Jump to content


Photo

Fusible vs Sewn-In Interfacing


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#19 Der Zuschneider

Der Zuschneider

    Master

  • Senior Professional
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:TX, Houston
  • Interests:- German Cutting Systems
    - Modern Tailoring by German Semi-Traditional Standards

Posted 17 October 2014 - 11:25 AM

 

Are you suggesting manufacturing with a hand padded lapel and a fused chest/front? Won't the fronts look less shapely than if they were padded?

 

 

The foreparts would be fused and a chest canvas would sit on top, this practice has been going on for years.

 

The fronts still could be iron shaped. Today cutting is so accurate, that you don’t need much shaping. If you use a lapel dart, you create enough chest already. The shortening of the bridle is still mandatory also the shortening in front of the armhole. Some light stretching of the chest does not destroy the fusing. The fusing today is only 30g, almost like nothing. It gives the fronts an accurate stay and quietness. I remember, in the 80thies, we had terrible thick Panzer fusing, LOL.


www.berlinbespokesuits.com

#20 MANSIE WAUCH

MANSIE WAUCH

    Pro

  • Professional
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 686 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North West, England

Posted 18 October 2014 - 05:29 AM

As someone who was there at the beginning of the man made fabrics and fusible interfacing's for the tailoring trade. I can tell you it was very hit and miss. The multiple tailors may have been developing techniques for the interfacing’s, with the floating chest pieces and fused break lines, but the smaller boys were trying to fuse canvas's with the tailors iron, without any knowledge of timing or pressure to give to the fusible canvas. The results of all this haphazardness could be seen when someone sent a suit to the cleaners, the fusible interfacing’s just separated and left terrible ridges down the front of the garments. Collars were being cut for the first time with a separate stand and fall, and both pieces were being fused with stiff canvas (the result can be seen on the suit in the picture with the stiff lapels.) The earlier fusible canvas was a gummed resin which, after a certain length of time (if the canvas was left unused) would turn into a powder in places,(when you unrolled the canvas, it was like shaking off, dandruff!)

 

As for the man made fabrics. One advert in the late 50's early 60's, showed a man in a smart suit, diving into a swimming pool and swimming the length of the pool. Upon emerging from the pool, the water was shed from the suit, and it looked as pristine as it was before he entered the water.

The earlier 'Terylene' suits were very stiff and hard to handle. There was one product 'Acrylan' which was as stiff as cardboard when the suit was finished. If you held a piece of the fabric in your hand and held a lighted match to it, it burned and dripped like tar! Of course, this was in the early days. As these problems were discovered, things changed and techniques were developed to improve things, but never to the standard of the wool and worsted fabrics from the satanic mills!


  • tailleuse, cperry and Henry Hall like this

#21 Der Zuschneider

Der Zuschneider

    Master

  • Senior Professional
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:TX, Houston
  • Interests:- German Cutting Systems
    - Modern Tailoring by German Semi-Traditional Standards

Posted 20 October 2014 - 10:26 AM

Early fusing time must had been terrible. Fusing is science today plus a floating canvas even more work. Fusing today is strechable in all directions and still has a rolling effect around the body, when using in the right direction, plus is only 30g/m2. Can only be used under 10oz.


www.berlinbespokesuits.com

#22 greger

greger

    Master

  • Senior Professional
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,122 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington, USA

Posted 20 October 2014 - 11:50 AM

What kind do you buy?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users