Questions About the United States Navy Peacoat

[LaymanX]

X-post from another forum. My unissued 1962 USN peacoat with midnight navy kersey wool. It's super stiff still and very thick and smooth to the touch.

 

[Peacoat]

From what I can tell from the pics, it looks like a good fit. Hope you are able to fit a sweater underneath, living way up there in the frozen northland. Congratulations on a good score.

 

[LaymanX]

Thanks for all your help again! I'm not a sweater person so I don't size for it. The most I'll wear is a thick flannel shirt. That said, I have a Schott Snorkel Parka and a Canada Goose Heli Arctic parka when it gets crazy cold.

 

[Peacoat]

If you aren't a sweater type person, then you might find a Filson 24 oz. 100% wool vest more to your liking with a peacoat. I often wear the Filson vest and a Pendleton wool shirt when the temps get into the single digits. Along with a thick high quality polypropylene undershirt, I find the peacoat gets the job done for that temperate range. By itself, or with just a sweater, a peacoat isn't enough when the temps are that low. The key is to fill in the space between one's body and the inner lining of the peacoat.

Stay warm, PC.

 

[Doctor Damage]

^ Thanks again for accumulating too many of these old pea coats, since I was able to use the tag guide to good effect this morning. I saw a coat on e-Bay and the tag looked weird and I doubted the seller's claim of 1949, but the tag matches your guide so the seller is right!

 

[wquiles]

^ Thanks again for accumulating too many of these old pea coats, since I was able to use the tag guide to good effect this morning. I saw a coat on e-Bay and the tag looked weird and I doubted the seller's claim of 1949, but the tag matches your guide so the seller is right!

+1

My two Peacoats were dated with PC's valuable information as well

 

[Peacoat]

^ Thanks again for accumulating too many of these old pea coats, since I was able to use the tag guide to good effect this morning. I saw a coat on e-Bay and the tag looked weird and I doubted the seller's claim of 1949, but the tag matches your guide so the seller is right!

When the seller is accurate as to the date, it means he has read my dating guide, or the peacoat belonged to a family member, and the date of issue is known: "This coat belonged to my Father, and he went in the Navy in 1949."

 

[Doctor Damage]

USCG coat, made of wool instead of the blend. I just bought this actually. Doesn't seem to match the other styles, so perhaps it's a sample or something for a production run that never happened. Anyway it should be slightly more interesting than wearing the usual black pea coat!

This came today and it's awesome. I got this coat since it's wool and not the thin 50/50 cloth with furry liner of the normal USCG coats. On the other hand, it's an oddball since the details of this coat don't match the standard USCG coats, at least based on the few examples I've seen. In any case, this coat is super-heavy and solidly constructed and once I get it cleaned it should be a delight to own. The colour is a darkish medium blue.

I'm bidding on an 80s USN reefer right now and hopefully I get that too.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Bidding just closed on a WW2 pea coat on e-Bay and it sold for a frightening GBP 368.00 after 20 bids! The tag was removed but the sizing appeared to be a 42 based on measurements (pits 23, shoulder 19.75, sleeve 25.5).

 

[Will015]

Even if you have a short torso (which actually means short legs, not short torso) then you're better off getting a proper length jacket that doesn't need alterations.

How does having a short torso mean I have short legs?

I have a feeling that a long size coat would have the nipped waste too low on my body and might uncomfortably push the shoulders of the coat up like frankenstein unless I went with a larger size. And even with a larger size the rear vent would be too low on my body. I guess my body is just out of proportion. I have a problem with short sleeves and long bodies on most clothing.

I understand that I will have a wear line wear the end of the cuff used to be but on this particular coat I don't think it would be that big a deal to me. The coat is quite worn and probably had been used more for it's utilitarian warmth rather than it's looks throughout it's life. If I lengthened the sleeves I'd use it similarly. It's definitely in no shape to be used as a dress coat and it's not like it's the rarest thing in the world. The navy must have had many thousands of size 38R peacoats made during WWII.

BTW, I picked the coat up for $35.

 

[Doctor Damage]

How does having a short torso mean I have short legs?

I have a feeling that a long size coat would have the nipped waste too low on my body and might uncomfortably push the shoulders of the coat up like frankenstein unless I went with a larger size. And even with a larger size the rear vent would be too low on my body. I guess my body is just out of proportion. I have a problem with short sleeves and long bodies on most clothing.

I understand that I will have a wear line wear the end of the cuff used to be but on this particular coat I don't think it would be that big a deal to me. The coat is quite worn and probably had been used more for it's utilitarian warmth rather than it's looks throughout it's life. If I lengthened the sleeves I'd use it similarly. It's definitely in no shape to be used as a dress coat and it's not like it's the rarest thing in the world. The navy must have had many thousands of size 38R peacoats made during WWII.

BTW, I picked the coat up for $35.

Sounds like you might as well alter it, if you think it will work out, and you don't mind the wear line being visible. If you're going to wear it hard then it would be better to wear a heavily used coat then a pristine or near-new example. I doubt your body is out of proportion, although few of us really fit the "average" shape. The reason I made the short legs comment is because I read somewhere that most people have similar length torsos, but it's the limbs which are different lengths... which is why really tall men and really short women can still comfortably make babies.

