Real McCoy's / Joe McCoy's Jeans

[the spirit]

Picked up a pair of these 'cuz I'm thinking it might be fun to participate in the DWC:

 

 

Pre-soak is looking mostly correct, only concern is that the waist/top block might tighten up a tad much post-soak:

 

...debating whether to go for it with the soak, or trade these 31's in for 32's.  

 

(love, love, love the denim, construction, and simple solid details)

[Geeman]

Post pre/post soak measurements please!! Had my eyes on a pair of these for a while but couldn't figure the sizing / shrinkage 

[Aries]

I'm quite sure the 991XHs are sanforised... right? If so they will hardly shrink at all.

 

I'd definitely size down, if you soak you can't return.

[the spirit]

Totally, Absolutely, Most definitely, 100% certainly NOT sanforized.  But thanks for that... uh advice?  

[goodrain]

I guess if you like how it fits now then size up?

[coleslawyum]

Joe McCoy is un-sanforized, will shrink when touching water. Real McCoy's denim is sanforized, but will shrink only slightly. Most of the jeans are sized up slightly to accommodate for shrinking, but you really got to try a pair on for your desired fit. Shrinkage is up to 7% depending on how you wash them. 

 

For the 991XH, some people might do better with sizing down 1 size, but it depends on where you are on the size range. The smaller the size, the tighter it gets. There are odd numbered sizes and this helps a lot. I actually prefer  true to size and not have to worry about shrinking, but its a bit too loose for some.

 

I haven't worn out a 17oz pair yet, lot 003, WW2 version, but I can say that its a bit smoother than the Joe McCoy denim. It still has some texture, and when washed, the texture is enhanced slightly. I would say its less noticeable as a heavy ounce jeans in comparison to a Samurai. A customer has mentioned that it shrunk very little, but I don't think he tumble dried it, just a soak.

[Aries]

My bad then chaps, was thinking of my Real McCoy 004s.

 

Thanks for the info as ever coleslaw.

[fre-co]

I have been fiending for some rmc tiger tadpole. Does anyone wear it round here?

Coleslaw I'm passing through Nyc at the end of April/beginning of May. Big and rmc are my first stop.

[coleslawyum]

fresco I am looking forward to meeting you. Hit me up when you know your schedule.

[LFC4ever]

I'm still a little confused re RM denim. I thought the 001 and 004 were sanforised and the 002 and 003 were not. Maybe I'm wrong though would appreciate clarification!

[Geeman]

RMC jeans are sanforized JMC jeans are unsanforized 

[fre-co]

fresco I am looking forward to meeting you. Hit me up when you know your schedule.

Ill be there for 2 full days 30th April and 1st may. Only Thursday and Friday unfortunately.

Looking forward to it though.

[coleslawyum]

Great! More than likely I'll be there on Thursday. Hopefully with new product to show you.

[fre-co]

Great, Thursday then. I'll head up in the afternoon.

[fre-co]

Some denim pictures... These are coming along, need a wash soon.

RMC Lot.002

[LFC4ever]

RMC jeans are sanforized JMC jeans are unsanforized 

Honestly, as a generalisation I'm not sure that's correct. You're saying that the 002 and 003 are definitely sanforised?

[coleslawyum]

At least for now thats how the models are constructed. The Real McCoy's Jeans is a bit more refined in terms of details. The denim is sanforized, they have the characteristics of sanforized denim, but its not to say they won't shrink. Just not as much as the Joe McCoy jeans.

[fre-co]

You can see my RMC lot002 above have just a little leg twist, that is because they are sanforized. They did shrink a bit like Coleslawyum says - just not as much.

[Maynard Friedman]

Sanforization is such a variable process/term. My sanforized Lee 1937 101Bs shrank 3" in the inseam but just 0.5" in the waist after a hot wash.

[Ichinojo Fan]

Shameless second plug - just to let people know that the Cold Weather Jacket I'm selling from a few posts back has had a price drop - £300 from £575 (so around $450 from $870) - if anyone was interested but couldn't splash out my previous offer. Free international shipping and whatnot.

 

On an unrelated note, could anybody recommend the slimmest line in tees McCoy's offer? It seems from measurements at Superdenim and elsewhere that there's some discrepancy between tee sizings, but I can't work out whether they're due to inconsistent measuring on their part or whether the sizes simply fluctuate with each new design and production.

 

Anybody have any extensive experience of them?

 

IF

[LFC4ever]

Thanks for all the answers re sanforised or not. I had really believed the 002 and 003 were different in that they were unsanforised it appears however they are perhaps just less sanforised!

[JohnM]

Thanks for all the answers re sanforised or not. I had really believed the 002 and 003 were different in that they were unsanforised it appears however they are perhaps just less sanforised!

 

That sounds about right and consistent with the following from Gordon at Blue In Green:

 

"The RMC Lot 003 are not unsanforized, Some pre-shrinking has been done on the denim but it will still shrink with washing, just not as much as unsanforized denim."

[LFC4ever]

Ha!

I went through my emails and I now know why I was confused! This was the reply I got from Gordon but it was 2 years ago maybe things have changed:

 

"The main difference is the 004 is a more tapered leg fit than the 003 (picture attached), it also uses the same denim as the 001 style which is sanforized. The 002 and 003 use an unsanforized denim."

 

Regards,

 

Gordon 

[the spirit]

Post pre/post soak measurements please!! Had my eyes on a pair of these for a while but couldn't figure the sizing / shrinkage 

 

Decided to go ahead and commit to the size 31 (991xh).  Glad I did not trade 'em for the 32's as these didn't shrink as much as I expected.  I even did two full warm soak/dry cycles 'cuz I was certain the first round didn't get all the shrink out.  As it turned out, second soak made very little difference.   In response to above:  Pre-soak: W: 33.75; L: 34.5; Thigh: 12; Hem: 7.9.  Post-soak: W: 32.75; L: 33.0; Thigh: 11.5; Hem: 7.75.  I normally wear a 32, and these 31's pretty much fit like a 32.  

 

Post-soak fit:

 

...so it looks like I'm all set with my DWC pair.

[coleslawyum]

Ha!

I went through my emails and I now know why I was confused! This was the reply I got from Gordon but it was 2 years ago maybe things have changed:

 

"The main difference is the 004 is a more tapered leg fit than the 003 (picture attached), it also uses the same denim as the 001 style which is sanforized. The 002 and 003 use an unsanforized denim."

 

Regards,

 

Gordon 

 

Things have changed recently.

[LFC4ever]

Thanks yes I wondered if the denim and processing were now different. Anyway no problem I think I'm clear now! Until they change again next year :-)

[coleslawyum]

 

Just to double check, I grabbed a 002, 003, and a 904s for comparison. For sure the 002 and 003 feel like sanfoized denim. I'm not an expert, but from my experience, the smooth texture of sanforized denim is very prominent with the 002 and 003 denim.

[fre-co]

nice picture...

[Aries]

Just received my 991s and N-1 navy jacket.

 

991s are still drying on the line but here's how they left my bathtub...

 

Quick pics of N-1 (wouldn't wear it with what I'm wearing right now, but just wanted to give people an idea of fit). Any idea on the reasoning behind the 'handles' sown below the arm openings?:

[Aries]

Fresh off the line, first fit pics of 991.