Fitting Issues for Larger Sizing

For those of you experiencing some dismay because I wrote that my one piece block is suited to bust sizes between 80cm and 94cm, please don't panic. This site is suited to students and home sewers without a great deal of pattern making experience. At larger sizes more understanding is needed to achieve a good fit and this gets somewhat technical so I don't recommend it, unless you really, really understand the properties of stretch garments. You will still need to create the one piece block, but modify it as set out below. The content below is somewhat long winded but I don't know any other way to present it ... it's not an easy topic and again I don't recommend doing this unless you are really familiar with stretch fabrics.

I won't be offering email support for larger sizing as it really isn't practical ... there is so much room for error that I'd simply be guessing most of the time, and may even lead you the wrong way unintentionally. If you really need support making patterns for larger size swimwear then you actually need more experience on smaller sizes first!

Now by larger sizes I do not only mean a larger waist line. It means any measurement at or beyond the Australian size 14 measurement set as a whole. You might be taller or bigger busted or much bigger hips or indeed your every measurement might be scaled up perfectly proportionally from a 5ft 6in size 8B only you are 6ft 4in tall and wear a 40D bra! Larger does not mean fatter. Larger means one or more measurements are larger than those that have a predictable shape with respect to size.

Fabric Issues

Lycra is widely loved by all because it curves and stretches and goes around things while still sitting flat on the body. No darts are generally needed and a simple curved side seam is all that's required to make it fit snugly all over. Right? Wrong. Lycra has the capacity to absorb a certain amount of distortion and still fit correctly. The emphasis here is on a certain amount. This is why you do see bust dusts on larger sizes. As the sizing gets larger, the amount we require lycra to distort also increases ... but the fabric hasn't changed, has it?

To illustrate my point lets consider the humble shoulder strap (see the basic tanksuit, step 3, for a quick refresher). As the strap gets narrower, we generally need to shorten its length to maintain the same tension. When we add more weight to the end of that strap we stretch it further, meaning for the same final length we need to shorten it some more right? Wrong again. Lycra only stretches to a point before it doesn't stretch any further. But before it gets to that point it takes tension away from other areas causing a cascading effect of trouble if you go for the quick fix. How about making the strap wider? Sure now that's the clear and obvious second solution ... but it's not a simple scale up in width. A bust at 94cm will get by on 3cm, but at 40D for example we'd be looking at a width of 5.5cm for the same support tension!! It's all about tension, remember. But at 5.5cm wide it will look very odd indeed. Anyone know the answer yet?

The clever student will point out that larger busts need a bra type support so why not add extra lining or fabric to the strap area to stiffen the fabric so it supports better. Yes this will work. You could line the strap (and indeed the whole bust area) with something like power net but the problem still exists in the rest of the garment ... all you've done is increase the rebound capacity of the strap and the rest of the garment is still the same ... resulting in a mass of ripples fanning out over the bust, or indeed under it if you use a bra structure. Not only that, but now we have a much more complex and more expensive garment to manufacture. The more complex the garment, the less size range it will suit and hence limit its potential market. How do we do this simply without chasing ourselves round in circles? How many home sewers that are, say a 42B, want to start learning bras and swimsuits both at the same time?

The clever student was half right to suggest stiffening the lycra with extra lining. The problem here is controlling the differing fabric tensions over the whole body and chasing ourselves round in circles trying to get the garment to sit flat afterwards. Of course you could carry the extra lining all over the whole body to keep the tension even but why not do something even simpler. What? Simply increase the weight of the lycra from the standard 170-180sm to something heavier like 195gsm or even 210gsm. You might have to specially order it, but it means simpler construction, narrower straps, standard lining and a whole lot less ripples ... but most of all it means even and more predictable tension control over the whole body, thus easier patterns.

All the above should help to illustrate why fabric quality is so critical to pattern making, and why the same pattern can produce both successful garments and complete failures.

Shape Issues

Generally there are three areas in which shape varies significantly as size increases. In order of significance they are ...

• Hips, bottom and legs
• Waist: both front and back
• Bust: mostly by increased cup variation

Part One - Hips, Bottoms & Legs

For any particular size, the range in hip measurements for a woman is greater than any other measurement (for men it's the waist), and with it, the larger the hip measurement, the greater the amount of shape variation. For example, a 76cm waist will have a hip measurement of between 95.7cm and 111.4cm, 95% of the time. That's more than the 12% one might use for ease. But even if your hip measurement is precisely, say 100cm, there are so many ways the shape of your hips can be different from the stereotypical average that the patterns must change in order to fit correctly. So you can see how impossible ready-to-wear might be! See the illustration below. The red line represents the true hip line that most people use ... and shows why I prefer to use a lower measurement!

