# Trench Coat sizing



## Maggio (Apr 4, 2005)

After reading the article in the Fall 2007 issue of Classic Style magazine about trench coats, I have been on the lookout for a military-inspired version. I recently found one (albeit with raglan sleeves.) I eagerly tried it on in the store, but was dismayed when it proved to be too big for me. The coat size was 38R. As background, I can get anything from a 38 to a 40 regular off the rack. Unforunately, the coat was ill-fitting to say the least. Just too big all over. The 38 was the smallest size they had. 

I am confused as to why it was so ill-fitting, since it was supposedly my size? For example, the jacket fell below my knee to about the middle of my shin.

Can you fellas help me understand why this particular jacket was such a dissapointed. I am thinking perhaps to look for a 38S or something. Would this work? 

Any suggestions you gents might have is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.


----------



## cpac (Mar 25, 2005)

all I can say is that this is precisely why you try something on before buying it. Different makers interpret sizes different ways. 

FWIW, my Burberry, m2m trench ended up being a 42 rather than my usual 44, so it may be that trenches tend to run a bit large (though recall you need to have room for a suit underneath, etc.).

Good luck.


----------



## Mark from Plano (Jan 29, 2007)

Interesting. That was my experience as well. I normally take a 42, but bought my trench in a 40 and thought that it was an anomoly of the brand, but perhaps it is consistent with all trench coats to run big.


----------



## The Other Andy (Jan 9, 2008)

Trenches are by design cut like a sack, so if you are used to wearing well-tailored clothing you are almost always going to need to size down unless you can find one by Prada.


----------



## mikeber (May 5, 2004)

1) As cpac wrote, trench coats are cut to be worn above suits, thus are about one size larger.
2) raglan sleeves: the original trench had raglan sleeves for ease of movement. If you want a military inspired trench, that's it.
3) length: the original trench was cut slightly lower then the knee.
4) Most trenches you see today are modernized versions (or designer interpretation) of the original.


----------



## Mark from Plano (Jan 29, 2007)

mikeber said:


> 1) As cpac wrote, trench coats are cut to be worn above suits, thus are about one size larger.


Sorry I wasn't clear. I bought a size 40 to go over my size 42 suits. It fit perfectly.


----------



## Haruspex (Nov 23, 2007)

*Burberry offering a more fitted look in Spring*

I've been hoping to try on a new Burberry SB trench that's previewing on their site - it's decidedly more trim. Not yet in stores, at least not in Atlanta or Washington, DC, since I last checked.

Looks to be the thing for width-challenged types such as myself.


----------



## cvac (Aug 6, 2006)

Has anyone had success in having an OTR trench slimmed down a little and shortened a couple of inches?


----------



## Bishop of Briggs (Sep 7, 2007)

I normally wear 42 or 44 inch chest jackets but went down to 40 inch for my Aquascutum raincoat. Going down a size seems to be the norm unless you want a baggy fit.


----------



## PittDoc (Feb 24, 2007)

Haruspex said:


> I've been hoping to try on a new Burberry SB trench that's previewing on their site - it's decidedly more trim. Not yet in stores, at least not in Atlanta or Washington, DC, since I last checked.
> 
> Looks to be the thing for width-challenged types such as myself.


I tried on this one at the DC Burberry's. Trimmer, yes but $1450 for a trench with a meager lining just seemed too much. Not sure this style will stand the test of time either. However, the traditional DB sack-like model makes me look like George Constanza... I don't need any help looking short and fat.


----------



## Young Pro (Jun 2, 2005)

cpac said:


> all I can say is that this is precisely why you try something on before buying it. Different makers interpret sizes different ways.
> 
> FWIW, my Burberry, m2m trench ended up being a 42 rather than my usual 44, so it may be that trenches tend to run a bit large (though recall you need to have room for a suit underneath, etc.).
> 
> Good luck.


+1 on the Burberry trenches running large. I had to size down to a 36R on mine from a 38R suit size and have them lengthen the sleeves slightly.


----------



## qasimkhan (Sep 24, 2003)

Theoretically your overcoat/topcoat size should be the same as your suit jacket size. But I got a 44 topcoat when I wear a 45 suit jacket, and it fits well. Seems normal to get a slightly smaller overcoat if you care about a good fit.

But you would do well to either try it on or buy from a source with a good return policy - overcoats are a very expensive item after all.

You can shorten the coat a few inches before it starts to look wrong. The pockets (and the belt if there is one) will look out of balance if you shorten it too much. Without wanting to start a debate, I think the coat should end at the bottom of your knees or even a couple inches lower.


----------



## TweedyDon (Aug 31, 2007)

Haruspex said:


> I've been hoping to try on a new Burberry SB trench that's previewing on their site - it's decidedly more trim. Not yet in stores, at least not in Atlanta or Washington, DC, since I last checked.
> 
> Looks to be the thing for width-challenged types such as myself.


$1450 for a cotton coat strikes me as being crazy! 

(Especially when you can find them on ebay and thrift stores for much, much less... is that "new coat smell" really worth *that* much to you? :icon_smile_wink


----------

