Levi's Vintage Clothing

[electrum]

I'd rather see more photos and stories of people waering these jeans and breaking them in, rather than the same old hoary stories.

Hear, hear Paul!

[electrum]

Heres a couple more photos of the 1905 209 coveralls

1911 333s

These look okay, but it's my understanding that they have the wrong cut, weight and stitching. If you want an exact replica, there's a company called Candy Cane that makes their's better and they use the last surviving original vintage Cone Mills shuttle loom to make their denim. JUST JOKING!!

Seriously though, the colour of the o'alls denim is remarkable. Its array of thalo blues, greens and a hint of cobalt violet, creates a very neat authentic unique earthy effect. The colour looks much like the detail shot PaulT posted of his 1920's 201 recently.

I don't particularly like the denim texture of the 333's, it's a bit bland -- looking almost like a heavy broadcloth or sailcloth crosshatch type of weave. I'd consider getting a pair though if they were available in rigid/raw -- think they'd be a damn good pair of tough work jeans. I nteresting stuff, you have a good eye for detail -- thanks for posting.

[Paul T]

Party taco, if you could measure the seat - the width of the jeans, measured across the front, along a line directly under the front pockets - that would help give more of a clue to the shape.

The main obvious difference between the cuts, rather than the relative width of the legs, is the shape of the top block; the 55 LVC is more of a bell shape, tapering in to the waist, whereas the 47 goes up almost in a straight line. Of course if you wear a smaller 55, and stretch out the waistband, this gives a very similar effect.

I have mentioned before, when this issue was raised, that I hope at some time to get hold of an LVC pattern cutter; I haven't been involved in any projects recently that would allow me to question them.

Personally I like the fact there's a difference between the 47 and the 55, that's part of the charm.

Interesting point someone was making about the smaller sizes - for many years the Levi's 502 was the kids' or youths' jean, I think available up to a 28 or maybe even a 30 waist, and these were probably a different cut, too.

Funny though, how many people won't wear the 201, because it's an original, 'wide' cut!

THis is the same fabric as Allen's 209 overalls

[mikedbt5]

I'm pleased partytaco has been able to shed some facts on this issue , with hopefully more to follow . The authenticity of cuts question I think has bothered a lot of us for a long time , I have previously discarded certain pairs because of it !!

Included a couple of LVC 551zxx pics , close as to any original pic I have seen and although referenced as an early 60s jean I have seen Evey Garment Guaranteed labeled pics dating them to late 50s. Note the bell shape and tapered waist !!!

Think these pics also show how jeans can look very different when pictured from different angles

[edmond]

does this pair represent the real 55 cut levis used by elvis or the grease kids?? and worn double 3" cuffs with engineer boots??

http://www.cultizm.com/product_info.php?info=p44_Levi-acute-s-reg--BIG-E-1955-DRY-GOODS-501xx-LVC.html

[Paul T]

does this pair represent the real 55 cut levis used by elvis or the grease kids?? and worn double 3" cuffs with engineer boots??

http://www.cultizm.com/product_info.php?info=p44_Levi-acute-s-reg--BIG-E-1955-DRY-GOODS-501xx-LVC.html

Yes. I suggest you buy your actual waist size, they'll still be generously-sized around the hips & the wasitband will stretch out. Get them to check, as this year's production is in a new factory and are made bigger.

[edmond]

gotcha so i wont need to size up on these like the usual lvc eh? so ill get my actual waist size on raw/rigid state?

[Paul T]

gotcha so i wont need to size up on these like the usual lvc eh? so ill get my actual waist size on raw/rigid state?

Yessir.

If you check out the pic below, you can see how the 55, on the right, is much bulkier than, say the 47. I'm a 32 W, and this is a 34 W (whic actually measured 33) on the 47, and a true 32W on the 55. The wasitband stretches out easily on the 55, but the top block doesn't need to stretch much at all, as it's cut quite generously around the hips.

http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showpost.php?p=1736065&postcount=14861

Make sure you do get them to check sizing tho, current 55 models seem to be made very big.

