setterman

Hooligan, I'm currently wearing raw LVC '37 and '44s, neither is leaving indigo behind anywhere unless they get wet (and even then they'd have to be soaking wet).

Historically, how different was the cut between the WWII era 501s, and the '47s? I'm guessing other than the details (rivets, buttons, arcs), the two jeans were very close (high waist, narrow straight leg). Which leads me to ask, why do the LVC '47s get so much attention (and confusion) and the '44s seem to be a bit ignored? They're both going to give that same look, and it might be easier to accomplish with the '44 (I know it was for me).

If they're wearing LVC on Ax Men (and I noticed in one of the commercials it looked like one of the guys was), it's probably part of a sponsorship deal from Levis. I can't see a logger spending $200 jeans.

After wearing my 0105s for a month, I've started rotating them with my 1944 LVC 501s. After wearing the '44s all last week, it's funny putting the Full Counts back on today. The '44s are smaller everywhere except in the rise, and what a difference that measurement makes. Wound up getting the Full Counts a size bigger than I wanted, to try to get enough rise, and I wish they had 1/2" to 1" more. They're still damn comfortable jeans though, and the denim is much better than the the LVC.

I'm not worried about how long they take to fade, I just don't want to get blue all over the place if I wear them raw.

Reading through this thread it sounds like Canes are slow to fade and wear. How is the indigo loss when worn raw? I'd like to get a pair of size 38 1947 and stretch them out some before soaking. But, I can't be leaving blue all over the place. Recently handeled a pair of Full Cout 1108Cs and in two seconds my hands were all blue. Returned them for a pair of 0105Cs, and didn't have that problem raw or after I washed them. Yes, the soap suds turn blue when I was my hands, but hands aren't visably blue, and I'm not leaving indigo all over the place (at least that can be seen).

I gotta start cuffing my jeans higher. That's guy on the left with the scowl on his face is wearing his jeans perfectly.

Notice in the dragster picture and in the excellent beach photo posted a few days ago, that there isn't a much fading going on? A friend of mine who grew up in the 50s said his 501s didn't wear in the way so many here are looking for (whiskers/combs), they just faded to a little bit lighter shade of indigo (but still stayed fairly dark). Part of that was probably due to jeans getting washed at least once a month rather than a couple times a year.

thanks for the comments guys; I do understand they are cut anti-fit, I just don't want to end up with a 'gangsta look' on behalf of my skinny legs. Sizing down seems to be the way to go then.

I'll still give it a try though; my taste in denim has been evolving to more fuller cuts (plan to pick up the LVC '44 also)

I don't know if you're aware of it or not, but the '44s aren't full. They've got room in the seat, but are a couple inches narrower than the 30s jeans in legs. I like the cut a lot.

Any thoughts on how well Filson suspenders will work with the pre-1937 LVC 501s? They look they might be a little too wide in the back.

http://www.filson.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2092348&cp=2069836.2065003.2075127&parentPage=family

What years are the suspender buttons stitched on?

Thanks.

get a job, gravel hugging hippies.

Are they really hippies though? I see immature city/college kids (who I'm betting didn't grow up in State College or rural PA), who's parents probably paid for those jeans, and are trying to desperetaly to be something, though they're not quite sure what.

And as others mentioned it's the trying to hard that probably irritates most people, not the actual wear.

You buy quality, heavy duty jeans...to baby them? Seriously, I may not have the balls to paint my jeans gold, but if I had the time I'd be fucking psyched to be able to do shit like what they're doing. These jeans were made to reflect an era when clothing in general wasn't made to be fashionable, it was made to be reliable and be ready for whatever was required. Enough with this nonsense of, "I'd never do that to my pair of $300 jeans" that shows how much your mindstate isn't that of the Americana enthusiast.

I wouldn't do that to a $40 pair of jeans. It's called respect.

People in this era you're so enthusiastic about didn't abuse or mistreat their clothing. They had respect for themselves, their clothing, and the money spent on it. Yeah, work wear got pretty dirty and ragged, but real work clothing wasn't worn around town. And by the 50s that kid wearing 501s as daily wear was expect to treat them like the wool pants his dad wore a couple decades earlier. I have a friend that grew up in the 50s, and knows of my interest in old style denim. He told me he got new clothes once a year (spring), you better have bought those $4 Levis at least one size big (for shrinkage and to grow into) or mom would beat you, and you better take care of them because you weren't getting new clothes until next spring. Come home with a rip or tear in them, mom AND dad would beat you. My parents instilled in me that same respect for my clothing, though they wouldn't beat me (that I can remember!).

