"But I Don't Have Enough Money!"

[Bugbear]

I bought an eight yard, wool, Stillwater kilt, and have been going about making alterations in it to bring it closer to traditional construction. These things take me a long time to do. This is how I am learning about traditional kilt construction.

When I do have that kilt made up in my tartan, I will know what to ask a kilt maker to make sure the kilt maker is up to par. I will also know things about the traditional kilt that one could only know by taking one apart, or putting one together. I should also be able to inspect that kilt, made in my tartan, and tell whether it is made properly, or if I need to have the kilt maker fix something.

[Riverkilt]

I have owned 12 USK Kilts semi-trads including a U.S. Army tartan.

I have owned 11 hand sewn wool kilts.

There IS a difference....apples/oranges - roses/orchids all nice but a definate difference

[Nick the DSM]

One must do what one can.

In my perspective, I'm not getting a tank because right now it is too expensive, I'm still growing(a little), and also some classes I have in school might not be good ex: auto tech.

[Scotus]

I have a USA Kilts US Army tartan semi-traditional. I would put the quality of work in this kilt against any hand sewn tank. It is not hand sewn but the craftsman(woman)ship is very high.

People, continuing to bring up your defense of non-traditional kilts in the Traditional Kilts section of the forum is taking us down a rabbit hole. This is not what the topic is about. The discussion was supposed to be about saving for a traditional kilt rather than buying a PV or Utilikilt, or at least using that as an excuse for not buying a traditional kilt. I hear this in the forum a lot. If you want to wear these, go ahead. There are other sections in this forum where you can post on how great they are; this isn't one of them.

Lets not degrade the quality of many of the non-traditional kilts by calling them cheap.

By "cheap," I merely meant inexpensive.

[Nighthawk]

I'm afraid I would have to disagree with you, JelicoCat. I would rather see a person NOT wear a kilt than wear an inferior product. Step up to the plate, man, and wear the proper thing! Do your research first; ask questions; save if necessary; but I just think it is a mistake to go down the road you are advocating. The money you would save by not buying a "starter kilt" is most of the cost of a traditional kilt.

Kind regards,
JSFMjr.

No... The money you save is only a fraction. And if (A) you want to wear the kilt and work in a manufacturing environment, you are not going to be wearing a $700 kilt there have kids who think they should be fed, housed, get Christmas gifts, etc, you probably won't be able to get a $700 kilt. YES- different budgets have different priorities. I wear mostly Stillwaters because I cannot afford anything else. I don't wear the acrylics. I wear the wool heavies. I do have one tank on order, ad do you think that I will ever wear it to my job? I work in a machine shop. I will continue to wear SWK's for that reason. I can deal with my $120 SWK getting torn. I'll patch it and get over it. But my $700 Colorado tartan kilt? I think I'll take a pass on the whole patching a rip on that one. Again, there are all kinds of other perspectives. Yes, I own (or shortly will) a nice handmade kilt. Not everyone needs- or wants- one. Not all budgets can support one. What everyone in this thread is missing is that different families have different priorities. The arguement "I can't afford one" is very valid. I can't afford to wear $700 tradkilts every day, but I can afford the less expensive variety.

[macwilkin]

No... The money you save is only a fraction. And if (A) you want to wear the kilt and work in a manufacturing environment, you are not going to be wearing a $700 kilt there have kids who think they should be fed, housed, get Christmas gifts, etc, you probably won't be able to get a $700 kilt. YES- different budgets have different priorities. I wear mostly Stillwaters because I cannot afford anything else. I don't wear the acrylics. I wear the wool heavies. I do have one tank on order, ad do you think that I will ever wear it to my job? I work in a machine shop. I will continue to wear SWK's for that reason. I can deal with my $120 SWK getting torn. I'll patch it and get over it. But my $700 Colorado tartan kilt? I think I'll take a pass on the whole patching a rip on that one. Again, there are all kinds of other perspectives. Yes, I own (or shortly will) a nice handmade kilt. Not everyone needs- or wants- one. Not all budgets can support one. What everyone in this thread is missing is that different families have different priorities. The arguement "I can't afford one" is very valid. I can't afford to wear $700 tradkilts every day, but I can afford the less expensive variety.

Again, though (respectfully) -- you're making the assumption that everyone has the same priorities when it comes to their kilts. I do not wear either of my kilts on a regular basis, only to special events and functions of a Scottish nature, and an occasional lecture/program for the local library or a civil group, so I'm not as worried about damaging my kilt as others might, because I do not need it for everyday wear.

That's not to say that you're wrong and I'm right; quite the contrary. Horses for courses and all that.

Todd

[Scotus]

If it really doesn't fit into your budget, I understand that; however, this discussion is directed to the person who wants to wear a traditional kilt, can save for it, but might be tempted to buy a non-traditional kilt instead, thinking simply about getting a kilt now, for less money.

[Monkey@Arms]

People, continuing to bring up your defense of non-traditional kilts in the Traditional Kilts section of the forum is taking us down a rabbit hole. This is not what the topic is about. The discussion was supposed to be about saving for a traditional kilt rather than buying a PV or Utilikilt, or at least using that as an excuse for not buying a traditional kilt. I hear this in the forum a lot. If you want to wear these, go ahead. There are other sections in this forum where you can post on how great they are; this isn't one of them.



By "cheap," I merely meant inexpensive.

Scotus,

Perhaps part of the problem here is not everyone having the same definition of "traditional." To some a USAK semi-trad meets their definition of traditional kilt, in as much its in the traditional style: e.g. 8 yard, three buckle, tartan, traditional cut, made to measure, etc. To others it does not, because its machine sewn, and not made of wool.

Your certainly entitled to your definition, but I suspect part of the crossed communication here is that not everyone sees these things the same way.

Best regards,

Jake

[Friday]

By "cheap," I merely meant inexpensive.

In the post starting this thread it was said that "buying cheaper, less quality kilts" in this statement it appears the cheap and lower quality were related. I must have misunderstood this statement.

I'm sorry that I misunderstood what was written.

[Highland Logan]

In the post starting this thread it was said that "buying cheaper, less quality kilts" in this statement it appears the cheap and lower quality were related. I must have misunderstood this statement.

I'm sorry that I misunderstood what was written.

Come on now Friday, please use the quote for the whole sentence.

This phrase is often used by people as an excuse for buying cheaper, less quality kilts; that is, not a traditional, 16 oz, eight yard kilt.

It may not be the Bairds prose.. but it's plain it see Scotus' intent. And intent is always to most important part of the conversation.

Frank