I traced View A size XXL (for reasons given yesterday) but then decided I wanted to compare it with View B. There has been some discussion about the crotch of View A being different from View B. I wanted to know. So my XXL View A is traced in BLUE ink. View B is traced and the difference filled in with GREEN Ink. Let me tell you it’s not easy to take these kinds of pictures. I don’t do this often and don’t have a good set up. Nonetheless I think we can see how View a and View B differ:
This is the front. I think the substantive changes are the leg length (of course) and the narrowing which occurs along the side seam. That narrowing starts just below the waist and increases up to about 1/2″ before View B’s hem. There is also minor changes in the bottom of the front crotch curve and again under the front crotch point along the inseam. Had someone else not commented about the crotch being different, I would have thought the crotch differences were due to how I traced the pattern.
Changes to the back are similar
The substantive change is leg length and width along the side seam. There is again some change in the inseam just beneath the crotch point.
There are no changes to the waist or the length of the rise. Until I lined the pattern pieces up carefully, I didn’t think there were even the minor differences noted (other than the leg length).
I would be surprised if the changes in the crotch area affected fit. Although I do have to admit that I sometimes make 1/4″ changes to achieve my desired fit. Personally, when I want a shorter leg, I won’t be copying View B. I’ll just fold the leg up to my desired length.
Having compared the two views of the Ascona, I was curious as to how the Ascona compared with my TNT, Pp113. I placed the Ascona on top and traced PP113 with ORANGE ink.
I first tried aligning the pattern pieces by placing the Straight on Grain Lines on top of each other. Apparently the two pattern cutters don’t place their SOG’s in the same place. I switched to keeping the SOG’s parallel and aligning the crotch points.
I added orange lines to the pic to denote where PP113 would have appeared if I traced at this time. I felt like they were too out of alignment to compare. So I aligned the crotch and inseams as well as possible.
With this alignment, the fronts look very similar and kind of what I’m expecting. I’m expecting the slimmer legs. I did buy it for that reason. I was surprised by leg length but then remembered I have shorter legs and I always shorten leg length on patterns (and most RTW). What really surprised me was how different the grain lines are. That is a PLUS in my mind. I’m looking for a different pattern. If there is nothing substantially different between the two, why am I bothering to fit a new pattern?
The backs are more remarkable:
The Ascona front rise was at least 1″ taller than my PP113. I’m surprised that the back is not. The Ascona uses a cut-on waistband. Both back and front should be taller than my PP113. However, the Ascona’s crotch is obviously deeper by at least 1/2″ which may help. I was hoping for more of a change to the curvature of the back inseam. I always have excess fabric in this area. I was hoping that the slimmer (tapered) leg would also take away some of that excess fabric. By now the leg length was expected as were the much desired and slimmer legs. I was relieved when this detailed comparison revealed that I only needed 1/2″ extra along the side seam to give me as much rear ease as the PP113 provided.
SUMMARY PATTERN ALTERATIONS:
- Leg length
- -1/4″ to create my preferred 1.25″ hem
- +1/2″ along back side seam