Category Archives: US WWII Uniforms

How to determine uniform sizes

XXL WWII Field Jacket! RARE!!! Measures 50″!!!

One can look online, especially ebay, at any given time and find one or more vintage jackets listed with the actual chest measure advertised as the “size” by select sellers.

I’m sure they’re not hoping to snag some unsuspecting person who will pay a premium price for what is actually a much smaller garment, who will be too embarrassed to return it- that is, if they even allow returns. Such mistakes are most certainly completely innocent…

Why do such listings annoy the hell out of me? Because the measure of the chest does not equal the size of the chest. It’s not even close. This is due to the fact that all shirts, jackets and coats are oversized to allow freedom of movement. If you put on a jacket that measures the same as your chest, you’ll find yourself in a straight jacket.

In order to determine the size of a coat or jacket with missing or illegible size markings, the first step is to determine the chest measure. This is very simple; zip or button the front of the garment, lay it flat, then measure the distance from armpit to armpit. Double this number and one will have the circumference of the chest. Then subtract the amount of ease for that style of coat or jacket.

“Ease” is the amount of extra room built in to garments, typically tops, to allow freedom of movement. Most cold weather coats and jackets have 6-10 inches of ease. Thus, their chests will measure that much more than the stated size. In the US military documents they state that “garment is cut X inches over the garment size.” For simplicity, I simply say “+X inches”.

For example, M41 Jackets have 7 inches of ease so a size 34 will measure 41″. Thus an M41 with a chest of 51″ is clearly not an XXL. It’s a 44. Original shown below:

An actual 44R (shown) measures 51″.

Original M43 Field Jacket, 370D, size 34R. Chest measure is 44 inches.

Later production M43 Jackets, HBT Jackets or Raincoats will be +10″ since they’re intended to be worn over other jackets or liners. Therefore, those will get by on someone who typically requires a jacket 1-2 sizes larger if they only wear a shirt underneath. So a 2nd pattern size 36 HBT jacket will usually work on people who wear 38 or 40…but it’s not going to fly on a guy who needs a 44 much less a 48.

Conversely, a few tops have notably less ease- Service Coats, M42 Jump Jackets and German Feldblusen run 3-4 inches over the marked size. US overcoats oddly are only +5″.

So, when you see a coat or jacket being pimped with the chest measurement being represented as it’s actual size, don’t fall for it. It’s false advertising at its finest.

TM 10-265: Click on the photo for a link to a pdf of the appendix from TM 10-265 on how to determine the sizes of garments without legible markings. This is from the QMC manual on salvaging clothing.

This was written by the US Army and it’s likely to conflict with the information one finds from select militaria dealers. I know which one I consider valid.

Note: The HBT jackets in TM are the 1st pattern. 2nd pattern jackets are +10″.

Shrinkage, wear and tear, etc: Most shrinkage is in length rather than circumference. Heavily worn uniforms may lose an inch or so in the chest or waist, so one can compensate for that when trying to size such a garment. Using the tables in the TM should get you to the garments original size- at worst maybe one size off.

German WWII Uniforms: These follow the same principle. Feldblusen (Tunics) were +10cm (about 4 inches) over the marked size. Thus, a tunic with a chest measure of 102cm is a size 92 and so forth. Greatcoats appear to have had the same amount of ease.

Most German insulated coats, parkas, smocks and jackets used a generic number system- 1, 2, 3, or sometimes 4, rather than the size in centimeters. Trousers, like the US ones, were true to size, meaning a waist size of 86 should measure 86cm.

This stuff has marks all over it!

From time to time we do get some fussing about marks, spots or other unwanted “blemishes”, typically on US fieldgear. This post is to show that many of these markings are necessary and intentional as they are part of the production process, not a flaw or error.

Nearly all gear and garments are marked after they’re cut to show the workers exactly where to place pockets, make folds, straps, sew button and eyelet holes, or to indicate layers and shades. Others appear to be lot or inspector numbers so any flaws can be traced back to their origin and fixed.

The markings are applied in a number of ways. Chalk, colored pencil, ink stamps or stencils may be used to apply them. Many of these marks, particularly the first two, will fade or rub off after the item has been used for a time. Others are more resilient and may survive for the life of the item.

Blue and red pencil marks on original MP40 pouches.
These marked the sew lines to close the cells for each magazine.

Colored pencil marks: This is one of the most common means that WWII gear and clothing were marked for assembly. One can often find traces of them on German field gear, some uniforms, and occasionally on US uniforms. The Germans seemed to have an affinity for green, blue and pink colored pencils.

Original smock with chalk marks…how can they be wrong?

Chalk marks: At times the workers used chalk rather than colored pencils. This specific thing has caused us grief from outraged customers a number of times.

All those squares, U’s, tick marks, dots, dashes and other blemishes were applied at the factory in WWII to show the workers where to sew the parts- not offend the tender sensitivities of those keeping history alive 80 years later.

Stencil marks: US fieldgear is the most common place these are found. They were applied at the same time as the “US” and other markings as this is far faster and more efficient than laying a template over each piece and tracing the design with a pencil or chalk. Being printed with the same ink as the rest of the stencils, these tend to survive even on well-worn examples. We do this too and it’s one that creates the most complaints of “there’s black chit all over my pack”.

Various stamps on the parts of original MP44 pouches.

Number/ letter stamps: These are commonly found on German gear and uniforms. When present, they’re typically 1-3 digits or a letter plus numbers “R26”. Their exact purpose is unknown, but an educated guess is that they indicate the worker or group of workers who made the parts. Others may be inspector numbers.

On a few Waffen-SS items, the manufacturer was identified by number codes, such as “933” on some smocks. This will typically only be found once, such as under a pocket flap.

Shade marks (“226”) were stamped in black ink on all the wool parts of this original WSS M41 Feldbluse to indicate the layer of fabric they were cut from. The cloth wouldn’t have been stacked 200+ layers deep- but there were likely multiple cuts on the same table being done that day, so this might represent 2nd cut, layer 26 or something similar.

Shade marks: Some German wool uniforms are shade marked which is an alternative to shade tags. Garment fabric is stacked and cut many layers deep, and several rolls of fabric may be used to make the spread, making it likely that different shades will be in the same cut.

To avoid garments being assembled with mixed shades, all parts in each layer are stamped with the number of the layer. All the pieces on completed garments should then have all matching numbers which will indicate that they all came from the same layer of cloth in the cut, and should therefore match in shade and color.

Shade tag on a original jump jacket. 09 is likely the layer, 36R the size, and the other two numbers could be any number of things. The info on the tags varies from factory to factory.

Shade Tags: Commonly called “cutter tags”, these serve the same purpose as the shade stamps above. But, in this case, a small paper tag is printed from some sort of gizmo (we’ve never found out what it was) and stapled (occasionally glued) to each part. These often have more information- such as the size of the item, the cut layer, batch number, and some others we are unsure of their meaning.

