Spring Showers Trench Coat in Progress

I knew I wanted to make a trench coat for the Spring Showers Social Sew, but I couldn\’t decide which, so I posted two trench coat options–this minimalist Burda and the classic McCalls 5525 (OOP)–on my instagram and y\’all overwhelmingly agreed on the sleeker Burda. Burda 12/2011 #118 is from the Sherlock Holmes collection. It\’s pared down, but still retains enough of the classic elements to be recognizable as a \”trench\”: shoulder flap, shaped pockets, tie belt, etc. It\’s double breasted, but has interior snaps instead of buttons, which I though was a cool touch (and I have a bunch left over from my pink bow coat, so that\’s a bonus).

My main sticking point for this one was that it\’s a Burda pattern. At this point in my sewing career, I don\’t need hand holding for most things, but the idea of making something (basically) totally unknown, (basically) without instructions, was nerve wracking. I had to install this collar like three times. And… it has welt pockets! What?!

I mean, what?!

All the flap pocket tutorials I found were this type, and my pocket pieces were a totally different shape, more like an in-seam pocket. I briefly thought maybe I was just supposed to make inseam pockets and then have a decorative flap but a quick glance back at the instructions informed me that was (sadly?) not the case. I finally found this tutorial from Iconic Patterns with pattern pieces that looked similar to mine!

I\’m very pleased with how they look. It\’s still a bit wonky on the inside because my pattern pieces (which I did not add seam allowances too, fyi) are the same size–one should be longer. It\’s easily remedied, but my pocket will be a bit shorter than it ought to be.

The other tricky part for me was deciphering the back pleat. Unfortunately, none of the versions I could find online showed the back, and the instructions were lacking. I winged it using a bit of trial and error folding, attempting to get the top of my back to match up with the shape of the back neck facing. In the end, I have no clue if this is correct, but it should be functional!