Your definition please?

[Slowhand Bob]

Guys, I plan to post this on one or two other forums later but would really like your opinions.  After all you are the 'Leather Forum'. 

I recently read an article  by a reasonably well known black powder shooter and though the leather was not the central point of the article, the author included photos of his rig and the well known holster maker who created it.  Though the holsters had several modifications that I would not consider as traditional, but they were added for speed of competition with the cap and ball pistols used.  The one thing that I seriously consider as a deal breaker in calling them (California) Slim Jims is the use of a fold over belt loop.    It seams popular with some makers now to fold the loop and attach it at the bottom and call it a Slim Jim.  My definition would also require that the belt loop be a separate piece of leather attached top and bottom, as was common with the early flap holsters from which they evolved.   How would you define the Slim Jim and what would be the absolute evolutionary difference that seperates it fro the Mexican Loop that later replaced it in popularity.  Remember that some of those first Mexican Loops appeared almost exactly like the Slim Jim except for the method created for mounting on ammunition belts.     

[Trailrider]

While you are correct that most of the original Slim Jim holsters had the belt loops sewn on separately, I would say (JMHO, of course) that the term refers primarily to the style of the body with no wide fold-over skirt that became the "Mexican loop" holsters.  Still, I have learned never to say "never", though in fact I have not run into an original Slim Jim where the leather was simply folded over and the lower end stitched to the body to form the belt loop.

I would expect that some of today's makers are simply doing that as a cost-cutting measure, as they can eliminate the stitching of the top of the belt loop to the body.  I do not do this with my own slim jim-style holsters, however! (#1851 Utah Scout, #1869 Alder Gulch or military flap holsters.)

Remember, however, that one must differentiate between a "store bought" holster back in the day,  and one that might have been cobbled together by someone then.

[Irish Dave]

For my $.02, it depends on how narrowly you wish to define it.

In a general sense, I'd say that the "skirt" and/or "loop" (whether slotted ot attached) is the first and predominant feature of the Mexican or Kansas loop style.

A California style or "Slim Jim" --to my way of thinking -- refers to a pouch that has a contour very close to the shape of the pistol and no visible skirt or loop attached across the front. It may or may not have a recurved throat. I've seen originals with plugged toes, open toes and sewn-through toes.

As to the belt attachment, even Packing Iron shows a number of variations on that. Agreed that most commonly it was a single strip of leather riveted and/or stitched at the bottom and usually just stitched at the top. Sometimes the top end was folded over before sewing, sometimes not. There are also stitched attachments that use a wider piece of leather, sewn all the way around, with double vertical slots cut into it, which the belt pases through.

As to the fold-over attachment, the provenance for that can be found in the military records of the day. The "Gaston modification" was proposed and (IIRC) accepted by the Army and consisted of just such a method. While probably not seen in wide service, it was done in "the day." Given that it was probably not uncommon for a certain period, then, in the military, it would seem that it is not unreasonable to presume that others may have copied it for civilian use, though I can't say I've ever actually held a period one so constructed.

IMHO, it probably depends on your intended use. If it's for SASS purposes, then I'd say any contoured pouch sans skirt or retaining loop is a Slim Jim." That is likely to be too broad, however, if you're an NCOWS member or a living history re-enactor etc.

Just my opinion, FWIW.

[rickk]

The way I see it, a holster with a belt loop that is stitched at the top rather than folder over, has several drawbacks and would have evolved into a folded over belt loop rather quickly. I would think they would have happened in the same basic period of time.

The way I see it, a sewn on top belt loop has the following weaknesses:

-The sewn area on the top of the belt loop is put at the most stressed part of the holster. either the stitching would come loose or the leather would tear out before any other thing goes wrong with the holster.
-A sewn on top holster typically has a harder time maintaining a good shape and position for re-holstering.
-Extra stitching by hand is time consuming.

A stitched belt loop does have some advantages. It allows a high ride, close to the waist profile common in today's concealed carry holsters. In 1870-1890, concealed carry on the open range was probably not a high priority.

So, right or wrong, assuming they lack a wide skirt underneath I am lumping them both into the same category.

Personally, my modest interpretation of a "slim jim" design has a looped over the top belt loop.  I have made quite a few and that's just the way mine all are done.

Your mileage may of course vary.

Rick

[Dalton Masterson]

I am going to say that if its missing the skirt, its a slim jim. With a skirt, not a slim jim. The belt loop doesnt really matter to me, although I have only built them with a separate piece myself.
DM

[will ghormley]

We are greatly limited in our historical research by what has survived.  I have never seen, or heard of, a surviving California styled (Slim Jim) holster with a folded over belt loop.  There may be one out there, but I've never run across it.  They may have existed, but haven't survived in any quantity.

Rick has pointed out the weak spots in holsters with sewn on loops.  I would have to say, as an engineering flaw of the California style holster, Rick is quite correct.  Given the potential superiority of a folded over belt loop, it is only reasonable to assume that, had they existed in the "Old West", and were common, they would have survived in greater numbers proportionately than sewn on belt loops.  Yet, they are so rare as to seem nonexistent.  From this analysis of the fact, (better engineering of folded over loops and rarity of surviving historical examples of folded over loops), the only logical conclusion is folded over loops on California styled holsters were very rare or nonexistent. 

