Utilikilt lengths

[Panache]

...A kilt needs a certain amount of panache in appearance....
James

It is the kilt wearer, not the kilt, that needs a certain panache.

Cheers

[Riverkilt]

We Don't Need No Stinkin' Rules!!

Look at all the ways pant's are cut at the ankle/hem

Me, I prefer my Utilikilts just at the top of the knee. I wear a short too. Just the way the Ol' Coyote fashioned my body.

I do a lot of hiking and top of the knee length keeps that back hem from chopping away at the back of my knee. Its up out of the way.

Funny how we are. Wear cut offs all day long without a thought. Wear a kilt and sit down and we worry about how much leg is exposed.

Enjoy fashion freedom if you got it in your country.

Ron

[GlassMan]

You have to remember that any "rules" for kilt length have been derived from the traditional wear of the traditional Scottish kilt. I have always heard about the top of the knee and maybe down to mid knee. If you're going to be doing a lot of moving about, a bit shorter is more comfortable. Whatever works for you.

Of course, those who are familiar with traditional kilts will tend to apply the same "rules" to the Utilikilt (and other modern kilts). For instance, I wouldn't want to wear a UK as low on the hips as they picture them. But, the UK's weren't designed to be worn the same way as the traditionals.

Bottom line is, go with what works for you. Most people won't even notice how long the thing is, except for people like those on this board. We are a rather focused set of folks.:rolleyes:

I have to admit that when they were sizing me for a UK at the Capitol Pride festival this year, they kept trying to get me into a short because I am on the shorter end of the average range. With a short worn at the hips (or maybe a little lower) it was hitting me right at the knees. But it felt incredibly uncomfortable to me worn that low on the waist. I felt like I was going to be showing butt crack or something. I'm just not one who likes his underwear peaking out from the TOP of his kilt! The salesman could tell I was uncomfortable so he suggested that I adjust the waist height to where I felt natural. Well, I hiked it up to the traditional kilt height. The waist sure felt good then, but unfortunately the kilt was stopping well above me knee. I did get a few whistles though.

Needless to say, I told him to let me try on a medium with the waist worn at my comfort level, right below the ribs. Now I know that many Utilikiltarians (did I just make that up?) feel that a UK work that high is sacriligious, but I think I look great in it, and I definitely feel good in it.

[Raphael]

Needless to say, I told him to let me try on a medium with the waist worn at my comfort level, right below the ribs. Now I know that many Utilikiltarians (did I just make that up?) feel that a UK work that high is sacriligious, but I think I look great in it, and I definitely feel good in it.

You are not the only one. i do the samething. Both of my Originals are worn at my natural waist.

[pbpersson]

YOu are the only one. i do the samething. Both of my Originals are worn at my natural waist.

Natural waist....unnatural waist.....

You say natural waist and you think I know what you are talking about. :confused:

I once had an argument with my mother about that when I was a little kid. She was trying to help me pick out pants and she said your waist is HERE and she yanks the pants all the way up to my navel. I told her I don't know what you are thinking, it's my body and my waist is down HERE and I put the pants back down on my hips.

As a kid I had no belly so they always fell down there anyway so it made sense to me. Besides, I just tried this the other day and there's NO WAY I can wear my pants up at my navel. Well....not and have room for my anatomy.

So....when people talk about their "natural" waist I really wonder what sort of natural they are talking about. Only with a kilt can I feel comfortable exploring the "unnatural" waist up around my navel.

[NewKilt]

There are not really any "rules" when it comes to kilt length (excluding military organizations, or other organizations that require a certain length). Matt Newsome of the Scottish Tartans Museum has an excellent article for first time kilt wearers that includes what you might call "generally accepted kilts lengths." This ranges from mid-knee to an inch or so above the knee. This would be for traditional Scottish Kilts.

As Ron said, we are all proportioned differently. I suggest selecting were you want to wear the top of the waist band, and measuring down from that point to wear you want the hem to hit. You'll see lots of pictures of Utilikilts and Amerikilts with the hem covering the entire knee cap. In fact, as I recall the measuring instructions for the Utilikilt is to measure to the bottom of the knee. But that doesn't mean you have to go by that guideline. On my Utilikilts I prefer top of the knee, and wearing the waist band a bit lower than a traditional kilt. For me that means a 23 inch length. My traditionals hit at the top of the knee with a 24 inch length (I wear them about an inch higher on the waist than my UK's). If I wore the non-traditionals as low on the waist as you see in many pictures, I would look like torso man.

It really comes down to your personal preference.

Darrell

[arrogcow]

There are not really any "rules" when it comes to kilt length (excluding military organizations, or other organizations that require a certain length).

It really comes down to your personal preference.

There seem to be many who would like there to be rules though. For instance, many here would say my tank is too long On the other hand it was fitted to me in the shop of Thomas Gordon and Son in Glasgow, so who is wrong, the kilt maker or the opinion of many kilt wearers? I don't know.

Anyway, it does sometimes come down to the person doing the fitting. This weekend I worked a UK booth, and I always say to the customer that mid to top knee is the "Traditional" place to wear a kilt, but it depends on wearers comfort (and a lot of guys want a little more length to"hide" their legs). However, one of the other guys was saying that he likes his at the bottom of his knee, and that since they were casual kilts, the rules need not apply. So basically "you pays your money and you takes your chances". I'd say get what feels right to you.

BTW, we did get a girl in a micro this weekend, but it was longer than what she wore in, so I'm not sure that it counts as a victory.

Adam

[pbpersson]

(and a lot of guys want a little more length to"hide" their legs).

Well....the one thing that keeps going through my mind is that if I am kneeling I don't want to be kneeling on my kilt and grinding it into the dirt or the grass...

[mudd]

Well....the one thing that keeps going through my mind is that if I am kneeling I don't want to be kneeling on my kilt and grinding it into the dirt or the grass...

Exactly the way I have always looked at it. A proper Kilt should be just long enough that it doesn’t quite touch the ground when you are kneeling. Works for me.

[Kilted_John]

I've always worn my kilts at the traditional "natural" waist height. Can't stand to wear them as if I'm wearing a pair of jeans. Even so, due to my height (5'7"), a short (21.5") is too long. Covers most of my kneecaps. Once had a 42M Nightwatch shortened to the XS (Extra-Short - 20") length. Fit properly. Came to the top of my kneecaps and looked right. Most of the people @ the shop thought it was too short, but they seemed to forget that I had been wearing traditionals for three years prior, so I was used to the shorter length. So, next time I order a UK, it'll be an extra-short. I might even send in my black survival for shortening as well, since it's just a little too long at 21.5". In fact, I'll be doing that on Wednesday. Maybe have'em redo the repairs to the outer apron, where the material has worn through, while they're at it.

-J