Based on e-Bay listings, the navy definitely made thousands of 38R peacoats but only a couple dozen 42R coats and only two 44R coats! lol

 

[Will015]

Wow, I new the kids in the uniforms were smaller back then but didn't realize sizes were topping out at 44R. Hell, my wife works out with a few Navy divers now that are squatting 400+ pounds while wearing oxygen depriving masks. Though, I guess people were more naturally/work trained back then and didn't have the weight training/nutritional knowledge or availability of massive amounts of protein that is available today.

As far as my proportions go, they are absolutely out of whack. Back when I was a youngin' in school we were were measuring parts of our body and showing similarities between them. My arm to height ratio was the anomaly that we had to throw out my arms were 10% longer than my height. I guess I'm just closer to the apes. At least that would explain why I'm always throwing ***** material at things.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Wow, I new the kids in the uniforms were smaller back then but didn't realize sizes were topping out at 44R. Hell, my wife works out with a few Navy divers now that are squatting 400+ pounds while wearing oxygen depriving masks. Though, I guess people were more naturally/work trained back then and didn't have the weight training/nutritional knowledge or availability of massive amounts of protein that is available today.

I was joking about the sizes, but the bigger sizes don't show up much and people were smaller in ye olden dayes. I think it was mostly nutritional. Most people in those days had to walk more if they lived in a city and a much higher proportion of jobs were labour or active. Even these days I know from experience that you can stay relatively thin if you have a job that doesn't let you sit down much. Most people have a job that means sitting in a chair for 8 hours which is terrible and a major reason why obesity is a big problem, no pun intended.

As far as my proportions go, they are absolutely out of whack. Back when I was a youngin' in school we were were measuring parts of our body and showing similarities between them. My arm to height ratio was the anomaly that we had to throw out my arms were 10% longer than my height. I guess I'm just closer to the apes. At least that would explain why I'm always throwing ***** material at things.

LOL

 

[Spoonbelly]

When the seller is accurate as to the date, it means he has read my dating guide, or the peacoat belonged to a family member, and the date of issue is known: "This coat belonged to my Father, and he went in the Navy in 1949."

I have come across a few postings on ebay where the seller said that the coat was issued to them in whatever year and the tag of the coat was older then the time when the person was issued that coat. There must be times when the Navy had overstock for certain years.

 

[Spoonbelly]

Bidding just closed on a WW2 pea coat on e-Bay and it sold for a frightening GBP 368.00 after 20 bids! The tag was removed but the sizing appeared to be a 42 based on measurements (pits 23, shoulder 19.75, sleeve 25.5).

oD

Do you know how much that is in US money? There aren't that many size 42 WWII coats usually. Most of them are 38s and 40s, with a few 36s here and there. Let's face it - people were a little smaller, and thinner back then.

 

[Spoonbelly]

Wow, I new the kids in the uniforms were smaller back then but didn't realize sizes were topping out at 44R. Hell, my wife works out with a few Navy divers now that are squatting 400+ pounds while wearing oxygen depriving masks. Though, I guess people were more naturally/work trained back then and didn't have the weight training/nutritional knowledge or availability of massive amounts of protein that is available today

I somehow lucked out and found a size 46 WWII coat on ebay and it's in mint condition. I think I paid $160.00 for it.
As far as my proportions go, they are absolutely out of whack. Back when I was a youngin' in school we were were measuring parts of our body and showing similarities between them. My arm to height ratio was the anomaly that we had to throw out my arms were 10% longer than my height. I guess I'm just closer to the apes. At least that would explain why I'm always throwing ***** material at things.

I somehow found a WWII coat size 46 on ebay and it is in mint condition. I think I paid $160.00 for it.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Bidding just closed on a WW2 pea coat on e-Bay and it sold for a frightening GBP 368.00 after 20 bids! The tag was removed but the sizing appeared to be a 42 based on measurements (pits 23, shoulder 19.75, sleeve 25.5).

Do you know how much that is in US money? There aren't that many size 42 WWII coats usually. Most of them are 38s and 40s, with a few 36s here and there. Let's face it - people were a little smaller, and thinner back then.

The website was telling me that it was CAD$605. I don't know what the USD would be, but certainly on the high side of $550+. Granted, the coat was in near-perfect condition (except the tag had been cut off!), but that's still too much money. Perhaps because it was a UK auction that it sold so high; as you Americans know over here you can still find them in thrift stores, etc, although not very often.

 

[Peacoat]

I have come across a few postings on ebay where the seller said that the coat was issued to them in whatever year and the tag of the coat was older then the time when the person was issued that coat. There must be times when the Navy had overstock for certain years.

Yes, no question about it. The contractors would make the coats, furnish them to the Navy and the Navy would issue as needed. I once saw a 1953 peacoat, as best as I remember, that was issued in the early to mid 60s. That is extreme, but it did happen.

 

[Doctor Damage]

Bidding just closed on a WW2 pea coat on e-Bay and it sold for a frightening GBP 368.00 after 20 bids! The tag was removed but the sizing appeared to be a 42 based on measurements (pits 23, shoulder 19.75, sleeve 25.5).

Here are photos of that coat that went for such a large amount of money.

 

[Spoonbelly]

Here are photos of that coat that went for such a large amount of money.

I noticed something about this coat. It has 10 buttons as WWII coats do, but it also has two rows of stitching near the cuffs as postwar coats do. I've never seen a WWII coat like that before. Usually they have only 1 row of stitching a few inches above the cuff.