UK passport, it was suggested it might be for the paybook. I don't know what size that was or if either the British Army or Canadian army use a paybook. I tend to doubt it. I tried carrying my wallet in it but it was really uncomfortable to have it bouncing of my leg. I tried my skean dhu but after ten minutes, I remembered Murphy's Law and took it out of there.
I have seen a war era kilt that had a diagonal pocket in the apron. It was suggested that was for a bottle or a handgun. Rejected the bottle idea as dangerous, same as you did. The handgun didn't seem credible unless the kiltie was relatively stationary. I just can't see running or combat with a handgun in the apron. I'm picturing the British Army revolver, which looks pretty heavy. I know the Germans and US had lighter, better models.
(an aside: grandfather was issued a handgun. Special need outside of rank privilige since he was attached to the front line vet corp looking after horses.)
I am (respectfully) curious. Tell me about how you carry a gun in the apron, please. Is there a factory option vs. your own modification? What about movement: is it practical for combat? Does a light gun become a modern day skean dhu?
(oh, and forgive this civvy for saying gun everytime, my bro hates that but I'm not going to type the full term every time when we know what we're talking about.)

[Doc Hudson]

The pocket is the standard angled under-apron pocket available on Pittsburgh Kilts. IIRC, I asked Jeff to add an inch in width and depth. On retrospection, I could have let him use his standard pocket design.

The revolver I carry most often is a Smith & Wesson Model 640. This is a small frame, five-shot .357 Magnum revolver with a 2 1/8" barrel, and weights about 30 ounces loaded. Here is a link to the specifications of the revolver: http://www.firearms.smith-wesson.com...sw_activeTab=1 Mine has skinny wooden grips rather than the oversized rubber grips S&W provides.

Carry in the apron pocket is not quite as accessable as in a pants pocket or on a waist holster, but it is more convienent than carry in the deep side pockets.

Speaking of the side pockets, they are deep enough to carry a full sized service revolver. Either my 4" Smith & Wesson M-686, or my 4.75" Italian Single Action Army Revolver fit easily in the side pockets, without being obvious.

Draw from any concealment is slower than draw from an openly carried belt holster. That is a given. The simple fact that a person HAS a weapon, and the ability to use it is more important than speed. Think about it, how many muggers would expect a guy wearing a kilt to reach into his kilt and pull a revolver? Off hand, I'd say that concealing a revolver in a kilt pocket is easier than concealing the same weapon in a pair of tight jeans, and wearing the same shirt.

I don't know that I'd equate the Concealed Handgun with the modern skean dubh. After all, unless in uniform, at a match, or among close friends, the handgun tends to be concealed, in true black knife fashion. The dressy ceremonial version of the skean dubh would be the equivalent of what some folks call a "Barbecue Gun," that is a flashy, often engraved, handgun with fancy grips and openly carried in a fancy habd carved and usually silver mounted gunbelt and holster. I know some folks who wear "Barbecue Guns" so expensively flashy that they'd have an apoplexy at the thought of actually shooting it.

In my experience, the movement is not excessive, and it does not bang into any tender parts of the anatomy. If I wore my kilt lower, or if I were slimmer, this might be a problem, but it would depend on the kilt, the person wearing it, and what he had in the pocket. Since Rule 1 of Gunfighting is: Have a Gun, I'd say that packing iron in a kilt pocket is a viable combat option. However, if I knew for a fact there was going to be a fight, I'd either not go, or bring a rifle and a couple of friends.

BTW, I agree that those British Army revolvers were big old clunky, ugly contraptions and the later ones were needlessly heavy for the anemic chambering they used. But even so, they are oddly appealing to us gun cranks. I'd dearly love to have one of the old .455 Webly MkVI's.

[toadinakilt]

I'd like to see more solids made in the traditional style (with straps and buckles). The one or two I've seen looked great, and have just about changed my mind about wanted a solid color kilt instead of a tartaned one.

I too would love to see more traditional solids. It seems like Stillwater ought to introduce several solids in Standard (black, tan, navy, what have you). I would buy several in a heartbeat.

In reference to an earlier thread of mine, it would be nice to see some sporrans in les than traditional designs. The only one I can think of is the Amerikilts two-pocket...what about a sporran with places for credit cards and a built in coin purse, etc?

[Archangel]

In reference to an earlier thread of mine, it would be nice to see some sporrans in les than traditional designs. The only one I can think of is the Amerikilts two-pocket...what about a sporran with places for credit cards and a built in coin purse, etc?

I'm very pleased with my R-kilt sporran which, I feel is nicely updated. You might find what you're after in the Derek Alexander purse line. Before you get upset...I saw his waist wallet design for $CDN75 which is designed for men for this kind of application. It was too boxy for my taste and more than I need.

[Archangel]

Draw from any concealment is slower than draw from an openly carried belt holster. That is a given. The simple fact that a person HAS a weapon, and the ability to use it is more important than speed. Think about it, how many muggers would expect a guy wearing a kilt to reach into his kilt and pull a revolver? Off hand, I'd say that concealing a revolver in a kilt pocket is easier than concealing the same weapon in a pair of tight jeans, and wearing the same shirt.

I don't know that I'd equate the Concealed Handgun with the modern skean dubh. After all, unless in uniform, at a match, or among close friends, the handgun tends to be concealed, in true black knife fashion. The dressy ceremonial version of the skean dubh would be the equivalent of what some folks call a "Barbecue Gun," that is a flashy, often engraved, handgun with fancy grips and openly carried in a fancy habd carved and usually silver mounted gunbelt and holster. I know some folks who wear "Barbecue Guns" so expensively flashy that they'd have an apoplexy at the thought of actually shooting it.

In my experience, the movement is not excessive, and it does not bang into any tender parts of the anatomy. If I wore my kilt lower, or if I were slimmer, this might be a problem, but it would depend on the kilt, the person wearing it, and what he had in the pocket. Since Rule 1 of Gunfighting is: Have a Gun, I'd say that packing iron in a kilt pocket is a viable combat option. However, if I knew for a fact there was going to be a fight, I'd either not go, or bring a rifle and a couple of friends.

Thanks for your input, you've probably figured I'm quite likely diametrically opposite to your gun position but knowledge is good.

The skean dhu comment was my bad grammer. I meant it in the terms of a skean dhu being a last ditch weapon in days of old. In modern times your gun in the kilt fills the same role.

I had a laugh at your line what mugger would expect you to reach into your kilt. He's probably already scared about what you might pull out. A gun might be a relief. (Reminds me of the ads for a crotch holster which sounds like the only real value is a skit for comedian.)

BBQ guns, what a mind boggling concept! Finally, a weapon I would lay down my life to protect. I think you and I agree here, I'd rather have a Bic pen in my sock than decoration, I'd rather have a brick than a gun I can't fire.

Going to disagree with the first rule of a gun fight. I'd use Mr. Miyagi's rule: be somewhere else. Failing that, even Musashi says get a gun.

So, back to the thread, it looks like there might be a value in some kind of consideration for different kilt apron pocket design.