TheJonesBoy

how does the waist on lvc 1966 501s fit? tts or smaller like lvc 47's, some help please?

Got both in a pre-shrunk (raw) 34/32. The 66 are nowhere near as tight in the thigh and waist as the 66.

That said there was year between buying them so I have no idea if bought now that would be repeated.

Not sure that really helps!

FUck them then. Pay the extra £30 or whatever for a raw pair, which will look better anyway.

If, on their website, they say they will shrink, and they don't, you can argue they're not of merchantable quality and demand your money back, if you're in the UK (always best to pay with a credit card in this case).

BUT... if they say they think they will shrink, as far as they know, and then they don't, you do not have a case to get your money back.

Of course, they should be able to tell you for definite, so I'd steer clear, for what my opinion's worth. I don't think the saving of £30 over retail is worth it.

The 55 sugar finish landed. Look shockingly "fake". Have fades no one could create with wear. So, regardless of fit (waist is fine, leg too long - they pretty much fit how I'd expect raw ones to fit pre-shrink) they are on their way back.

Bagged some 44's raw for the same price from elsewhere (was after 55's but no bargains to be had anywhere in 34/32).

Yeah, amazing colour, but they can't beat the colour of my favourite jean, my 44's (and sorry for quoting myself guyz ):

You won't get it from this pic (50% wet), but they've got a real distinctive, greyish dark blue.

Been hunting for some bargain 55's (got 47's and my fave 66's) but this photo convinced me to bag some 44's. I'll try to get em as tight as poss with a sit in a warm bath as I'm not certain about fit (but sub £100 LVC in the face of £200+ costs was hard to resist).

FUck them then. Pay the extra £30 or whatever for a raw pair, which will look better anyway.

If, on their website, they say they will shrink, and they don't, you can argue they're not of merchantable quality and demand your money back, if you're in the UK (always best to pay with a credit card in this case).

BUT... if they say they think they will shrink, as far as they know, and then they don't, you do not have a case to get your money back.

Of course, they should be able to tell you for definite, so I'd steer clear, for what my opinion's worth. I don't think the saving of £30 over retail is worth it.

Most odd. They are normally bang on (as in surprising they say one thing and then . I'll get em and return em then. Need a 55 in the collection but wanted to jump in the bath to get em fitting nicely before wearing em.

well, that hanon listing is pretty specific. Maybe they're right, but it would be a first to my knowledge. If they don't shrink, you'd have a bona fide case for returning them... good luck and let us know what happens.

Hmm. latest from Hanon:

"As i stated in previous e-mail please treat these as you would with any other rigid jean. We will not accept a return if they have been wet."

Rrrright. So they say they are unwashed and unshrunk but if I wet them and they don't shrink they won't take them back....

Hanon say:

"As far as we are aware from the notes and info we have them on them they are unwashed and that they should be treated with as much care as a regular rigid jean."

Damn. Distressed = washed is what I feared but they were shown as specifically "Unwashed and unshrunk 'rigid' denim. Sugared Rigid finish".

I'll see what they look like 'pon arrival. FTR they were they puppies:

http://www.hanon-shop.com/levi-vintage-1955-501-sugared-rigid_pre-buy.html

Thanks Paul - was hoping you was lurking ;-)

Levi Vintage 1955 501 Sugared Rigid.

Just ordered a pair of these - I normally stick to raw untouched stuff from LVC. What's the view here on the "effected" LVC? A bit too much of a short cut? I'll be fine with them if they come and look natural (ie even though they ain't as long as it isn't blindingly obvious the initial wear isn't mad fake).

Anyone bagged the "sugared" LVC?

I'm also assuming they are raw and will shrink in a bath despite having been messed with...

I sat in warm bath, they shrank at least 1.5" possibly 2". You can pull them longer whilst wet if the legs go too short for you.

I wore mine until almost dry and also did a few stretches in them. The only down side was the knees have gone a bit baggy from the bending.

I wouldn't risk soaking and drying without having them on IF you buy to fit when raw / unsoaked / washed.

I dropped a pint of Guinness on mine so have quickly soaked (read laid them unworn in a cold bath and then removed and hung to drip dry) once but they still fit nice after a few months of daily (sedate nothing too hectic) wear. I expect they will shrink again when warm washed and can't currently decide if that should be in the washing machine at a 30 degrees gentle wool cycle or another dip in the bath.

I love my '66's far more than my '47's as the '47's feel a bit too skinny in the leg (they are two seasons ago when I think the sizing wasn't as roomy as they appear to be made now) and will buy more if they hit sales (at £170+ I'm not in the game!).

HAZARD - I sized actual size. Usually a 34" bought a 34". They fitted raw, warm soaked them to bring the legs up to be just on the shoe (small cuff for that Mod look). They can't shrink smaller than you if you keep them on whilst they dry!

I've always been nervous of sizing up as I don't wear belts.

sorry for asking this again. If i were to soak my nudie, is it possible for it not for it to lost its indigo? Anyway i'm soaking not to shrink it but to eliminate the smell.