[setterman]

Historically, how different was the cut between the WWII era 501s, and the '47s? I'm guessing other than the details (rivets, buttons, arcs), the two jeans were very close (high waist, narrow straight leg). Which leads me to ask, why do the LVC '47s get so much attention (and confusion) and the '44s seem to be a bit ignored? They're both going to give that same look, and it might be easier to accomplish with the '44 (I know it was for me).

[mikedbt5]

Pictures dont really prove anything but I have included two pics - One of a pair of 1950s offset belt loop 501s (w34 l 33.5 from Duff Tokyo site) and a pair of LVC 1947 i recently purchased (S1 08 tagged and measured w34 l 34) The 1947s have a 81/2 leg opening which immeiately goes to 9 inches upto the knee . Theses are extremely straight leg . The crotch to outer thigh is 12 inches . I always previously bought a w36 l34 (then shrunk) but recent 243m jeans I purchased last October were too loose . These are great but still not a slim cut !!!

[airfrogusmc]

Historically, how different was the cut between the WWII era 501s, and the '47s? I'm guessing other than the details (rivets, buttons, arcs), the two jeans were very close (high waist, narrow straight leg). Which leads me to ask, why do the LVC '47s get so much attention (and confusion) and the '44s seem to be a bit ignored? They're both going to give that same look, and it might be easier to accomplish with the '44 (I know it was for me).

Originals? Theres not much....LVCs 47s should be cut closer to the 44s than they have been if they are to be accurate compared to originals.

[airfrogusmc]

I haven't seen any of the newer 47s and as Paul has said the sizing on some of the other models has not been the way it was in the past. As you can see the measurements I posted of my 47s as compared to my 55 both tagged the same size would suggest a slimmer fir and Pauls remarks about the 55s more bell shaped profile as compared to the 47s would go to the idea that the 47s would have a trimmer profile. But as you can see by the measurements of my 47s the are slimmer in the thigh and cut lower than the 55s.

[Paul T]

I faithfully promise I'll contact a few key people at Levi's - employees, and past employees - to see if I can nail this. It will be a couple of months though, I have some work to deliver in the meantime.

(All this talk about them has made me want to put my 55s back in the cupboard and get out those '47s again....)

[mikedbt5]

I haven't seen any of the newer 47s and as Paul has said the sizing on some of the other models has not been the way it was in the past. As you can see the measurements I posted of my 47s as compared to my 55 both tagged the same size would suggest a slimmer fir and Pauls remarks about the 55s more bell shaped profile as compared to the 47s would go to the idea that the 47s would have a trimmer profile. But as you can see by the measurements of my 47s the are slimmer in the thigh and cut lower than the 55s.

I totally agree , 47s I owned say 2yrs ago were slimmer than those produced now . There is a pic of me in a pair of w36/l34 ( from Oct 2008 ,shrunk to 34/32 )in the 47 sizing thread and the cut is a lot fuller than any I ever had previous. I had to sell them and eventually get a 34/34 . Levis seems to have got its' act together on the 47 but dont start me on other recent models !!

[airfrogusmc]

Hey Paul I love my 47s to. I haven't worn them in a while. Took them out to measure last night but I think I'm going to leave them out and put them on later.

[Dr_Heech]

As requested by some, a few more detailed pics of the Lvc 1873 duck pant:

Selvedge with black 'ID' line

Lovely early back pocket detail

Rivet details

Lower inside rivet backed by leather washers

Buckle and early label detail

Hand written sizes

Inside detail

Early buttons were sown on

[electrum]

All I know, based on my experience with the '47(3 different pairs, 2 '07s and 1 '06 run I believe) is that they were all very tight in the thighs. Regardless of whether they were loose, too small or fit perfect in the waist, the thighs were always tight. They are the funkiest fitting Levi's jeans I've ever had, they just looked like and felt like crap on me. What's strange though, is that I've seen a few pics posted here of people wearing their '47's and they seem to look like they fit fine compared to the ones I had.

[Dr_Heech]

Oh, and for those of us who are interested, the inside wash/info tag:

Posted pics of the 1879 1st pleated blouse on the 'what about jean jackets' thread.

More to follow....