Typically found on US uniforms, they can be found on some gear. Years ago, I saw a German M44 tunic with them- they almost looked like tiny punch cards and were affixed with glue rather than staples.

Inside flap of original MP44 pouches. We assume the “CON” is the first part of “Continental” (a major rubber and tire maker) as that’s what these flap sides are made from.

Manufacturer marks: One sometimes finds the name, logo, or address of the firm that made the material. These areas are typically on the inside of garments or gear and are considered a very cool plus by collectors.

Guide marks on our cartridge belts.

Our reproductions: We do stencil the location points on our US gear as they make things so much simpler during production. We do not offer “mark free gear”. (A few have really gone ballistic over these.) Some of our German gear does have chalk or pencil marks, and we dooccasionally add some numbers to uniform parts or MP pouches just for giggles.

On a few items, such as Texled slings, I use the month and year (such as “223”) on a small stamp as my own inspection mark to ensure that all steps have been completed. This mimics those found on many original slings.

As for shade tags, I have looked around over the years to see if whatever contraption made them turns up. Wise me (the minority part of my brain) knows those would cause little but trouble due to the “huge holes” the staples would put in the uniforms…but it’d still be cool to do on some level.

The M1907 Sling

About Originals

To date, we have never acquired the original Ordnance specifications for the M1907 or BAR slings. Likewise, there is scant information online or in the numerous books on US military rifles. The best description I’ve found, albeit one paragraph, is in Joe Poyer’s book on the M1903 Springfield rifles.

So, all information posted here was gleaned from poring over originals in order to copy them as closely as possible.

The M1907 Sling was made during both World Wars. The US government has contracted limited batches postwar for ceremonial and drill rifles. It is also probably the most reproduced military sling in history- it’s impossible to say how many have been made in the last 40 years.

Variances in length of the short strap shown.

Description: The M1907 is a leather rifle sling, designed to provide a support for more accurate shooting as well as carrying the rifle.

The leather is undyed, veg tanned, and typically 8-9 ounces thick. When new, it’s very light tan, nearly white. The Army recommended using neatsfoot oil during cleaning- this, as well as exposure, sweat, powder residue, and dirt quickly darkened the leather. Heavily used examples are dark brown- a color that compares well to Crayola’s “burnt umber”.

The sling consists of two 1.25″ wide straps: the longer one, typically 48″ long, has 26 pairs of holes, and the shorter strap is 24″ inches long with 16 pairs of holes. The length of the straps varies up to 2 inches (longer or shorter) among different original slings I have in our collection/ hoard.

For a short time early in the War, the Marine Corps contracted their own M1907 slings- they had fewer holes, used mahogany leather and black thread. After several thousand were produced (50,000?) they switched back to the standard M1907 sling.

Note various shapes and locations of the adjustment holes.

The adjustment holes are spaced .5 inches apart and the pairs are 1.25 inches from one another. On most slings the holes are perfectly spaced meaning they were punched with a gang die, while a few manufacturers (I’ve only seen this on WW1 slings) made them by hand. Their shape varies- round, oval or rectangular holes have been observed.

WWI and early WWII rifles used brass hardware (left)
while most of the latter used steel (right).

The sling is adjusted via claw hooks, each of which is secured with 3 bevel headed rivets. Slings made in WW1 and early in WWII were made from brass with a chemical finish which darkens them to a dull gray or black. During 1942, brass was declared a war-critical commodity and parkerized steel hardware was substituted. Slings from both eras were used in WWII and beyond.

Like the hooks, the retaining loop (called a “D” ring in the manual) was also brass or steel.

On originals, one often finds WWII slings with brass rivets used with steel hooks. I would not be surprised if the reverse is found, or slings made with a mix of brass and steel hardware.

As for color- the brass hooks seemed to lose their finish relatively easily, which leads some enthusiasts to insist that “bare brass” is how they were made, despite this not being the case. The steel hardware varies in color from dark gray to black. Occasionally faint maker marks can be seen on the hooks.

Keepers: Each sling comes with 2 “keepers”. These are typically 5/8″ wide and hand stitched. (No machine can stitch a closed loop.)



Stitching:
The “D”-rings are stitched to one end of the short strap. The overlap is about 2″, with the edges scored, skived and split. The neatness of this varies by manufacturer. The stitching itself is usually done by machine, although hand stitching is present on some slings. The thread is a 3-cord linen, usually in a tan or gold color.

Not easy to see- note that the stamps on the two slings on the left are actually upside down.

Markings: Slings were to be marked with manufacturers name. Some WW1 slings are dated, others not, while it appears most, or all WWII slings have both.

Even on new condition slings, crisp and clear markings are quite rare on original examples that I have seen. The ones above are typically faint and very difficult to see. Boyt (not pictured) and Hickok slings tend to be more clearly marked than others. Were we to mark ours this poorly, 50% would get returned.

I think that’s it. Someday perhaps we’ll find the Ordnance spec which would be cool, but until then we’ll have to be content with this method. In all reality, when we do find the specs for a piece of US gear there’s rarely any great revelations- just a few “ah ha’s” and “cool’s”.

How to shoot- with a sling

All information here is published in How to Shoot the U.S. Army Rifle; the Infantry Journal, pp 36-pp41 (Cover photo above) link here

How to adjust the loop sling

We are now ready for the second step- correct positions.

You won’t hit the bull’s-eye every time unless you are steady. Three things control your steadiness.

The Gun Sling
Your Breathing
Your Position

The gun sling supports your arm and rifle. lt binds the rifle to your arm in a single, tight, steady unit.

There are two ways to adjust your gun sling- the Loop and the Hasty.

The Loop takes longer to fix, but it is steadier. It is used in all positions except the standing position. This is how to adjust it:

  • Place butt of rifle right thigh, barre! to right and muzzle point­. rng up.
  • Rest rifle against inside of right forearm so that both hands are free to fix sling, and loosen lower loop, as shown here.
  • Fasten it again near ehe butt swivel leaving yourself plenty of sling.
  • Adjust the upper hook until the loop has the proper length.
  • hen insert left arm through the upper loop, from right to left.

Another simple way is to twist the sling one quarter turn to the left, then insert the left arm into the loop between the D-ring and the lower keeper until the loop is around the upper arm.

How to tighten the loop

These pictures show how to tighten the loop into position on the arm.

  • Pull on both parts of sling-jockeying them until the loop and keeper are close against the arm.
  • Pull the D-ring forward and push the lower keeper and hook close against the arm to keep the loop in place.
  • If necessary, push the outer part of the sling away from you wit the thumb- tightening the sling still more.
  • Push the upper keeper down toward the hook.

A tight sling means a steady rifle

When the loop sling is properly adjusted on the upper arm, place the left hand, knuckles out, so that the sling passes around the side of the left wrist near the wrist bone. If properly adjusted, the sling is flat against the wrist.

Then, before you take your position, place the left hand so that the rifle lies in the center of the V formed by the thumb and the fingers of the left hand, with the hand forward against the upper sling swivel.

