# Feasibility/Cost of Reweaving a Moth Hole



## CMDC (Jan 31, 2009)

The other day I came across a nice Burberry guncheck sport coat. Upon taking it to the counter I spotted a moth hole on the sleeve. I left it but am considering going back to see if it's still there if it were possible and not too cost prohibitive to reweave it. I've never had this done before so I'm not sure the feasibility. The hole isn't too big--typical size I guess--and is on the inner sleeve so not terribly visible. Furthermore, the pattern of greys and blues doesn't have much contrast so I don't think that a reweaving of the hole in a solid color would stand out.

For those who have done this, what am I looking at in terms of cost and feasibility?


----------



## Danny (Mar 24, 2005)

It depends on the size really. If you're really interested, go measure the hole with a tape measure and call these guys and discuss it with them.

French American Reweaving
119 West 57th Street, Room 1406 
212-765-4670 

You're probably looking at $75 or more to reweave it. I have had holes rewoven with great success, but it really depends on the particular circumstance.


----------



## fishertw (Jan 27, 2006)

Had moth holes in two sweaters rewoven via Hunter Coggins in Asheville NC last fall. Two holes each in two separate sweaters. I think the total cost was around $60 and the results were outstanding. Jim Hunter the owner of Hunter Coggins has a lady in Asheville who does the work for his store.
You can google Hunter Coggin for the phone/email access.
Tom


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

charged me $60 for a medium hole or tear 2-3 years ago, and they did an amazing job. I think they did two garments for a total of $120. 

I had a favorite jacket with a seriously chewed lapel that I deemed not worth the expense, which would have been in the hundreds.

They quoted $60 to reweave some pants with a torn cuff. I still haven't decided whether to fix, or just re-hem without cuffs.


----------



## leisureclass (Jan 31, 2011)

Is it totally blasphemous to patch sleeve holes like these? Would theoretically be much more cost effective, right?


----------



## DoghouseReilly (Jul 25, 2010)

^ I think a patch is very reasonable. And being on a guncheck, I can't see it standing out much, either. My seamstress has fixed moth holes on a few of my jackets to the tune of $8. They aren't invisible, but hardly noticeable to all but the most observant.


----------



## SconnieTrad (Mar 16, 2011)

I will try to post a picture tomorrow, but I had a moth hole on the shoulder of a suit rewoven and it is all but invisible.

It cost around $100 for the reweaving, but it was a $2500+ suit that I thrifted for $30


----------



## Orgetorix (May 20, 2005)

To be honest, I cannot ever remember seeing a Burberry garment that would be worth the cost of reweaving. The quality just isn't there to justify it.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

True, perhaps, but to a point. If a garment fits and you really like it and, especially, if you've had it long enough, then sentiment can overcome a strict cost/benefit analysis.



Orgetorix said:


> To be honest, I cannot ever remember seeing a Burberry garment that would be worth the cost of reweaving. The quality just isn't there to justify it.


----------



## Sartre (Mar 25, 2008)

Orgetorix said:


> To be honest, I cannot ever remember seeing a Burberry garment that would be worth the cost of reweaving. The quality just isn't there to justify it.


Depends on the vintage. Burberrys used to make beautiful, very high quality clothing.


----------



## CMDC (Jan 31, 2009)

Thanks for all the advice and recommendations. Turns out the question was moot for now. I stopped back yesterday and the jacket was gone, although it may be in the reshelving process. Good resources for future use though.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Related question:

Is a re-weave possible for a Burberry-style trench raincoat? I ask because I found a Paul Stuart MIE, all cotton, that's gorgeous and complete, right down to the wool liner, but that has a small hole in a sleeve.


----------



## sbdivemaster (Nov 13, 2011)

32rollandrock said:


> Related question:
> 
> Is a re-weave possible for a Burberry-style trench raincoat? I ask because I found a Paul Stuart MIE, all cotton, that's gorgeous and complete, right down to the wool liner, but that has a small hole in a sleeve.


