Looked at as in eyeballed them and they appeared to be basically square as opposed to rectangular, or did you fold them to see if the corners would line up precisely with all the fabric lying quite flat?
My experience is like the OP’s – when I fold bandanas along a centerline to make a rectangle, the corners don’t meet with the fabric kept flat. They seem to be slightly rhomboidal.
It’s a corporate trademark:
http://m.c.lnkd.licdn.com/media/p/8/000/203/22e/2be7537.png
Seriously, textiles have a bias, and will stretch and deform more one way than another, so after a few washings, they will come out rectangular.
The main reason can be described as “good enough” - how accurate does a two or three dollar hunk of fabric need to be?
The dimensions come from the fabric - light cotton is usually woven in a 44 inch width, so they split it down the middle at 22. The bandanas may start as 22x22" rough cut, but by the time the edges are trimmed and finished, it shrinks a bit. One edge is “selvege” or self-edge, and doesn’t need finishing, so that’s where the slightly oblong finished size comes from.
If they were square, they’d be handkerchiefs.
I folded them. This is the best way to check if adjacent sides are of equal length, making sure of course to keep both sides under approximately equal tension.
I just checked a slightly larger sample of 13. Ten were square, while three had one side longer than the other by about an inch. Those three are among the oldest I own, and are probably more than 20 years old.
All three of the irregular ones are labeled “Made in USA.” Five of the square ones are labeled “Made in China,” and one is labeled “Made in USA.” The others don’t indicate a place of manufacture. The bandanas were purchased mainly in New York sporting goods or department stores (although a few may be from elsewhere).
I think we can conclude that although some bandanas are irregular in dimensions, it is not a general design feature of bandanas.
Possibly the irregular ones are due to trying to get the largest number of bandanas out of a roll of material. If the length is not an even multiple of the width, maybe it works out to have one dimension shorter (but not enough to make it too far off square). On the other hand, bandanas are not exactly a precision piece of equipment, so it could be just sloppiness.
If you’re worried about stiffness you could always use a Banana Saver. So the banana won’t get stale. That’s it.
I sure didn’t expect that.
they are handkerchiefs, aren’t they?
I always figured that it was nearly impossible to get a perfectly square piece of fabric, especially if you have to hem the edges.
To check for squareness, I would always fold on the diagonal. If the corners didn’t meet, it wasn’t square.
Here is the bandana/banana skit this thread is starting to remind me of:
A square banana wouldn’t roll off the table?
Hard to imagine how a 20 year old bandana wouldn’t be stretched out a bit along the bias.
I used to work in a place that processed fiberglass and the huge rolls of fabric would get run through a slitter that cut the fabric to the desired width and then a cut-off machine would chop those bands into squares - all at very high speed with zero waste. I’m sure bandana fabric is treated the same way. Even if the hemming is done by hand, the cutting is going to be automated and “sloppiness” doesn’t really fit into the picture.
Shrinkage! (Seinfeld). But yeah, shrinkage and/or stretching is always going to favor one direction over the other. It’s just that a “square” bandanna is one place where the effect is going to be apparent.
Me too. :smack:
