Paul T

muji do good aluminium card-holders

Thanks for letting me know. I'll try them again.

You're exactly right. The current repro is of the first edition, copper snappers with the wrangler rope logo, which launched in '52. Steve McQ wore the 2nd edtion, with white metal buttons, which replaced the previous version in '54, according to Wrangler's records.

For anyone interested, it seems they stock the selvage line in Rochmond,. london, but not on Regent St.

THe coolest shirt right now is Wranglers' 27MW - the one worn by Marvin Gaye and Steve McQueen. There's an excellent recent reissue of the first version, but when it sells out I'm not sure there'll be any more. You can find details on the warngler site, if you follow th elinks for Blue Bell Collection.

It's true that denim head to toe is a hard look hard to pull off, tho, unless you are Steve McQueen or Marvin Gaye.. .

47 leg is slim, (tapered down thru thigh, straight thereafter), 55 is looser fit, 66 is a drainpipe (especially the current LVC). If you can though, try them on...

No, there isn't. There are internal Levi's documents which give basic details, but nothing available to the public.

The early Lee Euro sanforized 101Z jeans I have feautre pocket placement which is essentially the same as 501s. As far as I rememebr the Edwin 101Z is very similar. But I don't understand why you can't simply look at photos and decide yourself? Try lee.com and look for LEe originals or do some googling. This is the first line on google for Edwin 101Z... btw you can get a LOT better, higher contrast fade wiht these jeans than on these examples, this Nisshinbo denim is excellent.

http://www.geocities.co.jp/Milano/8492/report3.html

All the Edwin-made reissues are excellent, generally made with more accuracy than the LVC models, and things like the pocket placement look perfect; thjey're all closely based on originals in Lee archives (which aren't anything like as big as those at Levi's).

The only shame is that they don't do a 1920s reissue, almost certainly because those early jeans, which look terrific, had a Levi's style arcuate that they wouldn't be able to get away with now - they also had a generally more Levi's-style look. Lee jeans also had a lot more variation than Levi's, things like the selvage details changed from year to year and not always consistently.

Practically everything on the chart, up to 1944, will have a baggier, more dungaree-style cut. The 52 jeans are close to a 1947 501, but will probably be less tapered round the thighs.

Good question, but given that Lee moved to single selvage in the mid 50s, I reckon they were using selvage material, but just in a different cut, as you suggest.

And yes, all the Edwin-made Lee repros are selvage, very nice greenish denim, which is sanforized, so doesn't shrink as much as the European ones. I thought the previous euro ones were great, but they're now so cheapened I think you have little choice but to go for the Japanese ones.

All Riders, from 1944 on, have a narrower cut, not unlike 1947 Levi's, and it's this cut the Euro Riders are based on.

INcidentally, Polish-made Riders, which look like single selvage, are not true selvage - they don't have the interwoven self edge. But I've seen that feautre on 50s Lees too, on one half of what looks like a double selvage.

Drummond St was always the one. Just behind Euston station, there's a lot of good restaurants specialising in South Indian food there too. Plenty of other markets have surplus stalls too, probably including Camden, Ken High St, Portobello, greenwich, and the stalls just off Seven Dials in Covent Garden. American Classics, on Endell St, have v good parkas and miliatry jackets, but they don't come cheap.

There is a LOT of variation. The 34" W 1947s seem more undersized than, eg, the 32" waist. And in fact the new 1944 deadstock I have here are exactly on-size, ie the 36" waist is exactly 36". But overall the consensus from people I talked to is that the new range is definitely smaller overall than previous LVC.

I'll have a go, don't know all these answers.

Don't know re c and b, z is zipper version.

50s (the Riders) are narrower fit; the 40s are baggy, but don't know how hair on hide and leather patch inter-relate. Both 30s and early 40s look pretty baggy to me, 1944 Riders have a narrower, more cowboy cut.

Only VERY early jeans had rivets, from the 1920s, and the ones I've seen all also had Levi's style arcuates and leather patch on the left.

Patches were leather intially, slightly different lettering, on the left, horsehide was wartime, frrom 1939 or earlier to 44. Then leather again 1944, once back cinch was dropped, and jeans were redesigned and called Riders.

Check on the Lee website for more information, will probably tell u differnece between c and b.