Without actually seeing the fabric, if it's like the stuff that the London Fog trenches are made of, I'd have to say that your not going to be able to get a reweave on that. The threads are just too fine, and the weave is just too tight.

Of course, I'd have to see the fabric to give a definitive answer...


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

That would be my guess, as well. A patch the size of a dime would be more than sufficient, however. I suspect this is going to turn into one of those should-I-or-shouldn't-I debates, although if it's still there on Tuesday, it will be reduced to $1, at which point I suspect I'll cave and offer it up on the Exchange for enough to cover shipping.



sbdivemaster said:


> Without actually seeing the fabric, if it's like the stuff that the London Fog trenches are made of, I'd have to say that your not going to be able to get a reweave on that. The threads are just too fine, and the weave is just too tight.
> 
> Of course, I'd have to see the fabric to give a definitive answer...


----------



## stubloom (Jun 6, 2010)

2 points:

1. sbdivemaster is right on. The finer the weave, the more likely the reweave will show. The lighter the color, the more likely the reweave will show. The "plainer" the fabric design, the more likely it is to show. Conversely, the courser the weave, the darker the color and the "busier" the pattern, the less likely it will "show". 

Further, unless the garment is a bulky sweater such as a cable knit sweater, the reweaver will have to use a piece weave (a square or rectangular piece of fabric removed from some other area of the garment such as the inside of the hem) and reweave that piece into the affected area. 

Piece weaves will ALWAYS show. There is no such thing as "invisible mending" when it comes to a piece weave. So on a light colored trench coat, the possibility of achieving a good result (defined as a reweave that doesn't show) is near impossible. 

2. Regarding moth holes that are visible to the eye, it's a probably a good thing that you didn't purchase that Burberry sport coat. Here's why...

It's the larvae of the female moth that feed on the nutrients in the fabric when they hatch. These nutrients come from perspiration and body oils in the garment. That's the ONLY reason the female moth chose to lay her eggs in that garment. When the larvae feed, they tend to feed on the surface threads, causing those threads to be very weak. You might have seen one hole, but I'd bet that many more holes will open up as soon as the garment is cleaned. As the garment tumbles in the dry cleaning machine, some stress is placed on those weak threads and all of a sudden you have five holes instead of one hole. And there goes the entire rationale for the purchase in the first place. 

Moral of the story: Always dry clean a garment before you send a garment to a reweaver. That way you can evaluate the economic viability of reweaving ALL the holes instead of only those holes that are visible to the naked eye.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

I always learn from your posts. Thanks.



stubloom said:


> 2 points:
> 
> 1. sbdivemaster is right on. The finer the weave, the more likely the reweave will show. The lighter the color, the more likely the reweave will show. The "plainer" the fabric design, the more likely it is to show. Conversely, the courser the weave, the darker the color and the "busier" the pattern, the less likely it will "show".
> 
> ...


----------



## The Rambler (Feb 18, 2010)

me, too (this one would have saved me some dough); but one question, Stu: if moth larvae are actually eating grease spots, etc (as I have often heard), why dont they eat grease-spotted cotton?


----------



## sbdivemaster (Nov 13, 2011)

stubloom said:


> 2 points:
> 
> 1. sbdivemaster is right on...
> 
> ...


1. Thank you, sir. :icon_smile:

2. This is why *ALL* thrifted clothing should be quarantined before being brought into your home. UC Davis' IPM Program has detailed information about clothing moths. Everything I purchase spends 72+ hours in my chest freezer (inside a tightly closed plastic bag) before coming inside. Moth larvae feed on animal based fibers, but will munch on cotton if it's blended with wool, silk, etc.


----------



## stubloom (Jun 6, 2010)

Response to sbdivemaster:

The idea of quarantining all thrifted garments is good. That should kill any larvae that have just hatched and are CURRENTLY feeding on those wool fibers. 

