Jersey stitching - Bad quality? or am I just too picky? - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

schnee · 01-08-2008, 09:24 AM

Greetings!

I didn't want to post this marathon read, but I am having trouble with a retailer over a jersey I had lettering/numbering done.
So I wanted to check what others think before I tried to go further with this.

I bought a new Flames vintage white jersey and ordered pro-stitched lettering/number at the time of purchase.

I received the jersey and the first thing I noticed was the quality of the stitching on the lettering/numbering.
I said it looked bad, like it was rushed or sewn in someones basement and wouldn't accept it.

I have had other NHL jerseys previously 'pro-stitched' by this same retailer (they also did the "good" pic below) who is using the same company to do their stitching, and the quality has always been very good and was what I was expecting on the white vintage jersey. I even brought in the other jersey to show them the difference in quality.

The problem with the stitching is that each 'layer' of fabric looks to have been sewn "freehanded", meaning the stitching doesn't follow the edge of the letter, but rather waves/meanders and wanders off the letters/numbers.

The pictures show the stitching.The bad stitching makes the letters look 'spiky', which to me defeats the purpose of having letters that are "laser cut for sharp edging" and stitching around the edges to assure the edges don't fray.

So I want to check my opinion... What do others think? Is this a badly done jersey?

Does anyone have suggestions where I could have this fixed, or where I could have a jersey "pro-stitched" at a higher quality?

Thanks in advance!

Bad stitching (?)

Good Stitching (?)

foofighter15 · 01-08-2008, 09:38 AM

I don't think you can be to picky because its your jersey and it needs to be done right. I think if you personally feel you didn't get what you paid for then take it to them and let them know.
I found it hard to notice it at first, until I really looked, but that could have to do with the picture.
But you definetley don't want to walk around looking like you're wearing a knock off jersey (even though I feel the new vintage ones are because of the major differences that can be spotted)

Prototype · 01-08-2008, 09:54 AM

I don't see the problem. The top one looks like it's on a name bar, the bottom one doesn't. Other than that, I don't see anything I wouldn't like, and I worked for Jersey City for almost 2 years... and have quite a collection.

I think you're being picky.

foofighter15 · 01-08-2008, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prottotype

I don't see the problem. The top one looks like it's on a name bar, the bottom one doesn't. Other than that, I don't see anything I wouldn't like, and I worked for Jersey City for almost 2 years... and have quite a collection.

I think you're being picky.

Do you get discounts if you work there? Might make it worth the side job

Cowboy89 · 01-08-2008, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prottotype

I don't see the problem. The top one looks like it's on a name bar, the bottom one doesn't. Other than that, I don't see anything I wouldn't like, and I worked for Jersey City for almost 2 years... and have quite a collection.

I think you're being picky.

Agreed. I have the exact same white jersey with ol' Chopper on the back. Got it stitched from FanAttic and it looks pretty much the same as yours.

redforever · 01-08-2008, 10:42 AM

Here is what you are noticing. Both jobs are perfectly done. The difference is the stitching spacing is different. So, in the one you got, the stitching is further apart, it has more of a zigzag look. In the bottom jersey that you posted, the stitching is so close together that it looks solid and has a "full satin" look or feel to it.

But the quality of both is the same, nothing wrong with the quality of how yours was done, just a different stitching method. I think yours is slightly more noticeable since the lettering is on the white background.

Prototype · 01-08-2008, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foofighter15

Do you get discounts if you work there? Might make it worth the side job

It was well worth the discount. Scratch that... the discount made it well worth working there.

SarichFan · 01-08-2008, 12:37 PM

I think it looks good.

I could've sword the ac in MAC was lowercase though.. Maybe not?

Prototype · 01-08-2008, 12:40 PM

Could very well be...

EDIT: Then again, you may be safe.

Lelands is a name I reccognize, and they are selling/have sold a game warn Chopper jersey.

http://lelands.com/itemlist.aspx?auc...&categoryid=51

Bottom of page.

Sainters7 · 01-08-2008, 01:44 PM

Stitching looks fine, I dont see what your beef is there. However, I would have a prob with the fact that the "ac" in "Mac" is as big as the rest of the letters. The "ac" should be a little smaller than the rest, and having it the way you do now would definitely bother me.