I mentioned this in a Sugarcane thread, but as so many people enquire about LVC thought it was worth repeating, ESPECIALLY IF YOU BUY MAILORDER...

All the new range of US-made LVC seem to be significantly smaller than previous reissues, in terms of waist measurements. Previously, in the main, the rigid reissues were roughly an inch bigger than the stated waist size. Now, all the repros are roughly an inch smaller than the tag size. So if you always used to buy 34" waist 1947 501s, you will now have to buy 36" waist.

I've measured both the new 37 and 47; the 47 with a tag size of 34 actualy measures more like 33, so will shrink down to circa 31". The current 1937 repros, washed, tag size 36", measure 33" or less...

Yawn. No more pig wrestling from me. Stay here and play with the your best friend... yourself.

Edited by Paul T on Oct 11, 2005 at 03:22 PM

Hey, everyone here's gay boys and the jackasses. And you're really crazy.

I bet you have a sign on your desk that says "you don't have to be crazy to work here but it helps".

Ignorance can't be obtuse by the way. That's an oxymoron. But then, we don't want to descend to namecalling, do we?

Check out 'This Is A PAir Of Levi's", their own book, it's got absolutely tons of old ads. Should be available used via amazon.

the 506 you're buying is LVC, right? Has the modern white size tag inside, etc? 'R' symbol next to the LEVIS onte red tag? Like the eBay one? It;'s gotta be more like $200...

Edited by Paul T on Oct 11, 2005 at 01:45 PM

Previous 34" waist (as indicated on the leather patch) LVC were made a bit oversized, over 35" waist unwashed, so shrunk down to 33". Current LVC are slightly undersized, so a tag wasit size of 34" is more like 33" and will shrink down to 31". The current 1937 repros, washed, tag size 36", measure 33" max.

Edited by Paul T on Oct 11, 2005 at 01:35 PM

34" tagsize 47 rigid are a full 2" smaller than LVC 2001 '33 rigid with a 34" tagsize. likewise the 1937 jeans seem to be 2" smaller than their predecessors.

"Marlon Brando and James Dean both sported denim, T's and plaid shirts. They weren't trying to emulate a style, it was because they were raised on fucking farms."

Is that a joke? Do you not think that Brando and Dean picked their clothes for specific reasons? And, in fact, most of the images you've seen of them, they were dressed by Hollywood Wardrobe mistresses. Or, in Brando;s case, clothes chosen by Tennessee Williams? But let's face it, this is more worthless generalisation. Who cares what 'a load of your well-dressed straight friends wear. Who cares what a load of my well-dressed straight friends wear. Whether or not you like Dior or Prada (and I don't) don't attempt to justify it with crass generalisations about people's sexuality. Mate.

I'm looking at a brand new pair of LVC 47s right now. BEar in mind they are sized A LOT SMALLER than previous LVCs if you're buying on-line. They are also not as dark denim as some previous LVC.

Fade on those Sugarcanes do look great, high-contrast, I for one would want to check them out. But if this were my first pair of 1947s, I would try out the LVC first, as they are still the nearest thing to the original article... and really, given Levis' seeming lack of commitment, I wonder how long they're going to be avai;able for...

"But, safe to say, on these boards when I read guys talking about Dior jeans, well, it may be safely assumed that fellow is very very interested in having guys check out his ass. He is probably gay "

No, it's not safe to say, it's pathetic. Who gives a fuck if he's gay? It's not necessarily you, but it always makes me laugh when people on these boards worry that people might think they're "a bit homo". It was probably someone 'a bit homo' who created the style that you/me/anyone else is trying to emulate, even if they're not conscious of the fact.

Dude, like others have said, you've gotta try them on yourself. No-one else can tell you whether a 33-style pant, or a boot-cut, or a 47-style straight leg will be what you like!

BTW, if you're looking at Levi's, 1933-style jeans have cinch backs, and are a much looser cut. 1947-style 501s are a much slimmer fit. And by all means buy your jeans distressed if that turns you on... but bear in mind that decent distressed jeans will cost more, because of all the work it takes, and they won't last as long. If you're starting out, maybe have a look at the LVC (LEvi's vintage collection) at levis.com - that should give you some idea of what all the different 501s look like.