WWII leggings (gaiters) for hiking

[Oddern]

Tobus, They look great. how waterresistant do you think they are?
Skål!

[macwilkin]

I always heard them as Puttees not leggings.

No, puttees, as Jim mentioned, are wound around the leg, like a bandage. In fact, the word originates from the Hindu word patti, or strip of cloth. The American "legging" is really a gaiter, also as Jim mentioned.

T.

[Tobus]

Tobus, They look great. how waterresistant do you think they are?
Skål!

The material itself is stiff heavy canvas, so I'm sure it is very water resistant. As for the construction of the leggings, well, I wouldn't go wading through knee-deep water and expect my socks to stay dry. They just aren't meant to provide that level of protection. But you could probably slosh through shallow creeks and puddles and such, and the water won't soak through.

But I would guess that they would be perfectly suitable in snow. As long as they cover the tops of your boots and are worn properly (including wearing the correct size*), I don't see how moisture could possibly get in. But like any gaiter, it is not a water-tight seal where it meets your boot.

*A quick note on size: apparently this is a complicated matter with respect to military surplus leggings. The army leggings used a different sizing scheme than navy/marine leggings. I happen to have very skinny lower legs with puny calves that only measure 14" around, so I got the smallest leggings available (size 1R). It is very important to get the right size. If they are too small for your leg, there will be a gap at the outside where they lace up. If they are too big, you won't be able to lace them tight. Either way, ill-fitting leggings will not afford the intended level of protection.

[macwilkin]

The material itself is stiff heavy canvas, so I'm sure it is very water resistant. As for the construction of the leggings, well, I wouldn't go wading through knee-deep water and expect my socks to stay dry. They just aren't meant to provide that level of protection. But you could probably slosh through shallow creeks and puddles and such, and the water won't soak through.

But I would guess that they would be perfectly suitable in snow. As long as they cover the tops of your boots and are worn properly (including wearing the correct size*), I don't see how moisture could possibly get in. But like any gaiter, it is not a water-tight seal where it meets your boot.

*A quick note on size: apparently this is a complicated matter with respect to military surplus leggings. The army leggings used a different sizing scheme than navy/marine leggings. I happen to have very skinny lower legs with puny calves that only measure 14" around, so I got the smallest leggings available (size 1R). It is very important to get the right size. If they are too small for your leg, there will be a gap at the outside where they lace up. If they are too big, you won't be able to lace them tight. Either way, ill-fitting leggings will not afford the intended level of protection.

Trust me -- as someone who has spent many a weekend wearing the Spanish-American War equivalent, canvas leggings are not that water-resistant. They're really designed more to keep things out of your boots and to reduce wear & tear on trousers. If they are not properly maintained, they will mildew very quickly. There's a reason why the AEF quickly adopted the British puttee after arriving in France in 1917.

T.

[skauwt]

or a good pair of half chaps ,i use a pair of half chaps when working in wet conditions

[Lallans]

Yeah, they're leggings, although some would call them gaiters or puttees. Puttees are actually wound around the lower leg, I believe.

Now you know why they were used: they work great. Even Boy Scouts wore them in the old days (before my time) for the same reason. Tromping about in the woods require something like that for best effect.

BTW, they really do look pretty smart.

British and Canadian puttees were/are specially made strips of material that were/are wound around the legs in an ascending spiral fashion. They used to be commmon surplus items here, probably because no one could come up with another use for them so they stayed on the shelves and in warehouses. The US items shown may have been called puttees in the US but if so I don't think they would have been considered those anywhere elso

[azwildcat96]

Another option for lower leg protection while hiking would be these:

http://snakeguardz.com/snakeguardz.htm

They are also not waterproof, but will keep you safe from things that poke, stick or bite!

[macwilkin]

British and Canadian puttees were/are specially made strips of material that were/are wound around the legs in an ascending spiral fashion. They used to be commmon surplus items here, probably because no one could come up with another use for them so they stayed on the shelves and in warehouses. The US items shown may have been called puttees in the US but if so I don't think they would have been considered those anywhere elso

See my post above. They were always called leggings. US puttees issued in WWI are of the same animal as Commonwealth issue puttees.

T.

[wildrover]

Semantically speaking...you might feel quite gay while wearing your new leggings...which could simply mean that you're very happy to have acquired a new pair of gaiters, or it could mean something else entirely. Language changes over the years...technically, leggings, colloquially, gaiters.

Functionally, those gaiters look sturdy, and they match up with the UK...good find! Do they add ankle support, or just provide some protection? Anyway, hard to beat 25$, and I suspect you can make them reasonably water resistant.

[macwilkin]

Semantically speaking...you might feel quite gay while wearing your new leggings...which could simply mean that you're very happy to have acquired a new pair of gaiters, or it could mean something else entirely. Language changes over the years...technically, leggings, colloquially, gaiters.

Except when you're talking US Army dress regulations.

T.