You buy quality, heavy duty jeans...to baby them? Seriously, I may not have the balls to paint my jeans gold, but if I had the time I'd be fucking psyched to be able to do shit like what they're doing. These jeans were made to reflect an era when clothing in general wasn't made to be fashionable, it was made to be reliable and be ready for whatever was required. Enough with this nonsense of, "I'd never do that to my pair of $300 jeans" that shows how much your mindstate isn't that of the Americana enthusiast.

I wouldn't do that to a $40 pair of jeans. It's called respect.

People in this era you're so enthusiastic about didn't abuse or mistreat their clothing. They had respect for themselves, their clothing, and the money spent on it. Yeah, work wear got pretty dirty and ragged, but real work clothing wasn't worn around town. And by the 50s that kid wearing 501s as daily wear was expect to treat them like the wool pants his dad wore a couple decades earlier. I have a friend that grew up in the 50s, and knows of my interest in old style denim. He told me he got new clothes once a year (spring), you better have bought those $4 Levis at least one size big (for shrinkage and to grow into) or mom would beat you, and you better take care of them because you weren't getting new clothes until next spring. Come home with a rip or tear in them, mom AND dad would beat you. My parents instilled in me that same respect for my clothing, though they wouldn't beat me (that I can remember!).

I find it a bit obnoxious. I'm certainly down with having stupid fun like when you were a kid (my roommate and I were actually talking about this the other day), but the big difference is that a kid wouldn't go and post about it on the internet.

Just trying a little too hard, it seems like.

I'm sure we all remember a kid when we were 16 or 17, that acted like he was still 12, and probably behaved that way as a means of getting attention. All the activity photos of this "crew" remind me of that kid.

Maybe I'm an old fart at 32, but it was a helluva long time ago when you'd have seen my intentionally slide down a grassy hill and make a mess of my jeans. I guess I've always had more respect for my clothing, and the time spent to earn the money to pay for it.

Planning on getting a pair of 555 1947s once they're in at cultizm. Want a 39" waist when it's all said and done. Is the best bet to get a pair of size 42s and do an initial hot wash to shrink them down from 41" to 39"? I'd go with a size 40, but I'm afraid once they're soaked, they're going to be too small.

there is no way those jeans could fade that much in less than 2 weeks with "normal wear"

After wearing my 0105s all day for two weeks straight, and seeing just two little wear spots in the indigo thanks to my belt buckle and one of the buttons, I have no doubt those jeans have had some help. Even with hard wear, you're not going to loose that much blue, that fast.

Everyone keeps talking about the price of the denims. If these were 501's, would it be cool to "trash" them like these clowns are doing?

If they were $30 STFs, it would kinda be okay. But I can't imagine doing something like that to jeans as nice as my 0105s are, or to pair of LVC.

We have now about 40 contestants checked in,with the highest number being 90.What is happening to the 50 others?Did BIG sold all of them,are they still in the post or do some people just bought the jeans and didnt bother to sign up?Just curious!

And....it might be a bit early,but what are you guys planning to do in a year or so...given that organizing a contest takes a lot of time?I wouldnt mind taking part in another contest then.what do you think,anything in the pipeline for now?

I've got 0105C #087. I didn't do the picture with date and number thing because BiG said I didn't need to for their contest. Jeans were delivered 3-2-09, I've worn them every day except one since 3-3-09.

Did an initial hot soak and dryer, then wore them four days. They weren't as tight as I wanted in the waist so I did a hot wash with no soap and another trip through the dryer. Shrunk up nicely.

I told Gordon not to bother sending me a tag, and I don't plan on putting on any arcs.