Note that some leeway is permitted in the position of the loop on the arm. The Manual prescribes that the loop should come above the bicep. But expericnce at The Infantry School shows that many men get better results with a lower sling. lt is important that “light” be visible between the sling and the forearm.

Be sure the sling is doing its share of the work in giving your rifle full support. A tight sling means a steady rifle.

We will discuss the hasty sling later- when we are ready for the standing position.

___

To download the entire manual, click here

Khaki Fever

Original US uniforms in new or nearly new condition with the US Army’s terms for each color.
L to R: Summer Service Shirt, M41 Jacket, Tanker Jacket, M1943 Field Jacket

Khaki Fever

Although the pestilence seems to have mutated into somewhat less virulent strains in recent years, it remains endemic to the hobby of WWII (and WWI) collecting/ reenacting. Precisely how and why it took hold decades ago is unknown- various theories exist but none can be confirmed.

Regardless, it is perhaps the single biggest misconception (headache) in this business. This post was just as valid in 1997, 2006, 2012, as it is today. I’m sure it’ll be so in 2032 as well.

Now what am I ranting about? Among many enthusiasts, there is a quasi religious belief that US WWII uniforms and equipment were made from beige colored fabrics. Nearly every day for 25+ years, we receive calls and emails questioning (or complaining) whether our US jackets, shirts, trousers, cartridge belts, packs, bags and whatnot are the correct color. They must be KHAKI! (beige)

When we have actual khakis (Summer Service Uniforms), despite having the largest and highest resolution photos in this market, we get drowned with calls asking if they are “khaki like in the photos”. It sounds like a joke but it’s not. No…we photoshopped over the purple polka dots…

Poor Gina has suffered through countless expert lectures about khaki. A few blue ribbon winners even fuss that our HBT’s, Helmets and, at least one, that our boots weren’t khaki. A couple have howled because their fieldgear wasn’t a perfect match for their jump uniform. It’s like a Monty Python skit. I can look at Gina and just say “khaki” and she throws pens at me.

This misconception continues despite originals being plentiful and their color(s) clearly being at odds with the gospel of the khaki cult. A reasonable person might think that these facts should act as a cure or vaccine, but the disease rages on. Over the years, I’ve come to consider this is a genderesque situation where truth is unimportant and contradicting a fantasy is a crime.

So let’s get Khakiphobic.

Historical Facts

During WWII, the only American Army uniforms that were actually khaki in color were the Summer Service Uniforms- commonly referred to as “khakis”. How shocking. Aside from khakis, all field uniforms and field equipment were one of several shades of olive drab, henceforth “o.d.”. The term o.d. was used both in official correspondence and documentation as well as by the soldiers. In our world, the best medicine is visual proof.

Originals- nothing is khaki except…Khakis!

Only the shirt is khaki

The most incessant complaints are for khaki jump uniforms, M41 jackets, musette bags and cartridge belts. Above are original items, all in mint condition, next to an original khaki shirt. Guess what…they ain’t khaki. All but the M41 were OD3 which, in most cases, equates to an olive-tan.

News Flash- M41 Jackets are even greener: To add insult to injury, original M41 Field Jackets were made from OD2 colored poplin. This tends to be range from a grayish tan to a grass stain green when new. (Emphasis on the last two words.)

If originals aren’t khaki, why does half the internet insist they are? My suspicion is twofold.

First, simple semantics. Most collectors differentiate OD3 from OD7 items by referring to them as “khaki” or “O.D.”. They realize khaki does not necessarily equate to the color of Docker’s, and that a khaki shirt or garrison cap is lighter than a tanker jacket or a Haversack. However, neophyte enthusiasts come into the picture and they take the term “khaki” literally. Throw in gamers and cosplayers and one has a mess.

Second, dyeing was imperfect in 1942. Much of the items worn by our troops faded, some of it relatively quickly so much so that it was one of the top complaints about the early HBT’s and M41 Jackets in general. Heavily faded OD2 and OD3 things do look beige- but they didn’t look that way when new. And new is the look we are striving for in our products.

The photo below shows the fading problem clearly- both pouches are made in the same year by the same manufacturer.

The infection has spread

Some years ago, we carried a less expensive line of US gear from a surplus company from Chicago. For a year or two it looked good and was a near perfect OD3 color- just like originals. Then a beige shipment arrived. I called them to ask wtf. They told me they were tired of all the returns from the khaki weenies howling that they didn’t want green chit. It must be KHAKI!

Now, it appears that most other manufacturers of US gear have bowed to the khaki mob and now make everything in stunning and brave beige.

At least one offers khaki AND “od3”.

Gag.

Two of the most plentiful & popular (cheap) reproductions on the market surrounded by every original Haversack I could scrounge. The difference is oh so subtle…

It’s amazing how stunning beige lights up the forest as the troops march by, alerting even the most myopic and hungover of Wehrmacht snipers lurking in their plywood bunkers. Yes, besides being totally wrong, it’s almost as attention grabbing as hunter orange.
When it fades a little it will be basically white. Of all colors! Awful.

Apparently the fever hit the beaches too.

In recent years the mania has spread to German gear as well. The demands for khaki (or golden) breadbags, packs, and A-frames have increased dramatically- maybe thanks to TikTok videos posted by expert historians. Yes, the Germans had a smattering of khaki-ish items, but most of those were more a mustard tan in color, with the bulk of their canvas gear being a shade of olive or fieldgray.

I’ve resigned myself to the idea that there is no cure. I’ll give a big nod to social media where many have valiantly fought the fever with me, but regular outbreaks still occur as new enthusiasts continue to drink the Khaki Koolaid from where ever it flows. For our part, it’s exasperating but we will never give in. We’ll only make it khaki if that’s the color it was in WWII.

Sizes Then and Now

 

Signal Corps Photo
Sizes Then & Now
There is a cohort of history maniacs who periodically bleat that we should follow the WWII sizing tariffs to the letter- make the same ratio of each size uniform as was done in the 1940’s. Then their time warp will finally be correct! These guys may be intelligent and capable in other disciplines, but when it comes to selling clothing they’d be bankrupt within 30 days. Why?
 
Biologically-born-male humans are proportioned a bit differently today than they were during World War II. 
 
According to the US Army QMC, the average WWII soldier was 5′ 8″ tall, 144 pounds, wore a 36R jacket, 32 x 32 trousers, and 9D shoes. Today, as per multiple sources on Google, the average American male is 5’9″ tall, weighs 197 pounds, wears a 42R jacket, has a waist of 40″ and 10D shoes.

So…that additional 50+ pounds of modern muscle makes the WWII tariffs functionally useless. 
 
The average sizes we sell today mimic the modern averages almost to the letter: 42 chest, 40 waist, and 10.5D shoes.
I used the tables in Appendix XXIII from “Quartermaster Supply in the ETO in WWII, Vol. 3” and our most recent sales ratios, extrapolated those numbers to match the quantities from 1945 and created comparison tables in both raw numbers and percentages.  
 