EDIT: After searching on the web, I see that it was in fact all the same size, it mustve just been in St. Louis that they shrunk it. The Flames way seems wrong to me though, something about it looks weird with it all the same size. But if thats the way it was, then I guess your beef is unfounded.

Hack&Lube · 01-08-2008, 02:22 PM

The stitching looks fine to me, it's not the retailers fault and they can't really do anything about it. The stitching company probably changed the way they do stitching and it's on a nameplate and also on white background so it stands out more. Honestly, who is going to tell from even a 1 foot away the difference? There is such a thing as being too picky.

As for the ac being in a smaller font, I've seen it both ways and it's the new vintages that are seriously inaccurate in both size of the actual jersey and all the lettering, numbering, and even the size of the C is off but it varies depending on the year.

Recent "Vintage"

Genuine game worn early 80s vintage

Genuine game worn mid-late 80s vintage

The bigger issue with the new vintages is that the material is just not right for the names and numbers, they are using modern materials where the old stuff was actually without any fabric grain and was basically silky/shiny.

foofighter15 · 01-08-2008, 03:33 PM

another thing lots of people don't notice about the classic compared to the new vintage is that the Logo was modified with the 95 jerseys, and in the modern vintages it uses the modified logo.

tvp2003 · 01-08-2008, 04:01 PM

Example of a Flames MACINNIS (circa 88/89): http://www.dropthepucks.com/Frederic...acInnisrbk.jpg

schnee · 01-08-2008, 05:38 PM

Those are great game-worn MacInnis pics, thanks for posting them.

I can accept that I'm being too picky (and won't pray for moths to devour it), so thank-you everyone for the replies and comments

Hack&Lube · 01-08-2008, 05:43 PM

Do they even sell the new vintages in Small or Youth?

The small version of the genuine 80s jerseys (which were small) fit me fine. Almost all modern made "vintage" is only in M and L and XL, etc. and is riduclous ginourmous on me.

Prototype · 01-08-2008, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foofighter15

another thing lots of people don't notice about the classic compared to the new vintage is that the Logo was modified with the 95 jerseys, and in the modern vintages it uses the modified logo.

How so...???

iggypop · 01-08-2008, 06:44 PM

The company clearly changed their method of stitching between the two jerseys and the new one is just more spaced out as redforever menitoned. Im sure the company is just trying to save some money and went to a more cost effective stitching as it would use less thread. But really nothing you can do, as it is perfect and there is no way from a few feet away you would ever notice a difference anyways.

redforever · 01-09-2008, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iggypop

The company clearly changed their method of stitching between the two jerseys and the new one is just more spaced out as redforever menitoned. Im sure the company is just trying to save some money and went to a more cost effective stitching as it would use less thread. But really nothing you can do, as it is perfect and there is no way from a few feet away you would ever notice a difference anyways.

Not necessarily. The jerseys are now of a different fabric too, not as solid, lighter weight, more breathable. If you do the stitching as on the second jersey, the one where the stitching is so solid and you can not see any spacing, it will pucker a fabric that is lighter in weight. Or, it can even damage the fabric.

So I suspect the style of stitching now might have changed to accomodate the fabric in the new jerseys too.

burn_baby_burn · 01-09-2008, 09:17 AM

Stitching looks fine to me. I think your being picky.

tvp2003 · 01-09-2008, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redforever

Not necessarily. The jerseys are now of a different fabric too, not as solid, lighter weight, more breathable. If you do the stitching as on the second jersey, the one where the stitching is so solid and you can not see any spacing, it will pucker a fabric that is lighter in weight. Or, it can even damage the fabric.

So I suspect the style of stitching now might have changed to accomodate the fabric in the new jerseys too.

You might be onto something there... the stitching on the white jersey looks a lot wider; on the red jersey you can barely notice it's there.

The only beef I might have is that you can see on the white jersey where the stitching on the red portion has "leaked" onto the gold... no such "leakage" has happened on the white stitching for the red jersey -- not sure if it is related to the problem described above but it doesn't look as clean from up close.

From afar, you probably can't notice the difference, so if there is nothing you can do about it, I wouldn't sweat it.