Jump to content

Paul T

member
  • Content Count

    5,584
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    36
  • Feedback

    N/A

Posts posted by Paul T


  1. Hope you're all well. Sorry for my absence; especially sorry for being a chino guy due to new profession, plus I've been two-timing my 40s with some natural indigo 1880s.

    But now the nights are colder I'm back with this lovely, much heavier fabric.Just machine washed them; they marble bigtime when washed right side out I notice . Apols for weird camera angle favoured by nipper who now takes photos rather than being the subject.

     

    DSC00468.jpg


  2. Just got mine. 31 post wash measures a not generous 31 pre wash. There does seem to be room in the thighs and seat so I should be able to work with this, I figure they'll be an inch smaller in the waist than my LVC. Time to get out the ply and jigsaw. My pocket bags are lovely, olive green and hickory stripe.
    My number seems to have changed from  #14 to #125, sadly.

    Gone back to ancient habits, warm soak. Given London's weather, who knows when they will be dry.

     


  3. 1 hour ago, Maynard Friedman said:

    The label reads 0913, which I think is September 2013, or possibly week 9 of 2013, ie early March.

    Sept 13 sounds right to me

    @robroy I'm certain your jeans [with the mis-mismatched salvage] are legit. R code is normal from 2004 or so. I think it's a simple operator error at Cone, dropping the wrong spool in (perhaps it's possible they used a wrong bit of fabric at the factory in which case you'd see different textures from each side of the leg). THey don't have any of the normal fake tell-tales.

    @andyrcii sorry if it looked as if my post was directed at you. Nice jeans. All 505 fabric (sanforized) is Kaihara.


  4. 5 hours ago, Duke Mantee said:

    1934 as I understand it Paul - but yes you’re right. I think there was also a version prior to that but never went into production proper (401s). Apparently in 1930s NY women couldn’t wear denim? Probably something that slowed the potential market quite dramatically although denim was common in the working environment (farms/factories etc)

    there was a big fanfare when the 701 came out in 36/7, features in Vogue, with lovely illustrations. I didn't know that the 401 was the same jean, I thought it was a more budget model but it's a long time since I've looked at them.

    The idea of a front fly was regarded as very edgy. So a lot of contemporary jeans including Lee had a zip up the side, presumably to make it harder to fornicate. Lots of sex involved, as the 701 became the obligatory wear for heading to a dude ranch in Nevada where you could have fun while waiting out your divorce. So very racy - and also the first time jeans really became a fashion item.

    The original 701s do look great, you could still buy 50s examples in the 2000s for less than today's repro prices and wear them, as they're not as collectable as the 501, and the cut still looked fantastic. They might well have been Levi's first Sanforised jeans too. There are a few items from the Western catalogues of the time that aren't fully documented in the regular cagtalogues (might have been sold through a different wholesaling channel) so there's a delicious mystery about them.


  5. 9 hours ago, ameritech said:

    Anatomica makes a popular women’s 701 repro/ interpretation. No cinch back, but Levi’s never released a cut specifically intended for women with a cinch back until the late 70s under the orange tab (decidedly fashion and not workwear) line.

    Don't understand this post. Levi's released the 701 Lady Levi's, Sanforized, buckle back, pink selvage, around 1937 iirc. There was also a budget model, the 401, likewise buckle back.
     


  6. Hmmm. I am not sure how much mine shrank from raw to soak. But it was from soak to machine wash that there seemed to be a big change. It was dirty and folks on here told me off and to wash it properly. I don't like it quite as much now, although the fade is good. It's synthetic indigo. If you do decide to keep I reckon cold handwash only is the way.

    The natural indigo 1880s are actually quite dark and purple in comparison. They're showing a bit of crocking already after only a couple of months.


  7. On 7/27/2020 at 3:11 PM, JDelage said:

    @SuperJackle - Not an asshole move, you were clearly in your right. This being said, I would have refunded, minus shipping costs. First, you took a risk with eBay & Paypal, second you'll probably get a negative rating, and third the pain of dealing with a refund is not that big a deal. My guess is you spent more time documenting stuff that you would have just accepting the return.

     

    I've advised buyers that boots were too small, using measurements, they bought them anyway, and returned as too small. I'm too paranoid about neg feedback to do otherwise.