The US Army numbers are what the Quartermaster predicted 100,000 men would need as replacements every 30 days. (13,000 field jackets and 35,900 HBT trousers).  

(Click on table for larger image. Yes, it’s secure.)
 

 

 

Not an indictment: Yes, I realize that the average age of soldiers in 1945 was younger than that of our average customer, and that they were typically more physically active, frequently had poor and/ or restricted diets etc, etc… 
 
I’m not dimension shaming nor attempting to pull any triggers in any way- these are just real statistics, then versus now. This also explains why there are next to no originals in larger sizes.  

M43 Field Jacket Liners

Jacket, Field, Pile, O.D.
The M1943 Field Uniform, which, with gradual updates, remained in production for the US military for over 40 years, had a rather controversial and tortuous birth. Despite apparent utility of the design, numerous high ranking officers attempted to stop or sabotage production repeatedly due to differing personal preferences, mostly regarding “soldierly appearances”. One of the most embattled components of the new layered uniform was the liner. After months of testing, a pile lined jacket with knit cuffs and collar was decided upon by the QMC. However, another faction within the US Army continuously lobbied for the Ike Jacket to become the new uniform instead- when that battle appeared lost, they insisted that the short wool jacket be used as the liner. Months of bickering ensued which caused repeated production delays, ultimately causing a critical shortage of M1943 Field Uniforms in the Fall of 1944.

This resulted in liner production beginning in the Summer of 1943, followed by a gap in new contracts (while the generals battled to get some other uniform more to their liking produced instead) with new batches not being started until the following Summer.

Issue of the liners was by no means universal, with many soldiers wearing sweaters or other jackets to accomplish the same purpose. Given that the liners have a sturdy outer shell, they were often worn on their own without the field jacket. In period photos, they can often be mistaken for tanker jackets unless the front is visible. allowing one to see the buttons.

 

The first liners were spec number 368A, Jacket, Field, Pile, O.D. approved 30 June 1943, with contracts dated in late July. Quantities made are unknown, but I suspect they were substantial, given that 75+ years on, original examples are not terribly rare. The liners generally appear to be a rather ugly child born of a B15 Flight Jacket and the mailman.

The shell is O.D. 7 cotton poplin, similar (if not the same) as that used on M41 Field Jackets, with two slash pockets. The interior is lined with woolen pile, and the neck and cuffs are trimmed with knit wool to prevent the wind from entering.

The fronts is closed via 6 large plastic buttons, fastened through cord loops rather than buttonholes- likely due the difficulty of sewing buttonholes through the pile and impracticality of zippers for troops likely to be wearing gloves in freezing conditions.

No provision was made to attach the liners to the field jackets themselves- they were simply worn as one coat over another.

 

In March of 1944, the design was amended slightly, with the new contracts being issued starting in May, as spec number 368B, as Jacket, Field, Pile, O.D. Type B. Some spec labels describe these as “Pattern B” in addition to or in lieu of “Type B”.  All Type B’s appear to have an instruction label added below the size tag at the neck.

Additionally, some 368B’s have the pile lining covered with a layer of OD3 cotton twill (the fabric used for Tanker Jackets and Jump Uniforms). Examples seen of this type with the “khaki” interlining, were to date, all from the May 1, 1944 contract, and the spec date of March 1944. 368B’s from subsequent contracts, have a spec date of July 1944 and have all had the more typical exposed pile inside.  So, it appears that the covered lining was only for the early 368B contracts, after which they switched back to the exposed alpaca.

Later production runs of 368B’s appear to be identical to the 368A’s from the previous year aside from the instruction label in the neck. Liners produced in the immediate postwar period, spec no. 6-440, have the pile lining again covered, but this time with a nylon or rayon fabric instead of the cotton twill of the early 368B’s.

The WWII Army HBT Uniforms

Pfc. Floyd L. Rogers, 2nd Infantry Division, silver star,
November 29, 1919 – July 12, 1944

About WWII Army HBT Uniforms

This page consists of my observations and analysis of authentic WWII garments with some input from Risch and Pitkin’s QMC Historical Studies, Clothing the Soldier of WWII.
With over 25 years experience manufacturing reproduction garments, I hope to be able to offer some insights not usually found in typical references. Despite this being one of the most prolific uniforms of the Second World War, and authentic examples being relatively plentiful, the available reference material is surprisingly scant.

Prior to the outbreak of WWII, soldiers in of the US Army were issued a blue denim jumper, trousers, and hat for fatigue duties and used the cotton khaki shirt and trousers as their summer uniform.

By the late 1930’s, the Army recognized the need for a more practical uniform in a more suitable color. In 1941, a green uniform made from cotton herringbone twill (HBT) fabric was introduced to replace both the denim and khaki cotton uniforms for work and field operations. Shirts, trousers, coveralls and caps were produced. These garments were issued to all Army personnel in all theaters of operations, ultimately becoming one of the most common garments worn during WWII.

L to R: 1st pattern, 2nd pattern light shade, 2nd pattern OD7 L to R: 1st pattern, 2nd pattern, 2nd pattern OD7, 2nd pattern April 1, 1944 and later

The “First Pattern” HBT
The Army introduced the Two-Piece herringbone-twill work suit in 1941 to replace the creaky denim pants and jumper. This uniform is referred to by collectors as the “first pattern HBT” and the color as “sage green” with both terms being contemporary and were not used by the US Army or QMC in WWII. The actual government name for what is called “sage green” today was OD8. Yes, it and OD7 are out of sequential order.

The first pattern jackets, Spec. Number 45, were waist length, with two pleated breast pockets, an adjustable waist band, and bi-swing back. The trousers were essentially the same pattern as the khaki and wool models with straight legs, four internal pockets, and a watch pocket. Both garments used metal tack buttons for closures.

These uniforms were widely issued and were worn in all theaters of operation until the end of the War. Production of both ran into the Fall of 1942.

1st Model Jacket Spec. No. 45, April 1941. Bi-swing back, gusseted armpits,
adjustable waist
Cuff and waist detail
1st Model Trousers Same pattern as the khaki
trousers
Button fly, watch pocket Lining was either white twill
or the HBT (same as the
outside)

The Simplified Two Piece Suit
By early 1942, government contractors were struggling to supply enough of the HBT uniforms to supply the needs of the Army. This fact combined with complaints from the troops regarding their design led to the garments being modified in order to simplify production and improve their functional characteristics. New designs for both garments appeared in late 1942- these uniforms are referred to by collectors as “second pattern”- while the Army termed them “simplified two piece suit”.

The new jacket was greatly simplified; the bi-swing back, adjustable waist and gusseted armpits were gone, the breast pockets were simpler and much larger. The already loosely fitting chest was enlarged another 2″. They were now 10″ over the marked size due to the design concept that they be large enough to be worn over a field jacket.
The new trousers had a larger seat for better freedom of movement, a higher rise, and the internal pockets were replaced with two large cargo types on the hips.

