Paul T

i only tried the 60s on briefly, they're pre-washed, to check they fit (which they do). I'll compare them with my Levi'sg 66 and report back. It is nice fabric, very blue once soaked, feels almost 70s. Won't be starting on them properly until the autumn, and then I'll be a three days a week denim guy so no more competitions for me

Edit: I thought they used my 20s for the last shoot but it was my 50s.

16 hours ago, Leevi's said:

Another thing about my LVC 501-54 above, the previous pair I got (from 2011), if I remember correctly, had a bit different look and touch of the denim, it was more smooth at touch, the fabric looked more "combed", more starched (I don't know how to describe it correctly, english is not my language) and maybe also a bit darker, these from 2015 have a bit more rough, "hairy" look and touch. Anyone knows why? The  denim should basically be the same from Cone Mill...

Cone would use different cotton from different years with different weather. They would try and 'average out' the result but there will always be inconsistencies from year to year.

that's beautiful. I guess it's the Cone indigo duck. Cone sent me a bunch after we did the Roy contest, it's gorgeous stuff. Though you will end up with blue thighs, it crocks like crazy!!

I spent a few days in Kurashiki, visiting Nihon Menpu, but sadly didn't visit TCB.

How dare they shame me by having someone look much better in my jeans than I did???

I think I remember that little bit of the street, too...

I actually thought all the contest jeans were great, I'd often look at them and think they looked better than mine. But then looking at mine in the factory they seem to look even better than I remember them!
Interesting, too, how similar all my different jeans seem to end up. Those two are really similar, although when you look at the 50s close-up there's beautiful detailing where the warp has just worn away over the whisker creases.
Your jeans are great, Volvo, you are the role model we're all trying to emulate. ! Stay well. x

Those all look great!

@fresco those aren't my nipper's old pair, are they? They went off to Mark F in Germany IIRC.

@spiraltoy, I remember when those came in to Cinch, they are a 1901 repro... with an 1880s leather patch! Production error. Kurabo fabric.

hmmm... fixtures and fittings look good, without seeing them in the flesh i would guess they're legit, and that the inconsistencies are simply production errors.

Show us the inside of the rivets on the front and back pockets. Also the yoke details pleez.

1 hour ago, Maynard Friedman said:

How about a 47 cut using 43 denim with 44 arcs and 46 hardware with 45 details and a 39” inseam? 

• I voted for customisation, on the basis it would only be pocket fabric, which would involve minimal cost and disruption. But I'm fine with stock fabric, too.

yup, works for me too.

We know historically around 50% of folks who say they're up for it drop out, so I'd cost it at 25 and make it first come first served.

The early 555 501 are all cone. The very first Captial E jeans, with a mix of feautres, were all based around the Cone fabric. I am not sure about the original '201', that might be Kurabo.
 

I hate the fading too but it looks vintage to me. Would really need to see in the flesh but, for instance, none of the Levi's Japan reissues I've seen have the red selvage line fade like that, nor do you see that corrosion of the zinc on the reverse of the buttons.

Great news. Me too . LOvely to see you guys.

I'm a three-days a week denim dude now so no chance of even winning a hat but I can copy Volvo and use the dremel etc.

6 hours ago, 428CJ said:

Just out of curiosity: If you dry clean raw unsanforized denim, does it shrink in the dry cleaning chemicals? I would think so, as the garments are still getting wet (just not with water).

Generally no. I have done this with jeans to keep them dark and orginal size. There might be some shrinkage and even fading but it's negligible. Might vary with modern , less toxic chemicals but I suspect it will still be minimal.

IIRC, in the late 70s, Cone changed the fabric to be pre-skewed, to eliminate leg twist. (I don't know how well it works, as when I used to go thru stacks of 501 in the 80s, you'd see lots and lots of leg twist). One guess therefore might be that Kaihara have over done the pre-skewing? Although my recollection , without checking, is it started in 79.

That's only a guess, as I don't really understand how pre-skewing works, and even people experts like Ralph Tharpe aren't too sure why some jeans show more leg twist than others.

58 minutes ago, bod said:

TPB on Rakuten

Ah, thanks for this. The Kaihara looks like a kind of cross between the first Kurabo, and the Cone. They seem to say the Kaihara version is completely loomstate. (and btw I'm saying that we started the loomstate craze on SuFu with the Roy Cone fabric. It was my and Ralph Tharpe's notion to do that, with the 1915 yarn. I don't recall anyone doing that before).

Has anyone else noticed how the cut looks really different? In the Rakuten photo the tilt from front to back looks much more drastic.

Ha, so the reason that fabric looks like Cone is because... they're using old photos of Cone.

Of course, i'm assuming the new faric is Kaihara, but there is a chance it's Kurabo, who produced the first version. Looks nothing at all like the Cone, which is blue-er and much much gnarlier. Have we had any indication?

My 1890s are Kurabo and are looking pretty good, they fade from a black blue to a very turquoise colour. But not as nice as the Cone, or the natural indigo that TCB are using for their 3-pleat, which looks pretty like the Cone, nice and stripey.

37 minutes ago, Sympathy-For-The-Denim said:

some new 1993 repro now join LVC line

a 1993 501 with black bar tacks and Big E along with leather patch? is this an attempt to reproduce the very 1st repro?

https://www.levi.com/DE/de_DE/levis-vintage-clothing/levis-vintage-clothing-1993s-501-straight-jeans/p/798300041

Ew.

2 hours ago, bod said:

I’m afraid it’s Kaihara cloth and made in Turkey.

Ah, that's sad. Does it state that somewhere? Could be wrong, but it looked to me as if they'd reduced retail, if so that explains it. Fabric does look interesting though.

11 hours ago, cool_hand said:

Paul, I don't believe the actual jeans you will receive will look like that earlier pic. If you go onto the website someone who purchased the 1937s has posted a picture of the jeans they received and they don't have that problem with the arcuates. I might be reading this wrong but it appears Jimmy returned his 1937s - just wondering why?

You're right, I should have emphasised that that might simply be the wrong photo etc, just wanted to point out what was wrong in the pic posted.