Figure A represents the stereotypical outline shape of most people. If you take a look at the table below you can get an idea of how many people in each size group are actually represented by this shape. What you will notice is that as you increase in size, fewer people within that group are actually represented by figure A.

Figure B represents what is referred to as "squared hip". This is initially a distinct skeletal change that is mostly seen in taller North American women (it still occurs in all sizes and heights). I have no idea what caused this change but I have trouble finding it in any images going back further than the 70's. Squared hip is usually padded by a little bit of fat creating a nice smooth shape which tucks in quite quickly toward the waist (about 40%) or the waist is almost missing (60%). Keep in mind this is a hip condition ... similar effects can be caused by things like "muffin top", the ring of fat at the lower tummy which teenagers like to hang over the top of their hipster jeans.

Figure C is the bane of women world wide. Referred to as "jodhpur thighs" it's really only of interest to swimwear because it's usually accompanied by a sagging in the outer edge of the bottom cheeks (about 85%). It can't really be hidden by swimwear but we can do things like raising the leg line to draw the eye away from it. We do however also need to extend the leg line further out over the bottom or the angle of the cheeks will cause the garment to ride up. This is why you had such high leg lines with square back bottoms in the 1980's ... jodhpurs were the issue of the decade in women's magazines ... and so many women "suffered" from this figure shape that all swimwear styles were designed to cater for it. In fact does anyone remember the soft cotton lycra bodysuits with the press studs in the crotch? The leg line was often so high to look good for the bedroom that if you ever tried on your 10 year old jeans from the 70's you'd find an exposed patch of skin above the belt line! The absolute worst thing you can wear if you have jodhpurs is hipsters as these exaggerate the feature and look awful. So much for trying to be fashionable!

Figure D is where the inside thighs touch when standing straight with your knees together. It usually occurs because of and stays after pregnancy (see the irony in that?) but can occur naturally in a person of any size. It's of significance to swimwear because it's associated with lower and closer together bottom cheeks (or better said, there is little to no natural valley between the cheeks. From a pattern making perspective you can open the cheeks a little with a concave center back seam (best suited to smaller sizes) or go the complete opposite and create a convex center back seam to allow the garment to move further out over the cheeks (larger sizes that also have jodhpurs for example).

Figure E represents both jodhpurs and square hips together. While exaggerated in this image, many North American and African women are of this figure type.

Figure F represents both jodhpurs and touching thighs, more typical of European and Australian mothers.

Figure G is the trifecta and usually (honestly) is a weight issue, although it is possible to have all three and it not be a weight issue on much taller women ... the taller you are the more likely you are to also have jodhpurs, although the less likely your thighs will touch because both your pelvis is bigger and you thighs are longer (then it's a simple matter of physics and mechanics).

The above table is based on a survey size of 1,402 women of assorted nationality. You can clearly see from the table that as size increases the percentage of people of figure type A decreases sharply. The most notable shape issue is jodhpurs … in sizes 14 and up you are more likely to have them than to not, with 88% of women size 16+ having this feature. Which must raise the question is it normal to have them, with the smaller sizes being the odd ones out? Square hips and inside thigh do increase with size but are not significant numerically in themselves until combined with jodhpurs. There was one instance in a size 8 in which both squared hips and inside thigh were present but not jodhpurs ... this was on a very odd shaped model so I've removed her from the statistics.

Ok that’s a lot of technical stuff and numbers. What it should tell you is that as size increases, a lower square or hipster leg line is a bad idea yet that’s what most shops have on offer. Why? It’s because the larger sizes cater to all three conditions at the same time in order to sell more product. Too bad if you’re a size 16 or greater, they won’t give you a choice … you’re going to look like an overweight grandmother even if you’re a 6ft 4in perfectly proportional, twenty something athlete, who’s never had a baby and that is that! Seriously though, the numbers show that designers should be catering to the jodhpur shape in larger sizes and ignoring the other two conditions ... this would mean higher leg lines, not lower leg lines ... but of course, that wouldn't be fashionable would it?

From a custom pattern making point of view the trick is to identify which conditions you or your client have and design the garment accordingly as described above. You are really looking at either ...

• Raising the leg line at the side seam about 4-5cm and moving the leg line at the cheek further outward by 3-4cm. The amount really is arbitrary but increases proportionally with the extent of the jodhpur.
   
• Creating a square leg line as directed in the 70's Square Leg Maillot and adding in a convex curve into the centre back seam as illustrated below by breaking the back panel below the waist into quarters. You rotate up the top section about 5 degrees and open the other two by 5 degrees creating a little extra vertical ease (center image). You can also add in extra horizontal ease as illustrated in the right hand image.

Click here to go to Part Two

Got Any Feedback?

Please rate this page from 1 star to 5 stars based on how
much you learned from the information. Was it detailed enough?
Was it easy to read? Was the information relevant? Feel free
to add further comments (and email address if you want a reply).

Any comments?