The “Specials”

At this point, the Army was going to great lengths to protect troops from possible chemical warfare attack. In late 1942, most tops were modified with “gas flaps” on the chests and cuffs while trousers were fitted with overlapping flys in an effort to prevent blister agents from reaching soldiers’ skin. Garments modified or produced with these features had the term “Special” added to their name. The Specials appeared early in 1943, with contracts running concurrently with non-special garments.

The first specification for 2nd pattern jackets did not have a gas flap. This was the 45B which was only made for a brief period at the end of 1942 and into early 1943. In Jan 1943 the first “Special” was approved, the short-lived 45C, (Jan 1943) which was identical to the 45B, except for the addition of the gas flap and buttons under the rear of the collar for an anti-gas hood. In March 1943, this was replaced by the 45D which eliminated the yoke at the shoulders. This model was manufactured through the end of the War in both OD8 (sage green) and OD7. The Quartermaster did differentiate uniforms made in the two colors by assigning them separate stock numbers.

“Special” Trousers made in sage green had Spec numbers 42A (Oct 1942), 42B (Jan 1943), and finally 42C (March 1943)- the latter, like the 45D jackets, was made in both sage green and OD7.

Spec 45B- no gas flap, OD8.
Spec 45B. Note the two piece
back.
45B Label.
45B- made with the 45D
one piece back but no
gas flap
Inside. One piece back. Label has been edited by hand

at the factory. According to the

stock number this is actually

a Spec 45B jacket- not a 45D


Spec No. 45D The gas flap The gas flap shown when
closed
This pattern was approved
in March, 1943
Buttons for the hood- both
plastic and metal tack types
were used
Example with optional
center pleated pockets
Spring 1943 production-
no such thing as a “3rd
pattern”
Simplified aka “2nd pattern”
trousers
Spec. No. 42C, March 1943 Early “high pocket” pattern Overlapping fly acts as a
gas flap

A New Shade
During 1942, the sage green color was determined to be unacceptable. Even when new, the color was too light for concealment purposes, and use and exposure led to fading, further exacerbating the problem. After lengthy tests and field trials with various colors and camouflage patterns, the OQMG decided on olive drab shade number 7 as the best solution.

The “OD7” uniforms entered production in early 1943. Garments were made in both sage green and OD7 simultaneously due to the Army permitting the manufacturers to use up existing stocks of fabrics before switching to the new color.

The two shades-
olive drab 8 vs. 7
A “classic” example of an
OD7 HBT Jacket
An early production jacket,
in a more greenish shade
…and a more brownish shade
Cuff detail Plastic button variation Spec 45D, OD7 April 1943 pattern date
Pre-April 1944 trousers Spring 1943 production, Spec 42C Notably shaded gas flap- a
somewhat atypical trait
Comparison of the pocket
positions
April 1944 pattern change Spec date 3-43, pattern change
4-44, contract signed 7-44
The “new” pocket location
was much more practical
Later trousers (L) vs. earlier
production (R)

The Pocket Drop
The HBT uniforms would retain this same design throughout the end of the War. In April, 1944, one small change was made to the trousers by lowering the hip pockets 3-4 inches to make them easier to access when the soldier was wearing a field jacket. Due to the late date of this change, it is unlikely that any trousers with the lower pocket position were used during the Normandy Landings in June, 1944.

Manufacture
HBT uniforms- jackets, trousers, coveralls and caps were all made using the same assembly methods as other WWII American uniforms. The parts were cut with power knives or die punched and individually tagged to prevent shading. The contractors used standard lock stitch machines for single seams and two-needle chain stitch models for the felled, interlocking seams. Belt loops and pocket corners were reinforced with bartacks (usually 18 or 28 stitch). Both corded eyelet and standard tacked buttonholes were allowed by the OQMG. Tack buttons were attached with hand or foot presses while plastic buttons were affixed by machine. Spec labels with the item name, size, manufacturer, and contract information were placed in the right hand pocket and woven size labels sewn into the necks, waistbands or sweatbands.

Production Variants
With dozens, perhaps hundreds of firms assembling HBT garments, there are several common variations encountered on authentic WWII examples. Some are due to the Army permitting substitute components or assembly methods due to shortages of materials or equipment, while others simply come with the territory when hundreds of thousands of garments are being made by numerous manufacturers using fabric and parts supplied by hundreds of companies- often as quickly as possible.

The “3rd Pattern” fantasy
On the “second pattern” jackets and trousers, the QMC allowed the manufacturers a choice on how to construct the pockets. They could make them plain front, with an expandable gusset on the outer edge, or sew the edges flat while having a 1″ pleat in the center of the pocket. Some enthusiasts have christened HBT uniforms made in the latter style as “3rd pattern” or “Korean War”. Neither is true. The pleated pockets were used on both sage green and OD7 uniforms, and the spec labels show production ranging for the entire period (1943-45).

The pleats in the center of the pockets were a variation, not a later pattern Both trousers are Spring 1943 production


Buttons & Buttonholes

The most common closures used are black (or occasionally olive drab) metal tack buttons with a 13 star design on the cap. One occasionally finds sage green uniforms made using tack buttons with a hollow center and wreath design in lieu of the 13 star type. Lastly, some uniforms (both sage green and OD7) were made with plastic buttons- sometimes the caramel colored type seen on wool trousers or the OD7 style used on M1943 Field Uniforms.

As with the pleated pockets, uniforms with plastic buttons are often automatically declared to be “Korean War” by less experienced enthusiasts- but the spec labels and photos prove otherwise. The soldier on the far right in the June 1944 photo above clearly has plastic buttons on his jacket. Their use is scattered throughout the range of production dates (1943-45) making them yet another permissible substitution.

Both the standard “bartack” and corded eyelet type buttonholes are found on original garments.

Thread
The thread color was obviously meant to match the fabric- but during the transition from the lighter color to OD7, it’s obvious the factories were using up what was already on hand. There are sage uniforms sewn with dark olive drab thread vice versa.


Shading

As with all wartime garments, the shades of sage green and OD7 vary markedly. The sage green can range from nearly a gray to a bizarre green approaching a faded turquoise- very reminiscent of ACU’s. The OD7 is likewise quite variable. At times the two colors appear nearly the same depending on the variations on the garments being compared.

Q: Is that OD7? Or is that OD7???
A: Yes.

Issue and Wear
The HBT uniform was general issue to all personnel in the US Army thus the number produced was in the millions. The garments were utilized throughout the entire conflict, in all theaters. Wear depended on the weather- in hot climates, this was the primary uniform, worn often by itself. In cooler areas, the HBT’s were worn in conjunction with the OD’s (wool shirts and trousers) and field jackets. Some units and troops chose to wear the top over their field jackets- the best known photographic example being the 4th Division troops on Utah beach. Others troops wore them underneath other garments.

