I know this topic has been covered before but I love a grumble and have had a bit of a time with it over the past couple of months.
Are people finding that carp clothing brands are grossly mismatched to the 'normal' small, medium, large, extra large, xx large and xxx large sizes?
I've apparently jumped from a simple large (or XL for a comfy baggy fit) to XXXL for FOUR different brands, and yet beleive it not, although I'm no skinny minny, I've not put any weight on.
In fact its not really even about the sizes, its about the proportions. XXL garments that my kids/wife could barely get their wrists and ankles through.
There's countless anglers bigger than me so can only assume these companies are completely restricting potential sales.
Really frustrating as they aren't cheap.
Are people finding that carp clothing brands are grossly mismatched to the 'normal' small, medium, large, extra large, xx large and xxx large sizes?
I've apparently jumped from a simple large (or XL for a comfy baggy fit) to XXXL for FOUR different brands, and yet beleive it not, although I'm no skinny minny, I've not put any weight on.
In fact its not really even about the sizes, its about the proportions. XXL garments that my kids/wife could barely get their wrists and ankles through.
There's countless anglers bigger than me so can only assume these companies are completely restricting potential sales.
Really frustrating as they aren't cheap.
In reply to Post #1
Your kidding yourself if you think the Carp brands dictate what constitutes a S, M, L, XL size etc it's down to price and saving cost's.
Make your XL to the size L was a few years back and you make a few quid in the extra you get from the raw materials.
Carp branded clothing is absolute **** anyway.
Your kidding yourself if you think the Carp brands dictate what constitutes a S, M, L, XL size etc it's down to price and saving cost's.
Make your XL to the size L was a few years back and you make a few quid in the extra you get from the raw materials.
Carp branded clothing is absolute **** anyway.
In reply to Post #1
You get this with any clothing. although most (not all) clothing sold by fishing retailers and aimed at carp anglers, is crap anyway. I will say though, Snugpak... FFS! I tried on dozens of jackets in Johnson Ross and found a different fit with virtually every jacket. I'm a pretty average size fella (42" chest, 5'11 and 34" waist) so usually a Large from any brand fits me OK... couldn't find a single Snugpak jacket that fitted. What a sh1t show. Ended up getting a Craghoppers insulating jacket in green for just £38! Quality was better than the Snugpak too...
You get this with any clothing. although most (not all) clothing sold by fishing retailers and aimed at carp anglers, is crap anyway. I will say though, Snugpak... FFS! I tried on dozens of jackets in Johnson Ross and found a different fit with virtually every jacket. I'm a pretty average size fella (42" chest, 5'11 and 34" waist) so usually a Large from any brand fits me OK... couldn't find a single Snugpak jacket that fitted. What a sh1t show. Ended up getting a Craghoppers insulating jacket in green for just £38! Quality was better than the Snugpak too...
I spent a couple of months in the Philippines including a 2 weeks in the capital Manila biggest shopping mall in Asia and being (at that time 17 stone and XXXL )
i never found a T-shirt or top to fit me all way to small even the 5x size was too small bloody good job I took plenty of clothes with me
i never found a T-shirt or top to fit me all way to small even the 5x size was too small bloody good job I took plenty of clothes with me
In reply to Post #1
I just bought from a company called Smart Carp. saw em on insta. They only do 'large' sizes and were reasonable cost. Ordered a 3xl, gotta say, was a really decent fit.
They state they only cater for real sized men and there smallest size is XL, they do a real big boy at 5xl.
Worth a look as Im really happy with mine. Fits better than expected. The service was amazing as well, contacted me through every stage so I knew exactly what was happening with the order. Some bigger companies, take note. Up ya game and give us REAL sized clothing.
Why nearly ALL companys ignore larger sizes is a mystery, so many bigger anglers out on the bank, theres clearly a market for our sizes but they don't even make stuff for us
I just bought from a company called Smart Carp. saw em on insta. They only do 'large' sizes and were reasonable cost. Ordered a 3xl, gotta say, was a really decent fit.
They state they only cater for real sized men and there smallest size is XL, they do a real big boy at 5xl.
Worth a look as Im really happy with mine. Fits better than expected. The service was amazing as well, contacted me through every stage so I knew exactly what was happening with the order. Some bigger companies, take note. Up ya game and give us REAL sized clothing.
Why nearly ALL companys ignore larger sizes is a mystery, so many bigger anglers out on the bank, theres clearly a market for our sizes but they don't even make stuff for us
In reply to Post #3
I'm a pretty average size fella (42" chest, 5'11 and 34" waist) so usually a Large from any brand fits me OK... couldn't find a single Snugpak jacket that fitted.
Similar to me (I am 6' exactly though) & I have had no problems at all finding a Snugpak/Fortis jacket to fit me (I didn't even try any of them on before buying as ordered them online or bought blind from local shop on a special order for me). I have 4 here (all bought from different shops at different times) - 2 x SJ3's (one Large & one Medium for the wife), a FJ6 & a DPM Marine jacket. Both the Large sized FJ/SJ jackets are the same dimensions for chest, shoulder, arm length, etc as measured them with a tape measure, the medium SJ3 is an inch smaller in all the dimensions other than the arms compared to the large (as would expect) and the Marine is closer to an XL (even though says Large) as it is designed to fit over the top of the SJ/FJ jackets (which it does perfectly over both the "3" & the "6") being 1.75" larger in the measurements than the Large SJ/FJ jackets.
A friend of mine had similar experience to yourself when looking for a Snugpak jacket and I ended up showing him mine and getting him to try them on. He said that he felt the SJ3 was a tighter fit than the FJ6 even though the internal measurements were exactly the same sizes & when I showed him, he couldn't understand how one could feel tighter than the other with identical measurements & that the lighter padded one was the one that felt "tighter" to him.