I've done 6 and 9 months without a wash (started and worn thru the summer) with two pairs of Slim Jims without a wash. I did a short soak before wearing to get a little starch out (to avoid blown crotch - still got it though!) - to stop the stink I froze them in a plastic bag overnight and hung to blow in the wind. Worked ok for me but I'm guessing on the level of stank yours have ;-)

If they fit perfect and you've already started wearing them in, just repair them and roll with it. 2 months is pretty soon for stitching to start popping, but it generally happens sooner or later.

Cheers man. I was thinking that anyhow but wanted some input from the wider audience! ;-)

I'll try and make it as invisible as I can!

my guess is that you wore them raw... did you soak them?

Yeah - here they are getting a tepid shrink to fit...

Worn raw but never hard (just on my arse and standing in pubs really - no BMX madness etc!).

http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showthread.php?p=2123823#post2123823

Hmm.

2 months into some raw LVC's... the yoke stitching is falling away inside and the top line of stitching is unpicking.

For the price they should be better made. Dilemma is I'm making them my own and they are coming along fine.

Thoughts?

Stitch together myself or send them back? Really don't want to lose my efforts so far, they fit perfect, but can't help feeling they feel cheap - and of course they weren't!!

I'd go 47. Mine (2008/2009) are much tighter post shrink than the 66 (2009/2010) despite both starting out as 34" x 32". My 66 shrank a little shorter than I wanted so I re-wet the legs and stretched them back out another 1/2" - 1".

The colder the bath you sit in the less they'll shrink - pull the leg length whilst damp to keep them short - stay longer in warmer water to get them lose more length (and go tighter).

For the record both mine fitted in the waist raw before sitting in the bath - ie I didn't size up 2" at all in the waist.

I'll post a fit pic. I re-wet the legs yesterday and stretched them a touch as they were the right length with no cuff and I sometimes like one small turn up.

Tried the 47's on again - they are like spray on. I was hoping to be able to judge the difference between 66 and 47 but the only conclusion is that you can't do that unless you get the 47 and 66 from the same season I guess it's not like for like (ie Levis seem to have sized up a bit this season - making buying the LVC a bit of an unknown).

One thing I would say is that the legs went up about 2" with a short "jeans on" soak but the waist - even if very tight when totally raw - doesn't shift more than you'd want if they are on you when they are wet and when they dry. If I'd have gone to a 36 x 34 (my only other option) I think they'd be loose and very anti-fit. Not what I believe is a "60's" look.

Just doing a catch up here. The 47's I have are a bit too tight in the waist (post Xmas blowout!).

Just for kicks I did a ten minute tepid soak whilst wearing the 66's.

They have come out perfect. I stretched whilst wet and sat in them until almost dry (air dried indoors). The waist is looser than the 47's - odd as it was tight to start (as in they appear to have stretched a bit!). The thigh is definitely far looser than the 47's which are of course last season's.

Of course I did an hour soak with the 47's and ten minutes on the 66's but they feel similar post soak & dry. These 66's are superb. Loving them. They are quite different denim-wise to my 47's which are a bit more 'fluffy' than these.

I just bagged some 1966 for £90 which are the 2009 (the button has 233M stamped on it).

Thing is, I got the same size as I have in 1947 501 (nothing stamped on the back of the 47's button) - the 47's I shrank to fit from a 34 x 32 (I'm actually a 33 x 30). The 47's are the same size post-bath shrink and worn about 20 times (warm, 1 hour, left on to dry before being hung for a day) as the unshrunk 66's. Waist smaller than post soak 47's (actual measurements are 18" wide for 47's and 17.5" for the 66's) and the same length (31").

So beware out there, seems they've changed them and sizing down will be the death of you!

I can't decide whether to send back the 66's or just do a cold short starch removing soak followed by a load of squats to keep the waist bearable (in the hope 5-6 months of wear will see them stretch out pending that first cold wash/dry)...

Due a wash as they are hanging off me since losing 17lb!

Not sure exactly how to wash (I'm after shrinking them back more than anything look-wise)...

I know they ain't exactly a bitchin make but give me a break as they are my first raw denims (we all start somewhere!).

Seen these bad boys?

BAPE...

Cuffed denim with those gives a classic total mod look (think London 1963-5).

In my experience - 1908 gentleman traveller - yes mate.

Size down 1 from Nike Size (SB and AIR) for Red Wing Boots?

Anyone got any denim hotspots in Vegas?

Out there for 6 days next week - even just a gaff knocking out LVC will do but keen to go flex my sterling on the good stuff.

Cheers in advance for any hints.

asian girls + denim. you just made like half of SuFu bust a nut

Word.

Assume the soundtrack is some hard rare groove collectors vinyl to add to it ;-)

I have a pair of the 101z gold label on the go. 5 months no wash yet. Not the hide hair patch, mine are leather patch, which by the way is hanging off! Did a soak to lose a bit of starch before wear. They are wearing real nice and the cut is decent but as mentioned elsewhere the denim isn't the toughest out there. Got some 101z non gold label right behind them ready to hammer once the gold label get to where I want em. Will add that these were my first dip into the denim obsession and that I recognise they are raw denim 'lite'