    So usually I have standard wording saying no questions asked returns, but they pay postage both ways, and that normally provides sufficient disincentive for them to return. It's the loss pf postal costs rather than having to re-list that's a pain


  8. 6 minutes ago, dudewuttheheck said:

    I love that patch, but am I the only one who is bothered by the prop setup on that plane? It's clearly modeled after a WWII single engine fighter/dive bomber/torpedo bomber(probably one of the latter two, given that there are two animals in the plane instead of only one), but then it has two extra props on the wings, but no engines and the center prop looks stationary.

    Obviously this doesn't matter and it's still the best patch ever, but I can't help but think about that every time I see it :P

    It's a plane... being flown by cats. Cats.


  9. 2 hours ago, Maynard Friedman said:

    Here’s a link to some original 333 info with a picture of the patch that Paul mentioned.

    that's a great link, Maynard, thanks!

    There are other catalogues or links that mention it having recycled fibre. No-one knows who would have produced the fabric first time around.

    Fascinating to see the Lot 225 black denim pants mentioned, too, I can't remember seeing that before.


  10. The 333 are fantastic jeans.

    The repro was lovely. The original were indeed a budget range, with fabric that used recycled yarns. LVC did the same for this range, commissioned IIRC from a little mill in Portugal, bits of recycled fibre in the thread. (Not sure if the mill only span the yarns or loomed the fabric as well). It was insane attention to detail for jeans that nobody knew anything about. I am sure they sold zilch. Patches were like the 201 range but with green type. I think somewhere on this thread I posted  photos of the vintage pair in Japan that inspired the reissue.

    There was a remainder sale at their showroom where they had a few pairs but none in my size, sadly. But then again, I have so many pairs of early jeans that look like they're starting to break in after 10 years of wear. At some point in my life I need to wear in  my 201, but that will probably be when I get to a care home etc.

    My recollection is that the 333 were produced before, or in the early stages of, the move to Amsterdam. That was when our own Cotton Duck joined the company. RIght after that point Levi's decided LVC had to produce profits, before that it was partly about prestige. So prices went up and there were fewer quirky items (although, to be fair, items like the natural indigo 1880s could surely never have turned a chunky profit if you factor in the design time etc etc etc).

     


  11. On 7/7/2020 at 10:10 PM, unders said:

    The blurb of the book reminds me that I’ve reflected once or twice, ‘hold on, Levi Strauss got all the glory, but Jacob Davis created the riveted overalls’. I suppose it just comes down to the fact that Levi Strauss bankrolled and produced them, and it happens all the time in business. Just sucks that his name is not properly associated with jeans to the non-denim nerd masses.  

     

    Levi's on a corporate level have been pretty good about spreading Jacob Davis's name. He's on corporate histories and is always ackonlwedged as the inventor. He became the factory foreman. His grandson launched the Ben Davis company and, again, they stayed pretty close. Obvs he didn't get his name on the company, but I guess that's life.

    He only knew Levi distantly, the fact they were both European Jews likely made him think Levi was trustworthy. In the letter suggesting they team up he tells Levi not to send him his credit balance for cloth, to keep it as he'll need more later.
     


  12. On 7/7/2020 at 11:56 PM, SuperJackle said:

    I’ve been wondering this for some time as well. 
     

    LVC uses a 12oz pre soak weight for most jeans from the 40’s onward right? I wonder why it is that so many Japanese brands use 14.5 pre soak weights for repro pairs? I’m sure they’ve done the research and literally disassembled and analyzed the denim in the case of WH,TCB etc. Or am I missing the mark here, and the Japanese brands are aiming for ~14oz post soak? So what weight is historically accurate for the mid-century era? I’m sure this had been discussed ad nauseum somewhere, so apologies in advance. 

    This is a good question. My impression is that some manufacturers have simply gone for heavier fabric as 'more' is better. In much the same way that Samurai and others ramped up the slubbiness and crocking of their denim to make it feel 'more' authentic. There is definitely a 'thing' about 14 oz being better, as that was a selling point for Lee's (Sanforized) denim.

    But as we can see, there's also genuine debate about whther some Levi's fabric might have been heavier at some time.

  • Alan Crocetti Silver Nose Plaster
    $US 342

    silver-nose-plaster.jpgshow?id=gf39VV*YhHg&bids=818443.18799516