Question about a box pleat

[Hamo]

Hello everyone,

I have a question about my kilt that I recently got back from my kilt maker after having some alterations done to it.
I sent it away to have it taken out 4" at the waist. When it arrived back to me I noticed that the box pleat that precedes the under apron has shrunk in width from two setts to about one sett width, I suspect that my kilt maker has taken some tartan from that box pleat to create more knife pleats at the back to increase the waist size but I'm not quite sure. Is this a common practice when altering the size of kilts?

[The Wizard of BC]

Just for clarification - you now have a kilt that is a hybrid with some box pleats and some knife pleats?

Do you have any photos?

[Hamo]

Just for clarification - you now have a kilt that is a hybrid with some box pleats and some knife pleats?

Do you have any photos?

I have circled the part of the kilt I am talking about in the attached photo.

[Barb T]

When a kilt is let out, it's typically enlarged only in the apron and underapron. There just simply isn't enough fabric "stored" in the deep pleat next to the apron and the inverted (box) pleat next to the underapron to add extra pleats (and you'd need two pleats if the kilt is pleated to the sett). The way a kiltmaker typically lets out a kilt to maintain the center front stripe is to take fabric from both sides of the apron and underapron symmetrically. If you had your kilt let out 4", that means that the fabric for the facing on the outside edges of the apron and underapron would be 2" smaller, and the inverted (box) pleat and the deep pleat next to the apron would now each be 2" less deep. If the inverted pleat is roughly 1 sett smaller, it's possible that the kiltmaker took the whole 4" from the inverted (box) pleat next to the underapron, because it doesn't really matter if the underapron stays centered or not - no one sees it. Without knowing the size of the sett, I don't know if that's the answer or not.

I suppose it's possible that, if the kilt were pleated to the stripe, the kiltmaker might have chosen to take one sett from the inverted pleats to add one pleat next to the underapron in order to cut down on how much had to be added to the apron and underapron. But that wouldn't work if the kilt were pleated to the sett.

[Steve Ashton]

Hamo,

In the diagram you show you are looking at the inside of a kilt.
The circled part is the deep and reverse pleat behind the apron.
The kilt in your diagram is knife pleated.

Can we please see a photo of your altered kilt from the outside next to the aprons showing the pleats.

[Barb T]

Steve - the part that's circled is next to the underapron, not the apron (the diagram calls the underapron the "inside apron"; it calls the apron the "outside apron"). The "box pleat" he's talking about is the inverted (box) pleat next to the underapron. The kilt itself is knife-pleated.

[Steve Ashton]

That's what I just said

[Hamo]

When a kilt is let out, it's typically enlarged only in the apron and underapron. There just simply isn't enough fabric "stored" in the deep pleat next to the apron and the inverted (box) pleat next to the underapron to add extra pleats (and you'd need two pleats if the kilt is pleated to the sett). The way a kiltmaker typically lets out a kilt to maintain the center front stripe is to take fabric from both sides of the apron and underapron symmetrically. If you had your kilt let out 4", that means that the fabric for the facing on the outside edges of the apron and underapron would be 2" smaller, and the inverted (box) pleat and the deep pleat next to the apron would now each be 2" less deep. If the inverted pleat is roughly 1 sett smaller, it's possible that the kiltmaker took the whole 4" from the inverted (box) pleat next to the underapron, because it doesn't really matter if the underapron stays centered or not - no one sees it. Without knowing the size of the sett, I don't know if that's the answer or not.

I suppose it's possible that, if the kilt were pleated to the stripe, the kiltmaker might have chosen to take one sett from the inverted pleats to add one pleat next to the underapron in order to cut down on how much had to be added to the apron and underapron. But that wouldn't work if the kilt were pleated to the sett.

From the sounds of it this explanation makes sense, my kilt is pleated to stripe. I should probably also mention that my kilt is a bit funny in that it's not constructed out of one continuous length of tartan, rather my kilt maker took about 4 yards of double-with tartan off a bolt, cut it down the middle and sewed it together to make 8 yards. When I had it sent for alterations I also found a moth hole on an outside pleat at the back that I asked them to remove and I believe the way they did it was by cutting that pleat out and sewing the fabric back together.
That could explain why the inverted pleat next to the under apron has reduced in size.

[Barb T]

This is not an odd way to make a kilt. Virtually all tartan is sold double width and most kilts are "one-offs". In other words, there would be no reason for a kiltmaker to buy 8 yards of double-width tartan unless he/she had to make two kilts. Virtually all the kilts I make have a hidden join in the back for that reason.

There are other ways of fixing a moth hole, and your kiltmaker may have rewoven the hole with threads pulled from the tartan. You can determine whether a pleat was removed by looking for a seam - if there is a seam where the pleat was removed, that's what was done. But honestly? That would require _a lot_ of reconstruction (removing all the canvas, stabilizer, and steeking in the back of the kilt), and they should have charge you a boat load for the alteration!!

[Hamo]

This is not an odd way to make a kilt. Virtually all tartan is sold double width and most kilts are "one-offs". In other words, there would be no reason for a kiltmaker to buy 8 yards of double-width tartan unless he/she had to make two kilts. Virtually all the kilts I make have a hidden join in the back for that reason.

There are other ways of fixing a moth hole, and your kiltmaker may have rewoven the hole with threads pulled from the tartan. You can determine whether a pleat was removed by looking for a seam - if there is a seam where the pleat was removed, that's what was done. But honestly? That would require _a lot_ of reconstruction (removing all the canvas, stabilizer, and steeking in the back of the kilt), and they should have charge you a boat load for the alteration!!

Well, it didn't come cheap that's for sure, they did say that they had to take the kilt apart somewhat and that moth hole was about a 1/4" in size. Either way, I'm not unhappy with the job done, I just noticed that the inverted pleat was a lot smaller in width and depth after the alteration and was curious as to whether that's normal to see from an altered kilt depending on what needed to be done.