Jackets were frequently worn tucked in at the waist.

All patterns and both colors were issued and worn through the end of the War, and some were later utilized in Korea.

Both light and dark shades
clearly used together
4th Division troops wearing
the HBT top over their field
jackets

Concerns for Living History

Models: Which pattern/ color is “correct”? From early 1943 onward all styles were issued and in use. First pattern uniforms were undoubtedly still being worn on VE Day. The second pattern, OD7 uniform (also the most plentiful reproduction) is historically correct for anything from mid-1943 onward. Since 99% of living history is concerned with D-day and afterward, it’s an easy choice. All variations were in wear prior to D-day except for the low pocket trousers.

The Pocket: The post April 1944 production trousers were probably not used at D-day. It’s within the realm of possibility that some were finished in May and flown over (there were rush air shipments of various critical items constantly being sent to England) but regardless, the vast, vast majority would have had the higher pockets.

Light shade? Dark shade? Which is correct? The most despised answer for Living Historians- BOTH. Sorry.

This jacket is way too big! Blame the US Army. These were designed to be worn over a field jacket- so they are cut 8″ oversize on 1st Patterns, and 10″ over on “2nd Patterns”. (ie: a size 40 HBT jacket has a chest circumference of 48″ or 50″). Most men’s jackets are 6″ or 7″ oversized.

Airborne Ranger Short Visor Caps: 100% BS. At the end of the War the QMC issued a new specification lengthening the visor about 1/2″. The only change during the War was switching from OD8 (sage green) to OD7 (dark shade).

The pants aren’t sexy: This is a common complaint- not a joke. Trousers in the 1940’s were not cut like they are today- the rise on WWII pants is, on average, about 2″ higher than that found on most modern ones. These were designed by the US Army for engaging in manual labor, military training and combat. Not showing off one’s curves at the county fair.

Insignia? Yes or no. Wartime photos exist of these uniforms being worn devoid of rank and unit patches- as well as otherwise. With combat troops, sterile (plain) jackets are far more common.

Honor guards and parades: This was a work/ combat uniform. George S. Patton would likely have snarled at the idea of it being worn for an honor guard, but there was a war on and all manner of distasteful things happened and the grooming standards were undoubtedly violated now and then.

Marines? This is not the USMC Utility uniform. However, wartime stories of the Corps’ skill at obtaining Army property abound, and there are a few period photos of Marines wearing Army HBT uniform components. So yes, it happened, but the Marines had their own, specific HBT clothing which was different in cut, weave and color from these.

The M1943 Field Jacket

31 December, 2018

The M1943 Field Jacket was the main component of the the US Army’s improved combat uniform issued in the latter part of the Second World War. This jacket, with only minor design changes, was issued to American troops for the next 50 years, and is still manufactured today for the civilian market.

The United States entered WWII with her troops wearing “Parson’s jackets” (M1941’s) and wool serge trousers as their field/ combat uniform. The M1941 Jackets were found to be wanting almost immediately- they were not warm, they weren’t wind or water proof, they were too short and they had an open collar. When washed the wool lining shrank more than the cotton shell leading to a decidedly awkward appearance. The trouser fabric was too thin causing them to wear out quickly, they lacked warmth and they often split apart at the seams. The flood of complaints from troops in the field compelled the Army to take action.

The Quartermaster Corps quickly convened a panel of advisers, including designers from several large clothing manufacturers, to create an entirely new field uniform to address these concerns. The ensuing drama was worthy of a miniseries and is too long to address here, but it was the typical human conflict of common sense and good research data colliding with fragile, over-sized egos of a few high ranking individuals. Luckily for American soldiers, the former ultimately persevered and the M1943 Field Uniform was born.

The new field uniform was a layered system consisting of the field jacket, jacket liner, field trousers, and hood. Layering retains body heat far better than a single garment, while also permitting the wearer to add or remove layers to according to the temperature. This post will cover the jackets issued in WWII.

One of the major shortcomings of the M41 Jacket was its lack of warmth and total lack of water repellency. The thin poplin shell fabric was obviously not the appropriate choice for the new jacket. In 1942, the only way to have water and wind proof fabric was to coat it with rubber, which was impractical. The best option was to use cotton cloth made with tightly woven, very fine yarns and treat it with chemical finishes to help them repel water as much as possible. Ultimately a tough cotton sateen cloth was chosen for the outer garments, which provided a decent degree of protection. The wool lining of previous coats was dispensed with (although a test batch of wool lined M43’s was supposedly made) as it necessitated dry cleaning and had the aforementioned shrinkage problems.  A cotton poplin lining was used instead since a separate liner was planned.

The pattern of the jacket was a remarkable exercise in common sense. The cut was loose and roomy for freedom of movement and to allow more layers of clothing to fit underneath. Four large pockets were provided, with the lower two being internally reinforced with 3/4″ webbing to better distribute weight when stuffed with ammo and grenades. To help keep the wind out, the cuffs and collar could be closed tightly and a drawstring was provided at the waist. The designers decided against using a zipper as they often broke and were difficult to operate with gloves on. However, it is not uncommon to find WWII jackets tailor modified with various types of zippers.

The QMC specification number for the field jacket was 370 (the field trousers being 371). This can be found printed on the spec labels in the right lower pocket. Periodically, improvements and pattern changes were made, which were indicated by a letter following the spec number. The date these specifications were issued into effect is also present.

Note on label dates: The pattern or spec date is when the design was completed and accepted. The contract date is the day the contract went into effect. Precisely when production of the garments began is unknown, although it would likely be within a few weeks of the contract date. The gray area is what happened if a manufacturer wasn’t finished with their run from the preceding contract when the new one was issued. I suspect every possible scenario occurred depending on the individual contractor, how anal the government inspectors were about enforcing such things, and which course of action was most profitable. It’s quite likely that 370C’s and 370B’s could both have been in progress on the same production line for some days or weeks. It’s also doubtful that every jacket made after 31 December, 1943 was a Pattern B. What was cut out would have been finished up before cutting the new garments. Lastly, remember there was no internet or email in 1943, meaning updates and contracts had to be mailed which could take days or weeks to arrive.

A 370C label

WWII Jackets: Realistically, there were three patterns worn in WWII. 370B, 370C, and 370D. The two earliest ones (370 & 370A) were prototypes, with actual numbers completed unknown, so a few may well have gone into combat. To date, I have never heard of any originals still in existence. 370E would not have begun production until 1945- meaning perhaps a few arrived by VE Day, but none were in the Ardennes or at Nijmegen.

The BIG change: As soon as troops began receiving their jackets, complaints arose that they were too tight when the pile liner was worn underneath. As initially designed, the field jacket had 7″ of ease in the chest (ie: a size 40 measures 47″ around the breast) which is standard proportion for most coats and jackets. The pile liners are as thick as a tanker or flight jacket so more room was needed.

