Making do, length-wise...

[MacTavishOfJapan]

If you are talking about a traditional 'tank' then I'm not sure there is a standard length, just the correct length. In my opinion traditional kilts worn too long or too short look silly. You want the bottom of the kilt to be around the (upper) knee.

Welcome from Japan none the less!

[cavscout]

It will definitely "feel" different but it will not be uncomfortable at all, and once you get used to not having the kilt touch your rib cage you won't even notice it

My philosophy is decide where you want the bottom of the kilt to be and measure up from there to determine the length of your kilt. Some would say pick the position for the top of the kilt first and measure down but mens fashion has been so different from kilts that men have no idea what is a comfortable height for their kilt compared to a low riding baggy pair of pants.

I know the look I want so prefer the bottom edge to be within 1" of the top of, but not below, the knee so I measure up from there to whatever height allows me to bend comfortably with a belt on.

[JBfromBS]

I think what he might be asking is about some "off-the-rack" kilts, like Stillwater, etc. that usually come in a 24" length. I say yes, by all means order one and try it! You can wear it a little lower on the waist, and if it comes to somewhere around the top of the knee you have a great deal! Of course if it still too short, you can always return it (just remember not to take the basting stitch out). If you are custom ordering one, of course go with your measured length, not some arbitrary "standard" length.

Joe

[Schultz]

I have a similar problem. My "ideal" kilt length is 26" as well. My USAK casual is 24" long and is wonderful, but it's also made to be worn at the hip. I am, however, reticent about getting one in that length in, say, a SWK, at this point. I don't want to drop $100 or so on a kilt to find that I don't like the way it looks and/or feels.

One of us is just going to have to bite the bullet and do it.