Length of Sack Coats

[Grenadier]

Been curious about the variety of coats in common wear in the late 1870's and early 80's. Most coats I have seen in photos appear to hit about the top of the thigh, but some extend to the region of mid-thigh. I attribute the longer ones to fitting those individuals with a shorter torso. Was there a length that was considered more fashionable? Would a working man considered something shorter? Something that would be easier for wear on horseback?

[Books OToole]

Again, this is just a rule of thumb:

Jackets were rare in the post Civil War era.
(I don't know why.)

Sack coats were generally worn as a three piece suit, with only the top button, buttoned.
The length of a sack coat is generally covers the butt.

Frock coats were approxamately to the knee* and were worn with contrasting pants and vest.  They were not buttoned at all, to show off a vancy vest.

Books


* I have seen short frock coats in paintings of the era.  They were tailored like a frock coat but of sack coat length.

[Blair]

The overall length of a 'Sack Coat' can very. Fashion of the specific period of time can effect this.
The sack coat is a rather simple, usually untailored (hence the term 'sack') outer garment that uses one length of cloth from neck to the hem in three sections. The basic parts are the back panel and the two front panels.

The overall length of  a 'Frock Coat' may also vary greatly with period fashions as well. However, they are greatly more complex in their tailoring and overall fit.
The body parts are separate from the 'skirt' which gives the garment its overall finished form and length.
The basic body parts may be either 5 or 7 panels. With a similar number of separate panels making up skirts. (Adding to the complexity maybe double breasted, and skirt tail pockets.)
This is the simplest explanation I can offer to help describe the differences between the two coats.
  Blair