To correct this, the design was amended effective Dec 31, 1943. This was called “Pattern B”. From this point on, the patterns were altered with chest measure being increased 2″ and the upper arm circumference by 1″ to allow more room for the liners. The name “Pattern B” was used rather than a new spec number in order to allow supply personnel to more easily differentiate the two cuts of jackets when issuing them to troops.

All future patterns of field jackets used this sizing. Therefore, all 370B’s and about half the 370C’s (the first 6 months or so of all field jacket production) are cut like a typical men’s jacket. The latter batches of 370C’s, and all 370D, 370E, M50, M51, and M65 jackets are the Pattern B cut.  (On Aug 1, 1944, Pattern B was itself amended slightly, but to date we have not determined what that change was.) Thus, most field jackets made have 9″ of ease in the chest, leading people to complain for decades that they’re far too large or mis-sized.

The 370 Series: Below are the main details of each pattern. There were some other very minor changes (such as a fractional change to the shape of the button tab under the pocket flaps) that we didn’t list. Keep in mind that millions were ultimately made, resulting in subtle variations and specific traits of one pattern sometimes appearing on the next or previous one likely due to overlapping production (or simply human error) in some factories.

This information came from an old Militaria Magazine article, which I expanded a bit using data from the QMC archives and examining and measuring my 30+ original M43 jackets.

 

Quick I.D. guide: First, check the maker label in the lower right pocket. It will have the model number on it. If it’s missing or illegible, the main physical differences between the wartime issue jackets are:
370B
-Long epaulets, with the button actually placed on the neck
-Two buttons to hold the neck flap
370C
-Normal length epaulets, button on the shoulder
-One button to hold the flap
370D
-Large white instruction label added to the neck
370E
-Usually they have a dark OD7 lining with the instructions printed on the fabric itself. A few still use OD3 lining and a white label, but it now has a small illustration on it.

1. Specification PDQ 370, dated May 29 1943
. Prototype only.
-The collar can be buttoned in an upwards position by a piece of cloth under the collar, it can be buttoned in two positions, depending on what type of clothing is worn underneath.
-13 sizes are available, three lengths are available, Short, Regular and Long.
-Makers tag is in the right breast pocket, printed on cheese cloth.
-Size tag is sewn in the collar.
-There is a loop sewn in the collar to suspend the jacket when not worn.
-The bottom of the sleeves are closed like the wool shirt.

2. Specification PDQ 370A, dated June 30, 1943. Prototype only.
-The piece of cloth under the collar is placed lower.
-The bottom of the sleeves is hemmed by just one row of stitching.
-13 sizes available, 2 lengths , Regular and Long.
-Two lengths of cloth are sewn in at both extremities of the lower pockets to support the weight sometimes carried in them. One of these pieces of cloth goes all the way up to the collar.

370B Label

3. Specification PQD 370B, July 9, 1943. First pattern to be mass produced and issued in quantity.
-The bottom of the sleeves are more simplified. It appears the gusset was problematic and difficult to sew resulting in a wide variation (and sloppy stitching/ redos) on these jackets.
-The patch for closing the collar is replaced by a trapezoid patch sewn behind the left side of the collar and held in place by buttons. On some jackets these are a different color than the rest of the buttons.
-The second button for the collar is no longer there.
-The size is now printed in ink below the collar.
-Makers tag is in the right lower pocket.
-Epaulets are longer than subsequent models.
-Some have OD7 color lining, others use OD3.
-Suspension loop is sometimes sewn onto the back of the collar, others underneath as with later patterns.
-Pocket flaps tend to be narrower than on future patterns.

4. Specification PQD 370C, dated October 11, 1943.
-Thicker buttons.
-The cuff gusset is longer and simplified
-The 2nd button of the patch for the collar flap is dropped
-The loop for suspending the jacket is now actually sewn in a loop. This was not so before.
-18 sizes available, three lengths, Short, Regular and Long.
-OD3 poplin lining is normally used as permission was given to use up leftover stocks of M41 jacket fabric.

370C “Pattern B” vs. 370C

5. “Pattern B”, dated Dec 31, 1943.
This is not a separate pattern, but rather an amendment to the entire 370 class of field jackets. Henceforth, 2″ is added to the breast measure and 1″ to the upper arm circumference to allow more room for the pile liner. This the point where the field jackets became huge.
-This came into effect in the middle of the 370C production run, meaning some 370C’s are the less baggy cut, while others are the larger Pattern B.
-“Pattern B” or sometimes just “B” are printed (or ink stamped) on the maker label. Some jackets also had a “B” stamped below the collar next to the size mark.

There’s that sexy how-to-wear-me label!

6. Specification PQD 370D, dated, February 23 1944.
-‘How to use’ tag added below the collar, rectangular, in cheese cloth or on fabric. A few have the small illustration seen on 370E, most are just text.
-OD3 lining is normally used.
-Later 370D’s often use OD7 HBT cloth in the pockets.

7. Specification PQD 370E,  February 13 1945.
-18 sizes, three lengths, Short, Regular and Long.
-The size tag is sewn in with the collar and the size is marked in red, blue or black.
-‘How to use’ tag now has a small drawing added. Some makers print this tag on the lining by a transfer that is ironed on.
-Some 370E’s still use OD3 lining while most now have OD7
-The breast pockets are made larger, supposedly to be able to carry K rations.
-OD7 HBT cloth is sometimes used as pocketing.

Some observations on originals

-The 370B is the most variable, likely as it was the first to be mass produced and there were near catastrophic production problems with the contractors documented in the NARA archives.

-Lining in 370B’s is sometimes OD7 (as was likely called for in the original design) and other times OD3- meaning the approval to use use leftover stocks of M41 jacket fabrics came down during production.

-When new, the cotton sateen fabric is dull on one side and rather shiny on the other. Original field uniforms were assembled with either side facing out. Whether or not one was supposed to be on the outside is unknown. After some wear and washings the shine dissipates. As the two sides are fairly different in appearance, this can lead some people to assume that some uniforms are made from some other cloth.

-The cuff gussets were a major source of headaches. Those in 370B’s are often poorly sewn, with two of my originals having been picked apart and re-sewn at the factory, I assume for having failed inspection. Some barely pass beyond the edge of the cuff, while others reach the buttonhole. On 370D-E they were extended all the way to the end of the cuff.

-The hang loop on the 370B’s neck is sometimes tacked directly to the collar (like a belt loop) and on others it’s sewn underneath as with subsequent patterns.

-The lower pocket position on all models ranges from actually on the drawcord channel to several inches below. I chose the lower position on our reproductions as it clears the pistol/ cartridge belt better.

-Pocket sizes are inconsistent. In the changes listed for 370E the pockets were to be enlarged somewhat, but it appears that the manufacturers took this as a suggestion rather than a rule. From 370B-370E the pocket dimensions are rather varied. Different length pockets for short and long sizes do not appear to have been graded out. Among all my jackets, the one with the largest breast pockets is a 370C, size 38 short. Go figure.