But let me make one further point: the damage might already have been done -- days, months or even years before. Which is why it's so important to carefully examine all thrifted wool garments for signs of "moth damage" (holes or surface feeding) PRIOR TO PURCHASE. 

I'm surprised that garment resellers don't dry clean all their gently used garments before listing those garments for resale. That way the reseller can guarantee that a purchaser won't be surprised to discover multiple holes in their garment after the first dry cleaning. 

I understand that this may add to the cost of their operations but that small added cost could be a great differentiator. Imagine the positive reaction from a potential customer if a reseller could guarantee -- up front -- that all wool garments purchased from his site have been dry cleaned prior to sale, and that the likelihood that the garment has moth damage, prior to sale, is practically zero.


----------



## sbdivemaster (Nov 13, 2011)

^^^

Oh yeah, the damage is done; the quarantine is just to keep the moths from spreading.

Been checking out your site and blog - good stuff. :icon_smile:


----------



## HDK (Feb 12, 2015)

If you email a picture this reweaver can give you a guesstimate of how much it would cost. www.invisiblereweaving.com


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Orgetorix said:


> To be honest, I cannot ever remember seeing a Burberry garment that would be worth the cost of reweaving. The quality just isn't there to justify it.


i think you are wrong about that. Some of the older burberry stuff was very high quality. If it not the older quality stuff, it could still be worth it if the item has high value. There is lots of Burberry stuff that still sells for a lot of money whether it's quality or not.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Nobleprofessor said:


> i think you are wrong about that. Some of the older burberry stuff was very high quality. If it not the older quality stuff, it could still be worth it if the item has high value. There is lots of Burberry stuff that still sells for a lot of money whether it's quality or not.


This might be true, but at some point, if you're getting stuff re-woven so you can flip it, it might be worth taking a deep breath and asking yourself whether you've gone over the edge. I can't speak from experience, but from what I can discern, $50 is about the starting point for getting a pretty small hole re-woven. Not many odd jackets, or even suits, flip for that much. i'm thinking you'd have to get into Kiton territory before it's worth considering, and that's a decision I've never had to make, having never found Kiton. Also, as Stubloom suggests, if there's one hole, there's a good chance that larvae have made progress toward others that will open up on the first dry cleaning.

I've flipped my share of Robert Graham shirts and other unwearable stuff, but I'm not sure I could bring myself to do a re-weave job on something that I know isn't of high quality simply so I could sell it. OTOH, I have considered a re-weave job on an Oxxford suit that fits me beautifully--it's worth $100 or so to bring back a quality suit that has served me well. And some Burberry, as you note, is outstanding. I'm thinking particularly of my vintage Burberry top coat with sheared beaver collar that weighs about six tons and would stop a bullet.


----------



## Guest (Jan 1, 2020)

CMDC said:


> The other day I came across a nice Burberry guncheck sport coat. Upon taking it to the counter I spotted a moth hole on the sleeve. I left it but am considering going back to see if it's still there if it were possible and not too cost prohibitive to reweave it. I've never had this done before so I'm not sure the feasibility. The hole isn't too big--typical size I guess--and is on the inner sleeve so not terribly visible. Furthermore, the pattern of greys and blues doesn't have much contrast so I don't think that a reweaving of the hole in a solid color would stand out.
> 
> For those who have done this, what am I looking at in terms of cost and feasibility?


----------



## drpeter (Nov 21, 2008)

I've had excellent work done on reweaving small moth holes, especially with garments I value because of sentimental reasons. My experience has been with a company called Without a Trace in Chicago, which you can find easily on the web. The work I had done was over a decade ago and a hole the size of a penny (US) or a bit larger cost me around $60-$70 at the time. For me, that was a very good deal, especially when considering the personal value of the garment.


----------



## mhj (Oct 27, 2010)

I just had a small moth hole rewoven that was right on the lapel roll of my favorite J. Press. My tailor sent me to a nearby dry cleaner who has a woman that does this work. Cost was $35.00 plus whatever he charged me for dry cleaning the jacket. The results were excellent.


----------

