Please clarify reverse pleats

[The Wizard of BC]

It is my personal opinion that denim makes a terrible fabric for kilts. It is a very stiff and unforgiving material. It's ok for jeans because you are inside them, always stretching the fabric out to shape. In a kilt the fabric WILL shrink and pucker. Look at the seams of your jeans, see those puckers? That is what each and every pleat edge you stitch down will soon look like. Unless of course you just love ironing.

Not everyone agrees.

But if you have decided on denim then my comment would be to include as much fabric as you can possibly afford. My work weight kilts have between 7 and 9 inches of "Sett". (depending on model) With a reveal of either 1.5 or 1 inch that makes the pleat depth between 3.5 and 4 inches.

On the left side of the outer apron is the deep pleat. This pleat needs the depth to allow the aprons to hang correctly when standing and to allow room for you to sit and have the apron fall between your legs. On my kilts this pleat is half the depth of the width of the apron.

On the right side of the under apron is the reverse pleat. This is just like the deep pleat but because it also reverses the direction of the pleat it gets a special name. (Think inverted or reverse box pleat). On my kilts this pleat depth is also 1/2 the apron width.

I hope this helps. I'm not trying to discourage you from your endevour but trying to help you from making something which after two washings starts to look like a tutu.

[Eric T]

Thanks, Steve. Those are mighty deep side pleats. If my apron is 18 inches wide that would make them about 8 or 9 inches deep. Is that what you meant to say? Hmm. That's like three aprons worth of fabric in front, not counting the inner apron. I'm not trying to cut back on fabric, but I think I'll go more moderate. It seems that for apron-dropping purposes, 4 or five inches deep would be sufficient. That would give 16 to 20 inches of fabric to unfold as knees spread, giving a minimum of 34 to 38 inches to hang knee to knee on me, which is a lot.

I'm thinking perhaps you meant that all the hidden fabric in the deeper side pleats equals half the apron width, meaning for an 18 inch apron they would use 9 inches of fabric and be 4.5 inches deep. Is that right?

Regarding denim seams shrinking, one thing is for sure, they use cotton thread on jeans, which itself will shrink differently from the fabric. Good to point out that hazzard, though. So have you tried doing denim with maybe an all polyester thread, or a blend? Another trick would be to use a zigzag stitch, but that would probably look funny. I have in the past put hems on jeans that never puckered with many washings, so that must have been poly or cotton/poly blend thread.

I also noticed on the jeans that I have that the stitch they use is somehow not just an ordinary straight stitch, so that may figure in as well.

We shall see, we shall see.

I've also been warned by a seamstress to beware of selvage that may have different fibers or weave, and therefore shrink differently than the fabric itself.

[The Wizard of BC]

I did mean a pleat 8 to 9 inches deep for a 16 inch wide apron. If your aprons are properly tapered that depth at the waist is reduced to only 2 or 3 inches at the hem.

In general, amount of fabric = swish. The more fabric, the more weight of fabric to move and hang by it's own weight. That's why traditionals have nearly 8 yards of fabric.

And the extra deep pleats under the aprons means that the aprons will have less tendency to pucker up at the waist or under your sporran. Traditionals have horsehair linings and re-inforcements under the aprons. Contemporaries usually do not. With only two or three layers of fabric in the aprons there is just not enough stiffness there to resist those unsightly horizontal puckers in the front of the aprons.

I did some experimenting with the drape of fabrics when I was designing mine. I found that good kilt wool needs, on average, 6 inches of fabric length to have enough weight to allow the fabric weight to pull wrinkles out of itself.
Denim on the other hand requires 38 to 45 inches of length to do the same thing.
That is why most denim kilts you see seem to stick out at wierd angles after only a few minutes of wearing. The fabric is just too stiff to fall back down under it's own weight.

A note on stitching-Try to use the same fiber content in your thread as is in your fabric. Denim is 100% Cotton. Use 100% Cotton thread. The problem with denim is that the warp and weft threads are different. One is dyed and one is natural. The shrinkage is not even warp-wize
Then back off your machine tension. (both the upper and bobbin tensions.)
The stitches should be as loose as possible to allow the fabric to find it's own natural "Lay". (most home machines have limited tension possibilities and are factory set for thinner and lighter fabrics.)
And while I'm at it, it is not the ability of home machines to punch a needle thru fabric that is the problem, it is the foot height. Most home machines can't lift the foot high enough to get the 14 or 18 layers under the foot.

