Levi's Vintage Clothing

[501XX4EVER]

i just got a pair of "new rinse" .. not happy at all with the fit.. anyone know if these will shrink at all with a warm wash?

 

My guess would be probably not by very much, if at all.

[shoreman]

Cultizm ever offer steep discounts or promo codes that would make it more appealing for North American buyers?

[setterman]

Cultizm seems to be the slowest when it comes to lowering prices to clear out old inventory, and don't drop their prices as low as others do. 

 

Without signing in (which will drop the price a little) I see they want $105 for a 3/4 sleeve baseball shirt, marked down from $176.  I picked up a different color from the same season via vente-privee for $35.  And that thing was so cheap and flimsy I still paid $20 too much for it.  

 

NEVER buy LVC unless it's at least half off (and that includes the raw denim).    

[mf051404]

Need help please.  I bought a 1947 501 (code is 47501-0078) which is exactly this http://seamsboutique.bigcartel.com/product/1947, described as "Rough Rinse" but the tag says "Unwashed".  Is this actually unsanforized but has been "factory rinsed" so minimal shrinkage will occur, or is it still "raw" and I should expect it to shrink much? I plan to have it hemmed as I'm not really a fan of cuffing or stacking so I'd like to have an idea of the shrinkage rate. Thanks! Hope someone with experience on this exact jeans can help me out.

[DhaDha]

it's not raw. its a rinse wash. there will be little shrinkage, if any. IIRC Paul T used to say that they will fade differently from the rigid version since the resin coating comes off in chunks. 

[mf051404]

it's not raw. its a rinse wash. there will be little shrinkage, if any. IIRC Paul T used to say that they will fade differently from the rigid version since the resin coating comes off in chunks. 

Thank you.  That's also what cultizm said...but that stupid tag that came with it saying it is "unwashed", complete with the sizing guide for STF, complicated it for me...I find it dumb (and very annoying/confusing) for Levi's to put that "STF" tag when in fact it is pre-shrunk, why oh why Levi's?

[exaptavist]

/\ fair point.

[mf051404]

1947 501 (U.S. Raw) Thrifted for US$20, not bad! These are far slimmer than the Turkish Rough Rinse of the same size 

[Maynard Friedman]

For a given tagged size, LVC probably use the same size 1947 pattern template for both raw and all other non-raw versions that use sanforized or pre-shrunk denim. The raw ones shrink while the others don't, hence the sizing differential (I think!).

[mf051404]

Hi Maynard, for earlier LVCs I guess that is true, but for the recent ones, like the 1955 you are selling, I think they are tagged as "expected shrink size", yours has an actual waist of 34.5 tagged 32 right?

[Maynard Friedman]

That's true but if the same template is used for equivalent sizes in both raw and pre-shrunk denim, the end result always means there will be a similar difference, e.g.

Shrink to tagged size (size 32x36):

- Raw pair starts at 34x38 and shrinks to 32x36

- pre-shrunk pair starts at 34x38 and doesn't shrink

Shrink from tagged size (32x36)

- Raw pair starts at 32x36 and shrinks to 30x34

- pre-shrunk pair starts at 32x36 and doesn't shrink

[mf051404]

Exactly what I'm saying.

Your example #1 is what's been done for the newer LVCs of today.

Example #2 for the earlier/older LVCs

[rikz+]

Hi.

LVC 1947 (rough rinse)
31/34 (downsize 1)
180cm/77kg


 

 

Fits

 

 

[Coolguyzack]

Looks good. Though how does the seat feel?

[the rikz]

^

Really comfortable.

[cool_hand]

Just purchased a pair of LVC Raw 1947. Usually wear a 34" and sized up to to a 36. They are Cone denim.

 

Just received and they measure more like 37. The denim doesn't look like it will shrink that much. I am guessing probably not more than 1.5"

 

I've now seen measurements for Raw 34s @ 35.5".

 

What is the shrinkage like on these? - I'm starting to feel I should of just got a pair in 34's and cold rinsed?

[501XX4EVER]

Just purchased a pair of LVC Raw 1947. Usually wear a 34" and sized up to to a 36. They are Cone denim.

 

Just received and they measure more like 37. The denim doesn't look like it will shrink that much. I am guessing probably not more than 1.5"

 

I've now seen measurements for Raw 34s @ 35.5".

 

What is the shrinkage like on these? - I'm starting to feel I should of just got a pair in 34's and cold rinsed?

