Belt over the patch or under the patch? Which do you prefer and why?

[Deebo]

I see some people that wear their belts under the patch and others that go over the patch. Tell me which one you prefer and why you prefer to wear it that way.

[Giles]

I used to be an over type of guy, now I'm an under.  No scientific explanation….

[Chris]

Under.  I figure the patch got sewn on that way because Haraki intended us to use the patch like an extra belt loop, so that's how I treat it.

[Seul]

Under. It has room underneath, so why the hell not. Also: IH has such beautiful, thick patches 

[DougNg]

Under

Personal preference

[Finn666]

@Seul:

Under. It has room underneath, so why the hell not. Also: IH has such beautiful, thick patches 

backed…

[mvb]

Under

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[elclintor]

Under. Just because it feels right.

[madmonday]

doesn't matter to me.  my deciding factor is how fast i'm trying to get my belt into my pants & onto my a$$.

[MikeC]

Under always. Functionality. Period.

[scroogen]

I feel like the belt under the patch helps the pants to grip you better… especially with heavy fabrics and thick patches

[Megatron1505]

Definitely under.

[Guest]

My belief is that there is nothing to be gained from using your thick animal skin patch as a sixth belt loop unless you have a huge waist and need the extra support for your belt.  In all probability, the combination of the super thick patch and the super thick belt will only result in the stitches eventually ripping/breaking, or the patch deforming.  Putting your belt over-top of the patch however, provides some spectacular evo:

This is a similar situation to the cuffing debate.  Cuffing inevitably destroys your denim much faster than hemming to the proper length, regardless of your aesthetic preference.  But you people do what you want.  It's more money for H, G & P.

[Deebo]

Adam, those look awesome.

[elclintor]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there has ever been an issue with the stitching coming loose due to belt use.

[Guest]

moi is most definitely an under ,,always have,,,kinda natural for me ,,,,

[Guest]

@elclintor:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there has ever been an issue with the stitching coming loose due to belt use.

@yo_mj:

My SR patch is unstiching itself so I riveted it.

Snagged on the corner of a table (while wearing a belt underneath the patch)

@Giles:

The patch.  The problem with the patch is that unlike a lot of other brands, the stitching is just at the top and the bottom (rather than all the way around), so that you can get your belt through the patch if that is what you like to do.  That coupled with the thickness of the leather imposes great stress at the 4 corners.

The Polycotton that we sew the 634S with is and has alwayts been super strong.

On some jeans where we are aiming for a more vintage look (666 and 634SR) we use cotton.  This does tend to give up quicker than Polycotton, but that's part of the vintage look we are trying to recreate.

[elclintor]

Hmmm Interesting..

I figured all patches were sewn on with poly cotton thread.. It usually being a white thread and all.

Is that not the case? I've had 666S' and it sure did not look like cotton stitching on the patch..

Giles, could you clarify?

[LandoCal126 0]

Always Under. Never understood people who wore it over when they had the option to put it under. ROY Patches piss me off. Why put in all that work on the patch to have it covered with something?

[Guest]

That seems contradictory unless you wear your shirts tucked in, 'cause the shirt will then cover the patch, so what's the point.

My point is evolution and longevity, so I wear my belt over-the-top.