Pink That Dream

by the way, the inside tag code reads: 730S 646709895 , if that means anything to anybody?

yeah hey that's a good question. now that i think about it, it wouldn't shock me if that's what levi's actually did, we are talking about a company that can't get the copy straight on its website (see those 1873 501's, right. and the 646 too, rigid). certainly wouldn't put it past them to be misleading, whether knowingly or not, especially on products from their website, whcih seems to run as a seperate business entity. though the stores are not much better, as far as employees knowing just what the hell they're selling when it comes to LVC, at least here in the US. it's pathetic and it's been well-documented here.

i can't find the receipt right now, i'll keep looking somewhere in my papers i'm sure, but they definitely came with a spring 2007 hangtag and were sold from their website as 1966 646. actually gets me wondering, and maybe the resident levi's experts/historians can answer this one: was there even any difference between in the actual production 1966 and 1971? i know 1971 was the last year of the big E, but in terms of fit? denim used? weight? etc.. did it change at all from 66'?

sympathy- i would recommend sizing down from 31 now that i know how they wash. anyone who tells you (for example most of the sz 34's and 32's on ebay currently, etc..) that they'll shrink a size or 2 is mistaken. i wear a 32 in the 47 501 which is a 29-30 waist now. the 29 646 fits perfect at the waist post wash, even some good room to spare, they have that feel of a looser baggier jean, but with a slim fit leg (until thje bottom of course). may just be an indication more of the cut, with the bigger back pockets and the way the bell/boot cut sits on yr frame compared to the anti-fit 501, but i would def say that the 31's would be big/baggy. which could be cool, by the way. the legs are still skinny all the way through until the bell, so a bigger slouch/kind of waist look can certainly be pulled off, and i'd say is almost refreshing now in these prevelant days of nut-hugging band dudes in tapered jeans. just my opinion. also, just like 501's, the denim stretches back, so yr almost better off sizing down anyway..

i got extras in 28, 30, and 31. they're eventually headed to ebay, but havent gotten there yet. PM me if you like

they're really fantastic jeans. it's so cool now to essentially have the entire time from post war II 47's and 55's covered, and now the 60's and 70's too

and why not an indy update:

day 1

:

2.5 years later:

sorry the second pic sucks. don't really need to be singing alden's praises to anyone here, point is they're going strong and gonna last a lifetime. twice re-heeled, a quick mid-tan shine every month or two, and a bunch of new laces.. and that's it

those bucks wear like shit.. seriously all jcrew shoes are garbage, they look nice but are just shit construction. i got those bucks on sale one year for like 40$, threw them out after the summer. if you buy shoes from jcrew go with ones that are made by red wing or converse.

not the greatest fit pic, i'll try to get better ones eventually. i'm just digging the way they kinda hang in that bootcut way. frankly i was gettin so sick of this whole too tight too skinny jean, and even though my 47's were my size, they almost felt too tapered especially with my boots.

also the denim post wash is much darker than the close up pic, that's the flash. denim quality is every bit as nice as my 47's, i dare say even nicer (maybe just that new jean ready to get broken in feeling?). i'm officially down with sanfordization. and i suggest you get down too.. the new 517's are very very nice choice as well..

an update, for those that thought i may have been pulling anyone's leg:

first off, i was kinda disappointed that nobody could provide me any info on the 646's, so hopefully this can be of use for anyone in the future. these have been warm washed and hot washed in the machine. hung dry both times. they hardly shrunk at all, not even the 3%. i went with the 29x32's a bit nervous but now really glad i did, they fit just right and i was worried they'd shrink down too much. didn't at all. get your real size!! (and for the record to clear anything up, these are the 1966 646, not the 1971's that may/may not have been on clearance)

hey what size do you wear in the studio wash 646? (and thank you for steering this back to what it should be) i'm still looking for info on the rigid vs. studio worn. pls let me know how you wash them, and how they turn out. thanks

also, 14th street nyc store has the 517's raw, and they look really, really nice. may have to rethink this whole 646 thing, after all. ha