I have to admit that I have picked up the wife's Medium SJ3 a couple of times and worn that without looking at the label and not noticed any tightness from it when done up.
I'm a pretty average size fella (42" chest, 5'11 and 34" waist) so usually a Large from any brand fits me OK... couldn't find a single Snugpak jacket that fitted.
Similar to me (I am 6' exactly though) & I have had no problems at all finding a Snugpak/Fortis jacket to fit me (I didn't even try any of them on before buying as ordered them online or bought blind from local shop on a special order for me). I have 4 here (all bought from different shops at different times) - 2 x SJ3's (one Large & one Medium for the wife), a FJ6 & a DPM Marine jacket. Both the Large sized FJ/SJ jackets are the same dimensions for chest, shoulder, arm length, etc as measured them with a tape measure, the medium SJ3 is an inch smaller in all the dimensions other than the arms compared to the large (as would expect) and the Marine is closer to an XL (even though says Large) as it is designed to fit over the top of the SJ/FJ jackets (which it does perfectly over both the "3" & the "6") being 1.75" larger in the measurements than the Large SJ/FJ jackets.
A friend of mine had similar experience to yourself when looking for a Snugpak jacket and I ended up showing him mine and getting him to try them on. He said that he felt the SJ3 was a tighter fit than the FJ6 even though the internal measurements were exactly the same sizes & when I showed him, he couldn't understand how one could feel tighter than the other with identical measurements & that the lighter padded one was the one that felt "tighter" to him.
I have to admit that I have picked up the wife's Medium SJ3 a couple of times and worn that without looking at the label and not noticed any tightness from it when done up.
In reply to Post #1
Are people finding that carp clothing brands are grossly mismatched to the 'normal' small, medium, large, extra large, xx large and xxx large sizes?
I've apparently jumped from a simple large (or XL for a comfy baggy fit) to XXXL for FOUR different brands, and yet beleive it not, although I'm no skinny minny, I've not put any weight on.
In fact its not really even about the sizes, its about the proportions. XXL garments that my kids/wife could barely get their wrists and ankles through.
A lot of the problems today are that "cuts" of the material. A lot of the "fashionable" clothing (not just within angling) is cut to a "slim" or "tight" fit where as in the past it would be cut to a "normal" fit. It is more noticeable in leg wear with the legs of the trousers/jogging bottoms all being a "slim" or "skinny" fit rather than a "straight" or "baggy" fit like the same product a few years back would be. If you have thicker legs for whatever reason, almost everything is going to feel tight on them because of the cut. I have the same thing when buying suits. First thing I look at nowadays (can't afford to buy custom made from a tailor) is the cut of the fabric. I end up buying a "slim" or "skinny" fit jacket (as not got a "belly" so don't need the extra size a "tailored" or "normal" fit gives and go for a "regular" or "tailored" fit in the trousers as I cannot wear trousers that constrict around my legs when sat down like "slim"/"skinny" fit trousers do. Same with jogging bottoms and trousers for fishing. The only ones I have found within the last year that are the fit I want are the Aqua jogging bottoms - which are a "normal" fit compared to similar from Fox, Nash, etc which are all "skinny" fit and are the same as what you would find in non-angling outlets. I begrudge paying the Aqua price for a pair of jogging bottoms but they are the only ones I could find anywhere that were not the fashionable "skinny" fit. Thankfully I also have a pair of Trakker joggers from the early 00's which are a baggy fit that I can still wear. Same with the Nash Combats from the same time period which are a "baggy" fit compared to the "slim"/"tapered" fit that the more recent ones have all been.
Are people finding that carp clothing brands are grossly mismatched to the 'normal' small, medium, large, extra large, xx large and xxx large sizes?
I've apparently jumped from a simple large (or XL for a comfy baggy fit) to XXXL for FOUR different brands, and yet beleive it not, although I'm no skinny minny, I've not put any weight on.
In fact its not really even about the sizes, its about the proportions. XXL garments that my kids/wife could barely get their wrists and ankles through.
A lot of the problems today are that "cuts" of the material. A lot of the "fashionable" clothing (not just within angling) is cut to a "slim" or "tight" fit where as in the past it would be cut to a "normal" fit. It is more noticeable in leg wear with the legs of the trousers/jogging bottoms all being a "slim" or "skinny" fit rather than a "straight" or "baggy" fit like the same product a few years back would be. If you have thicker legs for whatever reason, almost everything is going to feel tight on them because of the cut. I have the same thing when buying suits. First thing I look at nowadays (can't afford to buy custom made from a tailor) is the cut of the fabric. I end up buying a "slim" or "skinny" fit jacket (as not got a "belly" so don't need the extra size a "tailored" or "normal" fit gives and go for a "regular" or "tailored" fit in the trousers as I cannot wear trousers that constrict around my legs when sat down like "slim"/"skinny" fit trousers do. Same with jogging bottoms and trousers for fishing. The only ones I have found within the last year that are the fit I want are the Aqua jogging bottoms - which are a "normal" fit compared to similar from Fox, Nash, etc which are all "skinny" fit and are the same as what you would find in non-angling outlets. I begrudge paying the Aqua price for a pair of jogging bottoms but they are the only ones I could find anywhere that were not the fashionable "skinny" fit. Thankfully I also have a pair of Trakker joggers from the early 00's which are a baggy fit that I can still wear. Same with the Nash Combats from the same time period which are a "baggy" fit compared to the "slim"/"tapered" fit that the more recent ones have all been.