After seeing the recent pictures and reading the recent posts, now I don't know if I want to go with a pair of the 555 1947s (I asked Dejan to hold a pair in my size). I've got a pair of '44s that I really like, and would like another pair of jeans with that straight legged 40s look (not wide, and not tapered). Should I just stick with the '44s? How's the denim compare between the two? I bought my 44s to fit and have worn them raw for between 40 and 50 wears. Denim still has a stiff feel to it (that I expect will disappear when they are finally washed), and doesn't seem to be wearing. Lot of nice sharp creases at the back of the knees though.

do you think the average european wears $200 jeans? The masses in any country, do not want $200 jeans.. if you can cash in on even .5% of the country the brand would be a wild success.

also, can anyone tell me the % of Japanese wearing premium denim?

Cost is just one of the many reasons the LVC line has not been successful US. Probably the biggest. Now, if you want to go round and round about this, be my guest. But the LVC line has a better chance of improving Levis image abroad than it does at home, and it makes sense to focus on those markets. But as I've also said, the American market shouldn't be totally abandoned. There's no reason we shouldn't be able to have easy access to LVC online through a US store.

If you consider buffalo a major city, then you suffer from problems of perception which no jeans can correct.

Ha! You make a good point! But when the closest city has a population of 100,000 people, a city with 270,000 is "major".

but it's ignorant to say levis is failing because 'masses (copout)' don't want premium jeans.

When did I ever say they were failing? I said their is a limited market for their LVC line in the US, it is understandable that they are pulling that line from US shelves, and it is understandable that they are focusing on foriegn markets. The masses in the US do not want $200 jeans, do not look at Levis as a premium brand anymore, and I'd be willing to bet money that I'm one of not more than a dozen people wearing LVC (or any other brand of premium denim discussed on this group) in the blue collar/rural area (including the city of Erie) between Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Buffalo. And I doubt there's a heckuva lot of LVC, Nudies, Samurai, etc being worn in any of those three major cities.

You're overlooking the importance of branding and brand image. For a company like Levis, every product is not a profit-maker. They need to produce high quality, limited run, more progressive styles in addition to the mass market lines in order to retain a certain brand identity/prestige. They probably lose money on the LVC line, but if it keeps the Levis name in the minds of the right people, and on the shelves at the right stores internationally, it's well worth it.

I don't disagree at all. If we disagree on anything, it might be on the weight the Levis brand carries in the US market, which in my opinion, isn't much, and I don't think branding through the LVC line would help that.

Now, having LVC jeans in London, Paris, Tokyo, I'd say that's very important for the brand and it's image in those markets. Should the US market be abandoned in favor of those forgien markets? Well, I don't expect to find LVC 501s on JC Penny's shelves, but I should be able to purchase anything from the line on levis.com

lolwut? yeah nobody in america wants raw or premium predistressed denim...

I didn't say "nobody", I said the majority of American consumers do not want premium raw denim. For every one person who'd walk store and plunk down $200 for a pair of LVC 501s, hundreds is not thousands more would spend $30 on a pair 505s or 550s, or $60 or those horrible pre-distressed fashion jeans they sell now. So, how many stores and shelf space are they going to devote in the US to the LVC line?

Premium denim is a limited market, and Levis knows that. They also know that the LVC line, the Levis name, and "American made" have more value over seas than it does in the US. It's frustrating to not be able to walk into a store and try on jeans from shelves full of LVC 501s, but I completely understand that that is an unrealistic expectation.

Oh, and the store in question is in Paris. Can't think of a better city in Europe to try to sell classic American jeans. There'd be something wrong if there wasn't a shop there!

How is it that Paris has more levis options than anyplace in the US, where levis are made?! ARGH!

Because the majority of US consumers don't want expensive, shrink to fit, turn my clothes blue, button fly, leg twist, jeans. Simple as that. Sure, there are folks like ourselves that they can sell jeans to, but why put forth effort to sell a few thousand pairs of expensive jeans in a market that wants, and you can flood, with millions of pairs of cheap pre-distressed jeans? Most American's want what's popular now, and what's cheap. Their lack of taste makes life more difficult for the rest of their countrymen. Thank god for cultizm, and that they stock sizes bigger than 36. Halfway across the world and he can get jeans to me as quick as any place inside the US.

LVC 1947 are no longer undersized.

Is this the case with the older 555s cultizm is going to be selling soon? Or just with the newer '47 listed on their website for $179?