 

You've pretty much described my experience with the 1966 model, size 36x36. I don't remember the exact pre-soak measurements but the waist was far to big and the inseam was barely 35" raw. I didn't get that much shrinkage even after a 60 degree wash, but that was after they had already be in at 40 degrees. Maybe give them a blast at 60 degrees straight away, no detergent, no spin and see what happens. Just my 2 cents.

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 12, 2015 by hoggreaser

[cool_hand]

I'm picked them up on Sale. I looked around at lot's of different online sellers to see what they advised regarding sizing. Very few are advising to size up - most just say buy your size. LVC have a video guide to sizing on Raw, but it's a bit crazy. it's like saying, if you're not going to wash them size down and they will stretch to your size, if you're going to shrink to fit buy you're usual size and sit in the bath, and if you're going to machine wash - size up. I measured them again and they measure more like 36.5 but I doubt they will shrink much more than an inch in the waist and 2" in the length with a warm soak, that's purely based on looking at the weave in the denim. I think if the 34's measure just over 35 they'd work out fine because they would stretch back if they shrunk a couple of inches.

 

I remember buying a LVC Blanket lined jacket for £50 at Sale and the denim looked very similar to the 1947 - the tag said expect 10% shrinkage and to size up and it did not shrink one percent. Fortunately I was able to find another in my size.

 

These 1947 maybe Cone denim but they are not worth the £215 price tag. They're not comparable in quality to say ROY.

 

I'm sending them back.

 

501XX4EVER: I used to have a pair of LVC 1966's. The first edition. isn't the 1966 model Sanforized?

Edited July 24, 2014 by cool_hand

[Cucoo]

I remember buying a LVC Blanket lined jacket for £50 at Sale and the denim looked very similar to the 1947 - the tag said expect 10% shrinkage and to size up and it did not shrink one percent. Fortunately I was able to find another in my size.

 

Yeah, I've said this earlier in this thread, but: same experience with the raw sawtooth shirt, no shrinkage at all although the tag talks about 10%. LVC really need to get their shit together with regards to tagging their stuff.

[501XX4EVER]

501XX4EVER: I used to have a pair of LVC 1966's. The first edition. isn't the 1966 model Sanforized?

 

I'm sure they do a Sanforized version but these ones were definitely raw. There not 100% terrible or anything but as many people have said they're only worth buying when on sale, which is when I got mine.

[cool_hand]

according to this online seller LVC 1947 will def shrink 2" in the waist:

 

http://www.oipolloi.com/levis-vintage-clothing-1947-501-rigid

 

but according to this blog they don't shrink at all in the waist:

 

http://denimhunters.com/2012/07/stfnyc/

 

which one is correct?

 

and these guys say they shrink just under 2 sizes?

 

http://scout.rawrdenim.com/brands/levi-s-vintage-clothing/denim-jeans/levi-s-vintage-clothing-1947-501-rigid-raw-denim-jeans

Edited July 24, 2014 by cool_hand

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 10, 2015 by hoggreaser

[Maynard Friedman]

1966s are not sanforized, that's the 1967s.

[cool_hand]

hogreasser your selfies made me LOL.

 

I just found a seller who claims his 1947's tagged 36 shrunk to 33"!!

 

http://www.styleforum.net/t/261945/fs-lvc-1947-xx-stf-made-in-usa-36-waist-levi-amp-039-s-vintage-clothing-shrink-to-fit

 

But it's sounds like he bunny boiled them and then tumbled dried.

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 10, 2015 by hoggreaser

[cool_hand]

I should of ordered a 34 and the 36 and sent back the one I didn't think would work.

 

They've sold out of the 34 now, but it's not like a 1947 is a hard jean to find, everyone seems to sell them, just don't want to pay more than £100 for a pair.

 

Maybe next time…

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 12, 2015 by hoggreaser

[exaptavist]

.

Edited October 10, 2015 by hoggreaser

[cool_hand]

There is a tag on the jeans saying to size up 2" and that they will shrink 2" in the waist and 2 to 3" in the length.

 

Saying it doesn't mean it's so.

 

And no chance of getting a refund if they don't shrink like they say.

 

They cost me £90.

 

As you say there is no way of knowing if the Cone Denim they use is consistent, or how much the sizing varies depending on when and where they are made. They say Made in USA but I am sure that is just the Cone.

 

Does anyone know what denim they use for the pre-washed version of the 1947? It's not made in USA and certainly not specified as Cone; and retails at around £45 cheaper?

 

I guess I could hot soak them and if they don't work out eBay them