[Dr_Heech]

All I know, based on my experience with the '47(3 different pairs, 2 '07s and 1 '06 run I believe) is that they were all very tight in the thighs. Regardless of whether they were loose, too small or fit perfect in the waist, the thighs were always tight. They are the funkiest fitting Levi's jeans I've ever had, they just looked like and felt like crap on me. What's strange though, is that I've seen a few pics posted here of people wearing their '47's and they seem to look like they fit fine compared to the ones I had.

I'm not big on the 47's, but your right on the tight thighs. I had three pairs I bought from Cinch in 1999, every subsequent pair were because of that fact (1st pair = 32/34, 2nd pair = 34/36, and 3rd = 36/36). I couldnt understand why, as all the original pairs I had owned never had that problem. In the end i found the 55's just right. The weird thing was that I was skinnier then, but the 47's were still just too tight around the thigh.

[Paul T]

outstanding photos on the cotton duck pants Dr H, many thanks. I hadn't noticed the leather washer on the backpocket rivets before; what excllenet repros these are .

[Dr_Heech]

outstanding photos on the cotton duck pants Dr H, many thanks. I hadn't noticed the leather washer on the backpocket rivets before; what excllenet repros these are .

Thanks Paul, i suppose that it's to do with them being a water repellent garment - when they shrink to fit, the leather stops water getting in around the rivet. Notice that they have a one piece waistband, like the other workwear-type early repros we were discussing?

[superBobo]

^^great pics, amazing pants. Comparison picsof the 1901 duck pants would be nice aswell:)

[Dr_Heech]

^^great pics, amazing pants. Comparison picsof the 1901 duck pants would be nice aswell:)

Will ad it to the "to do" list, I promise (On the card tie-on tag, it says 1900 duck pant !??!)

Here's one I posted earlier of the two:

And "limited number" and inside label, "made in turkey":

[airfrogusmc]

Great pants, doc H

Anyone no where I can score one of those duck jackets in XL Do they run large?

[airfrogusmc]

Ok everyone Jake just instructed me how to check rep and to Paul thanks for the info Dr H thanks and to all that have left a message and rep THANKS YOU...

[civicex]

Sweet. so here's the turnout:

"S108" and on inside tagged LVC 47's are the newer, looser cut.

I have a pair of "S107" inside tagged LVC 47's (Although the booklet attached said Spring 2008 Collection) that was 32/32, with a true 31 waist completely raw and deadstock. Button tag is 4170.

[telluride11]

oh man. i would kill for those duck pants

[airfrogusmc]

These look okay, but it's my understanding that they have the wrong cut, weight and stitching. If you want an exact replica, there's a company called Candy Cane that makes their's better and they use the last surviving original vintage Cone Mills shuttle loom to make their denim. JUST JOKING!!

Seriously though, the colour of the o'alls denim is remarkable. Its array of thalo blues, greens and a hint of cobalt violet, creates a very neat authentic unique earthy effect. The colour looks much like the detail shot PaulT posted of his 1920's 201 recently.

I don't particularly like the denim texture of the 333's, it's a bit bland -- looking almost like a heavy broadcloth or sailcloth crosshatch type of weave. I'd consider getting a pair though if they were available in rigid/raw -- think they'd be a damn good pair of tough work jeans. I nteresting stuff, you have a good eye for detail -- thanks for posting.

Hey Electrum the denim on the 333s and everything for that matter is SO different than any other LVC I've seen and it really has a great texture and color thats not coming through in the photos. They're probably the most comfy of all my LVCs. They're just SO different than any of my other LVCs. I just wish I could have got them raw. I also could have scored the 333 shirt but passed on it. I wish now I would have gotten it. I think these are VERY RARE.

[rnrswitch]

Man I really got to start buying more LVC jeans. I started with LVC and migrated to Japanese brands, now I think I am gonna make a slight u turn and dabble a bit in the LVC arena. I really like some of the LVC shirts. I have a wool "pendleton" type LVC 50s shirt and the raw bunkhouse chambray shirt, which I love.

My next pair I think will be a 27, 33 or 37 LVC. I am digging the fuller cuts these days. Denim-wise which are the most interesting. I also like heavier denim.

[airfrogusmc]

I have the 27s and I would HIGHLY recommend the 1917s over the 27s. These are all 10 oz though.