(and last time- they have bells left, they are $175, tagged from spring 07 collection) they're in the case, right in the middle of the store. an employee laughed at me when i asked if they'd ever been on sale for 26 dollars.

hey whatuknow, could you please take yr crusade somewhere else, stop trashing this thread. for the last fucking time, i'll respond. yr so smart, got everything figured out, right. i never said i bought anything from the levi's website. i never said i bought 4 pairs looking to sell them. or even sell them here, i never posted anything in supermarket. you said so. i'm not trying to scam anyone, in fact, i was cutting sufu's members what i thought to be a pretty good deal.

now please tell me this, smart guy. the lvc 646's are in the spring2008 collection, for $175. why would levi's slash the price of the same jean to an absurd, never before seen amount for lvc? the new york stores still carry raw 47 and 55's from past seasons, at regular price. if your levi's store is selling the 646's for such a low price, it could be a typo, i'd shut the fuck up here and quit yr whiny bitch talk, and run out and buy them.

if you really must know, and you seem oddly hellbent on it, in a very unhealthy way, i got the jeans 30% off of the sale price in the store at the time. they came out to around 110 a pair. i've been trying to get the right pair of 646's for the longest time, and i went a bit overboard and bought all the ones in my size range, that seemed to fit when i tried them on. in reality, the 28's fir the best right now, but they'll shrink some, i think. in the washed model, the 31 fit the best, though the 32 were good too. so i stocked up, hoping to get the right pair for me, after years of wanting them, and then maybe make a few bucks off it too.

before listing them on ebay for closer to regular price, i thought i would offer some here for essentially my cost, becuase sufu has always been a great resource for me in the past (i've been a member much longer than my 6 posts on this name indicate, much longer than you and your misplaced attitude).

i guess sufu has changed, thanks for trashing a perfectly good thread, one of the few that were left

somebody get there period or something, jeezus. i would love to know where they sell raw lvc 646's for under 30 bucks. they don't in new york. thats all i care to dignify the shit storm of a response.

as for head hunter, and for most everyone, there was a commenter on these forums a long while ago, and i havent heard it in some time, but it's a good thing to remind ourselves every now and again...

JUST JEANS!

wash, wear, whatever you want. don't worry about it (they're just jeans)

actually they retail for $175, on sale now at the levi's.com for 154. what are you talking about? please let me know where you can any lvc raw jeans for 29$

i can do the smaller sizes for 125$ shipped. still deciding between the 30, 31, and 32, for myself. would love some feedback, from anyone that has had experience with em' before i start trying them out.

pm me for pics/specs, etc..

hey i've asked this before in the other LVC thread, but i'll ask again: does anybody have any experience with the 1966 646? both raw and washed versions? got a few pairs of the spring 2007 "studio worn" and the rigid. the studio worn fits great in a 31x32. can i assume that the rigid 31x 32 will fit like the washed ones? i know that this is not always the case with the 501's. right now i've got raw in sizes 28x32 through 32x32. the 29's and 30's fit truest to size (in 47 501 my 32x32 fits perfectly). it's the 3% shrinkage that makes me wonder, please anyone with some actual experience with the lvc 646 let me know. thanks.

also any tips on washing/wearing sanforized raw jeans?

and if anyone is interested in them, from sizes 28, 29, 30, 31, let me know before they go on ebay. (except the ones i keep, obviously)

thanks

hey also, does anyone have experience with the '66 646? also from spring 2007. i got a few pairs, in a couple different sizes, not sure which ones to keep for myself. i know they're sanforized, they say 3% shrinkage (although on levi's website still claims rigid 646 10%) can anyone verify this?

also does anyone know if the "studio worn" are the same tagged size as the rigid? i.e would the 31 x 32 deadstock version fit the same as the stuidio warn after wash/wear?

they had a pair in the levi's store in nyc pre-christmas, forget if it was soho or 14th street. i don't remember the waist size, but it was definitely 38 inseam.

and i think the only ones on that list i've seen are the timberman and hacienda 501's. everything else atleast from the nyc stores is all spring 2007, as if fall 07 never happened?