Therefore, from a strictly historical perspective, I would exclude California style holsters with folded over loops from even being historically correct, let alone having a historical designation.  However, since the term "Slim Jim" isn't a historical designation, but rather a style of holster that includes modern variations, I have no problem calling that style of holster a "Slim Jim".

I'm not sure if any of Irish Dave's military modifications have survived, but I would class them as military holsters, and not civilian California style holsters.

Of course, if someone comes up with a historical example of a California style holster with a folded over belt loop, I'll have to adjust my designations to include the new historical evidence.

Will

[Slowhand Bob]

Would this mean that the famous Duke holster becomes a California Slim Jim by simply removing the loop and sewing it's fold over at the bottom?  I actually tend to consider this fold over as a skirt and the later Mexican styles actually attached a separate loop to this non-visible skirt.  No matter what I try to use as the dividing line, there are always exceptions that I find objectionable and considering anything but a strict definition of this very early style as allowing in to many mutts.  Top cuts and main seams would probably be a more slippery slope than is the belt loop style.

[Dalton Masterson]

SB,
By definition, I think the Duke holster without the loop around it, would be a Slim Jim. An unconventional one, but one nonetheless.
DM

[Skeeter Lewis]

Will, are you saying the the term 'slim jim' wasn't known in the nineteenth century?

[Slowhand Bob]

Actually as a young guy I remember seeing what we refer to as a Slim Jim be referred to as a 'Skin Tight' and it fit my definition pretty close BUT isn't it supposed to be common for the older holsters to have been made somewhat looser and the pistols to have ridden somewhat deeper in them?  Any one ever seen any kind of hammer thongs/etc on an old Slim Jim?  What with the lack of a definitive dictionary of terms we are often left to our own witts.  No matter who rights that book today, he would be using his preferred definition rather than a historically exclusive one.

[Ten Wolves Fiveshooter]

Actually as a young guy I remember seeing what we refer to as a Slim Jim be referred to as a 'Skin Tight' and it fit my definition pretty close BUT isn't it supposed to be common for the older holsters to have been made somewhat looser and the pistols to have ridden somewhat deeper in them?  Any one ever seen any kind of hammer thongs/etc on an old Slim Jim?  What with the lack of a definitive dictionary of terms we are often left to our own witts.  No matter who rights that book today, he would be using his preferred definition rather than a historically exclusive one.

From what my Granddad told me , holsters and gun belts were sold as SMALL, MEDIUM, and LARGE, and not every one bought the right size to fit there gun, therefore a lot of medium sized guns were holstered in large holsters, and fit much deeper in the bucket.


                tEN wOLVES

[Dalton Masterson]

I imagine it was simply known as a holster back then. Maybe some were called by a regional name, ie. California, Mexican, etc, but I bet most were simply known as holsters.

[will ghormley]

The terms "California" and "Mexican" are both used to describe holsters, (and saddles), during the 1800s.  I am not aware of any historical reference to "Slim Jim".  I'm not sure I even remember that term bein' used before 1990.  It would be interesting to look for "Slim Jim" in books and publications and find out then they were published.  If I had any money to bet, and could afford to loose it, I would bet the term "Slim Jim" was created during the last half of the 20th Century.

Will

[rickk]

to clarify my own definition... I do use a loop at the bottom of the fold over rather than stitching.

I just don't use a wide skirt.

Ya, the "Duke" style.

The way I figure it, any stitching that runs inside the holster is going to get worn out quickly. A loop avoids internal stitching and can be done with rivets instead (much easier).

It is still "slim".

It is easy, it is strong.

Again, your mileage may vary. This is just me.

Rick

[Slowhand Bob]

There are tricks used by holster and knife sheath makers to protect the internal stitches from Iron and iron from rivets.   Chuck shows some of these techniques in his videos that are available at Wild Rose.  His video on making a Slim Jim illustrates what I consider to be as accurate and traditional as it can be done.

[Cliff Fendley]

I call a California pattern with a seperate sewn and/or rivited loop on the back.

A Mexican loop style has a folded over top piece and is held to the body by one or more loops that the main body slides down through. The top piece creates the skirt but not all designs had a large one or even full length such as the early "Keller" half flap holsters.

There are some examples of ones with a folded over top and are attached directly to the body, I really don't know what to call them but I've heard some people refer to them as transitional holsters so sometimes I refer to them the same way. I tend to lead customers away from the design since it apparently wasn't very common although I believe there is at least one example of one in Packing Iron. I think Ben Varga was the maker. My brother has made some like it.

[Slowhand Bob]

There are more than a couple of makers who offer one basic competition holster in several configurations, one of which is a cut down skirt that is attached to the holster body.  Similarly, I have seen some cross-over mutts that had a full skirt with no accompanying loop, just riveted(?) together in a couple of places down the back.  Let it be understood that I am not being derogatory towards anyones work who combines styles, I have made many mutts my-own-self through the years.  Not sure off hand but wasnt the Paladin holster a mutt?

[Drayton Calhoun]

 I've actually seen what is commonly called "slim-jims" also called Missouri Skin Tights, why I have no idea.