[way2fractious]

Pleater has suggested narrower-than-traditional aprons so that they actually fall between the knees when sitting. Incidentally, the reverse Kinguisse pleating style she describes is exactly what Utilikilts uses.

The Wizard of BC reminds us that the deep pleat and the reverse pleat appear far too deep at the hip line, but when you add flare to the aprons of 1.5 to 2 inches on each side, the depths at hemline are much smaller.

I have made several cotton casuals with 2-inch reveals and 4-inches hidden. This produces only three layers of fabric below the hip line and makes them very easy to realign for ironing.

My most irritating issue with cotton or cotton/poly kilts has been the "dip," where the hem on the deep and reverse pleats has to be modified to prevent the points from showing beneath the aprons. Because cotton is so unforgiving, the dips canot be handled the same way as wool. Despite several experiments, I still have to reach down and adjust the deep pleats back into place after they have been extended. It has just become a second-nature movement, similar to the sweep before sitting.

Anyway, let nothing deter you from making your own kilt. My first handmade attempt (and several others) is not the prettiest nor most used of my kilts, but it retains an honored place in my closet and it is still used on occasion.

[Pleater]

The amount of fabric you need to go round you whan you sit is perhaps rather more than you think - particularly in a stiff fabric which is going to remain in its folds rather than spread out.

Remember that when you sit there needs to be enough fabric in the front of the kilt to go over the thighs as well as across the lap, and that the weight of the small pleats and the rigidity of the fabric will make them tend to fall back on each side of the hips, outside the thighs.

If there is not enough fabric then there might be a tendency for the aprons to be drawn apart, with distinctly draughty consequences. This might also be a problem if you need to step over some obstacle or up onto a kickstep or just to put your foot up to tie a lace.

[The Wizard of BC]

Actually the "dip" w2f describes is very easy to take care of, but it must be done at the same time you sew the hem. Accurate measuring and forthought is a must.
I would describe how to do this but it is one of those things that makes a Freedom Kilt so distinctive and I'm not sure I want to reveal a company secret.

I will though for a price

And please remember I'm not talking about the length of fabric needed to go around you standing or sitting but the amount of fabric needed to allow the fabric to move on its own. Even with a full width apron large enough deep and reverse pleats will allow the apron to fall between the legs.

[The Wizard of BC]

So, have we answered your original question yet?
Or did we get way too far off into kiltmaker lingo and detail?

[way2fractious]

I'm not sure I want to reveal a company secret.

I will though for a price

...And I was so hoping your forthcoming book on making contemporary kilts would reveal ALL the secrets...

[GlassMan]

Pleater has suggested narrower-than-traditional aprons so that they actually fall between the knees when sitting. Incidentally, the reverse Kinguisse pleating style she describes is exactly what Utilikilts uses.

And this is slightly off-topic but it strikes me as silly that even though the pleating method is quite old, Utilikilt was able to get the US Patent Office to issue a patent on it claiming to have invented it. While they probably did come up with it on their own, the issuance does show the sloppy work being done at the patent office. They will issue a patent for just about anything these days without proper research or thought. Sad, sad, sad.

And I must admit, know owning a UK for the first time, I really like the way that pleating style falls.

[Pleater]

It just seemed obvious - simple to make and and it accomodates such things as making from several strips of cloth, and changes in waist size more easily than when I was using a 'single run of knife pleats' design.

The two sides of the kilt are mirror images, the centre back lies flatter to the body and the full thickness of the pleats is at the sides. I have not had as many bruises as when I wore ordinary skirts and trousers - in fact I can't recall one at all recently.

I work with knitting machines and they are heavy, metal, and they sit on heavy metal stands with all sorts of bits sticking out at hip height, but the multiple layers of fabric seem to be quite protective.

Our patent office here was going to issue a patent on a traditional sun bonnet design, made in Dorset and surounding counties for centuries, to someone intent on denying a living to several small makers who had been producing them for decades. Luckily the person trying to get the patent crowed too soon. Someone heard what they were up to and got the patent process reversed.

The bonnet is made by folding and smocking a rectangle of fabric, very simple but quite distinctive, often seen in local paintings of rural life.

Yes, it really is amazing what you can patent.