-Collar & lapel size varies widely- some are slender, with sharp corners, while others  would make Batman proud. My originals range from 2.25″ to 3.25″ at the lapel.

-Buttons came in a wide color assortment, ranging from caramel to forest green. A dark brownish OD is most common. A few 370B’s used wool trouser type buttons (almost a butterscotch color) for the neck flap under the collar.

-The large white instruction label that excites so many living historians was not used until the 370D pattern in 1944.

-Most common pattern? At this point, we do not have the actual production numbers from 1943-45 of each pattern. (It might yet turn up.) From collecting them over the past 20 years, I encounter more 370C’s than any other Wartime pattern. In theory, the most plentiful should be 370D’s due to the much longer production run- but in early 1944 Eisenhower himself (who disliked the M43) had thrown a monkey wrench into the ordeal which resulted in manufacture being halted for awhile. It’s possible that the rush to get the troops equipped with them later that year led to a higher percentage of the total made getting sent to the ETO and being used up. The original order for 370B’s was several hundred thousand pieces, but production problems were rampant so how many were actually made is unknown. They are sometimes consider ultra rare, but I managed to acquire 9 or 10 in one year from trolling ebay. That does not jive with only a handful having been made.

-RC

Why US Wool Trousers fit like garbage bags

Many people do not realize that trousers from the 1940’s were cut differently than those made today. They tended to have higher waists, fuller thighs and very unflattering seats. The wartime pants designed for the US Army took these traits to new highs.

Note: This information also applies to the Summer Service Trousers (commonly known as “Khakis”.) They are the same pattern as the wool serge trousers.

The standard issue wool serge trousers were made in two very different cuts. In the late 1930’s the Army began to replace the WWI style breeches with the new straight leg trousers. In short order, complaints were received about the crotch, seat and thighs being too tight. Initially, these were brushed off as the machinations of style conscious young men, but 1” was added to the rise in late 1941. Within a few months (as the Army expanded after war being declared) there were so many complaints that the OQMG (Office of the Quartermaster General) ordered all procurement of wool trousers to cease until pattern adjustments were worked out. In March 1942, the pattern was altered with an additional 2” in the rise, as well as substantial increases in the seat and thighs.

How do I know this? Simple. I’ve been measuring real WWII pants for 20 years and…I read it in a government publication.

See: pages 42-43 “Clothing the Soldier of WWII”, QMC Historical Studies No. 16, by Erna Risch and Thomas Pitkin, September 1946.

The early cut wool trousers may look sharp and accentuate one’s curves rather seductively, but the crotch and thigh seams are very prone to blowing out during even relatively tame physical activity. Simply squatting down often results in a rear fly magically appearing.

The modified trousers, those with contract dates from April 1942 and later, are at the other end of the spectrum. They are definitely not “sexy man pants”. The waist now often reaches the navel, the legs are baggy enough to make a drug mule smile, and the backside appears to be concealing a well loaded diaper.

A comparison from early vs. later pattern pants (Size 38) is:
Rise: 30” vs. 34”
Thigh circumference: 27” vs. 31”

To relate this to modern clothes, I checked a pair of “relaxed fit” jeans: These have a rise of 30″ and a thigh of 30″. The seat was only 1″ smaller than the late cut wool trousers, so the main difference is the rise.

These are historical FACTS. Another fact is that we copied the originals exactly. I currently have 22 pairs of authentic wool trousers, ranging in size from 30” to 46” waist, and divided up by early and late cut. I have checked and re-checked the sizing tables and our trousers match up to the authentic garments.

Why not make the slim cut? Experience. Since 2001, we had copied the later, baggy cut. Sometime in 2010 or 2011, after some complaints about the unflattering appearance, we did a run of the early pattern pants.

They were an absolute disaster…echos of 1941-42 all over again. 30-40% were returned as “legs/ crotch/ waist too tight”, we were constantly repairing blown out asses and legs, and we caught hell because our pants were “wrong”. But they measured off against the originals exactly. Apparently history was mistaken.

Our current wool trousers are again based on the post-March 1942 trousers, with one adjustment from the WWII trouser dimensions. I downsized the patterns to fit modern sizing. Up until about 20 years ago, a “size 36” had a waist measurement of 36 inches. When people began gaining excess belly muscle in the 1980’s, garment companies began stretching the truth. Now, the waist on a “size 36″ measures 38”, 39” or maybe even 40”. It’s depressing but true. Don’t believe me? Fine. Get a tape measure and see for yourself.

Therefore, our size 36 trousers are based off original WWII size 38’s and so forth. So, for my photo verification exercise, I have a pair of our reproduction size 36’s compared to original size 38’s since those are the same size by measure.

Even a quick glance allows one to see the dramatic difference in the two originals- comely cut slacks on the right, baggy-ass-sh*t-sacks to the left. Our reproductions are actually slightly smaller (3/4″) in the seat and thigh than the original.

Below are the spec labels in the two original trousers to show the contract dates. “Special” simply indicates the presence of the “gas flap” on the fly opening.

Notes:
1. My measurements are in centimeters. FR & RR = Front Rise and Rear Rise. The seat and thigh measures need to be doubled to get the circumference. Divide by 2.54 to get inches.

2. Both “Specials” and “Service” trousers were subject to these pattern changes. I am not sure there were any “Specials” made prior to the changes.

Why did I choose 34″ inseams?  Simplicity. Yes, this is too long for most people-  but they will fit just about anybody aside from NBA players. These have straight legs with tacked cuffs which are the easiest of all trousers to hem.

Perhaps the most important fact is that this trouser design simply sucks. Like M41 Jackets, the wool trousers are a piss-poor field garment. The pattern was literally that of dress slacks- the tight cut and lack of double needle interlocked seams doomed these from the day they were issued. Adding half a bolt of fabric to the pelvic region was stop gap at best.

Customer satisfaction

It’s also a fact that some people don’t like looking as though they’re wearing an adult diaper that’s about to explode. I understand completely. Many don’t realize that the clothing of the 1940’s was not cut the same as today’s garments and this is how they were made in WWII. Not liking the fit does not necessarily mean a reproduction is defective or of poor quality.

The problem with this peculiar world of recreating history is that enthusiasts demand everything to be “just like it was in WWII”- but it often happens that they don’t know what that actually means. Particularly with regard to fit and color customers are very often wrong.

My information does not come from social media, video games, or war movies. My primary source is what most people lack- a room full of originals. I have authentic examples of just about everything, often quite a few of them.  These are supplemented with hundreds of reference books, including some original documentation. Lastly, I am friends with many advanced collectors and authors who are experts in particular fields who I often communicate with to help close any gaps in my own research.

This is what I have done, full time, for 25 years. I work very hard to get things right. Sometimes it seems all I do is measure old clothes and work on sizing tables.

Both ours and the original WWII US wool pants fit like garbage bags, but it’s not a mistake. It’s because the US Army Quartermaster designed them that way. And we copied it to save history.