Question on how to wear a belt with kilts

**cavscout** · 8th June 06, 07:00 AM

I agree that the belt adds a nice finished look to a kilt.

Traditional kilts that are worn up near the ribs do need the wider belts as Hamish suggested. I'm not partail to the flashy buckles for casual wear either. It just looks over dressed.

P1M has a great "casual" buckle to fit a wider belt. I say casual, but that style buckle can, and does, work in a more formal setting also.

I think the casual kilts like are made by USAK can get away with a narrower belt. I have a 1.75" belt that works very well. Due to the shorter overall length of the kilt a 2" belt would just be too wide and throw the proportions off.

**RockyR** · 8th June 06, 07:17 AM

Originally Posted by cavscout

I agree that the belt adds a nice finished look to a kilt.

Traditional kilts that are worn up near the ribs do need the wider belts as Hamish suggested. I'm not partail to the flashy buckles for casual wear either. It just looks over dressed.

P1M has a great "casual" buckle to fit a wider belt. I say casual, but that style buckle can, and does, work in a more formal setting also.

I think the casual kilts like are made by USAK can get away with a narrower belt. I have a 1.75" belt that works very well. Due to the shorter overall length of the kilt a 2" belt would just be too wide and throw the proportions off.

I think Ham was referring more to "traditional kilts" when he talked about the 2" or 2.25" belts.

Yeah, our Casuals look best with a 1.5" belt. That's why we make them with smaller loops. Also... there aren't many people who are BARELY willing to pay $110 for a kilt that would then spend $75 on a kilt belt and buckle.

**Robinhood** · 8th June 06, 08:17 AM

If you are shaped like me, the the kilt definitely will
fall off without a belt (or something) to hold it up.
Belt loops do help, and they are also good for hanging
things like watches and keys from. I don't like belts,
though, since they are too consricting when tight enough
to keep the kilt up. I prefer suspenders. (Probably one of
the don'ts, but I do it anyway.)

**M. A. C. Newsome** · 8th June 06, 08:28 AM

Barb is completely correct -- the so-called "belt loops" on kilts began life as loops for the sporran belt. If you look at any older kilts (older than 50 years, I would guess here, based on personal experience and examining *a lot* of older kilt) you won't see any belt loops at all.

And, unless I am mistaken, regimental kilts still have no belt loops.

The sporran loops were added sometime within the last 50 years, I would assume. I altered a kilt for a gentleman a few months back that was probably 30 to 40 years old (the kilt, not the gentleman). It had sporran loops that were about 1.5" wide, because they simply were not meant to accomodate a wide kilt belt. They were meant only for the sporran strap.

And just like Barb said, most men don't even need those. Only if you have no hips to speak of would you have to worry about your sporran sliding down (or if you are wearing your sporran belt too loose).

People started to think these loops were for the main kilt belt, so the kilt makers accomodated and made them wider. Now they come standard on most civilian kilts, just because people expect them. But I know a good number of kilt makers who still prefer not to put them on.

I don't put them on any kilt I make unless the client specifically asks for them. Probably less than 5% of the kilts I make have belt loops.

Aye,
Matt

**cavscout** · 8th June 06, 08:58 AM

Iguess my question would be, why is there a 1.5" loop for a 1/2" - 1" sporran strap?

Is there a demand for a wider sporran strap? Something in the 1" - 1.5" width? This would seem to be too big for appearance sake. Other wise the loops should be smaller, right?

**Barb T** · 8th June 06, 09:00 AM

Just to make it easy to put through. That way, you can put the strap end through one and the buckle end through the other and have the buckle in the middle of the back, if you want, I suppose.

Barb

**pdcorlis** · 8th June 06, 10:02 AM

I'm a bit late to this party but... my made to measure traditional style kilts fit like a glove and the belt stays put without bothering with the loops at the back - in fact my handsewn tank doesn't even have loops and doesn't need them. I do have a couple of SWK kilts and since they have a generic hip measurement they seem to beneift from using the loops.

Next time I order a traditional style kilt - I think I'll ask them to skip the loops.

**Mattg** · 8th June 06, 10:10 AM

I wore my kilt for a few weeks without a belt and it was fine! I think I do prefer a belt, but it was definitly wearable without the belt.

**Barb T** · 8th June 06, 10:13 AM

Personally, I think kilts (at least trad kilts) look peculiar without a belt, mainly because they sit so high if they're worn properly (without a belt, they have kind of a farmer john look to me). This thread has been about no belt _loops_, not about no belt at all. Or at least my comments were!

Barb

**mkmound** · 8th June 06, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by M. A. C. Newsome

. . .

And, unless I am mistaken, regimental kilts still have no belt loops.

. . .
Aye,
Matt

I have a Canadian RHR regimental surplus Black Watch kilt, which has no belt loops.

I find that I sometimes have a problem with the belt slipping up above the top of the kilt in the back when I sit, particularly sitting on a car seat which slants lower in the back than the front. I usually have to reposition the belt after getting out of the car.

Mark