Dr_Heech

Nice. My guess is a 213.

12 hours ago, reubensangwich said:

Thank you, @Dr_Heech! I was hoping one of the resident historians would chime in to confirm my suspicions. What gives the match strike pair away as being a 37 rather than an early war model? From that angle it doesn't look like there is, or ever was, a cinch. Here's another shot of him. 

The reason l think they're a cinchback model is because firstly the arc looks stitched on but there's no diamond in the centre and secondly because the red tab is placed high up almost under the bar-tacking which is generally a feature of the 1937 501XX. Just a guess though - could've had the cinch strap completely removed as well as the other pair?

Great sets of photos regardless. 

That's some great stuff right there @reubensangwich - in that last photo  they are definitely a pair of '1937' 501XX but have had the cinch strap completely removed as well as the rivets (a little dark hole being the tell tell sign).

Also that same first shot, amazing shape of the arcuate where it hits (almost) the bottom of the vertical side of the back pocket.

Also, that pair in the middle with the match strikes, they are 1937 model also imo.

On 8/19/2025 at 3:07 PM, bod said:

Just got back from a couple of weeks in Bali, there was just one day when the clouds burned off around Mt. Agung to reveal all of its 9000 ft glory

Cool. I climbed Mt Agung back in 1996. Also climbed Rinjani (on Lombok). Never used porters, carried all the kit myself. 

9 hours ago, Double 0 Soul said:

My goodness.. that makes me feel old, It was Carl Lewis in 84 for me!

Jesse Owens for @Dr_Heech

@CSL remembers the chariot racing

Who TF is Jesse Owens?

Daley Thompson for me! 😁

3 hours ago, Maynard Friedman said:

Yes I know. A gecko is a small lizard.

I wasn't being facetious at all Martin, l genuinely thought a gecko wasn't a lizard (like a salamander) so my bad.

Enjoy your break

@Maynard Friedman it's a gecko.

7 hours ago, ATWM said:

I object to this nomenclature! (In good humor, but, seriously, Canadian Tux is better although simply denim tux is the best)  

Feel free to object away!

I always prefer the expression Texas tux as l associate double denim with the cowboy culture mostly. I always associate anything Canadian clothing wise with something needing to be a little warmer to keep out the cold but that's just me 😁

21 minutes ago, Hopethisoneisnttaken said:

Was kinda shocked to read in some thread or other here that you and double O wear shorts in like 17 c or above?

If I had to live like that I’d never get a chance to wear jeans. 

 On your first point, my ideal (working outdoors) uk summer temperature l would say is between 12 and 20 degrees C. That's being active outside for 8 hours whilst in t-shirt and shorts. Anything over 25 degrees is now a struggle. Atm I'm sitting inside with a fan on in 29 degrees. Body temp seems to have had a major shift since getting into my 50's. Or is it global warming 🤔 😅

On your second point, my body often 'forgets' what it's like to wear jeans between April - October. So it is now August and starting to feel like l won't ever get to wear jeans again - it's like l'm losing my denim memory-map.

Can't wait for the cooler months here so l can don my texas tux!

15 hours ago, Broark said:

Psssh, those are rookie numbers. 

Reckon l'd need one of those hydration suits from Dune before l could go out in the sun in Texas! I'm melting if 25 degrees C or hotter as it is  😅

@reubensangwich

Modern day Jacob Davis right there!

16 hours ago, Maynard Friedman said:

Most things I no longer want, or fit as I’d like, rather than try to sell, I just give them to my 17 yr old son!

I did the same but he gave some of it back 😅

(I will hold onto it tho as l know he'll  change his mind later on down the road)

Handsome jacket and a great fit on you @Facini

I know this thread is more about the repros of this particular era, but on the subject of hidden rivets and red tabs, it is important to establish the original and its' origins.

I have seen quite a few images of '1937' salesman samples before and they all have a tab but also hidden rivets. This pair showcased by Marvin's has a red tab but no hidden rivets. Obviously this pair is a little smaller (not by much) but the back pockets look definitely designed with only the red tab in mind as the new addition,  which could make these sample pair date from late 1936? I'm guessing as usual, but l believe these to be from the prototype era of the 1937 model (1935-37) 

Anyway definitely an early advert for the newly improved 501XX and worthy of sharing even if for the smaller gauge LS&Co buckle and the close ups of the warp/weft of the denim. Cute little arc too.

@beautiful_FrEaK Maybe change the title of the thread to 1936 rather than 1937 if @indigoeagle doesn't mind?

59 minutes ago, beautiful_FrEaK said:

I hope the water entering this pic comes from a faucet... 😅

New Ammonia-wash, you not heard of it?

Pfft!

@MJF9 seen that video before thanks to  @beautiful_FrEaK but happy to view it again (and again) .

Just need 'someone' now to puchase the 1937's and then post their photos here 😁

5 hours ago, beautiful_FrEaK said:

Beware guys, AI fades are incoming:

 

I asked ChatGPT to create a picture of a pair of 2 years worn raw denim jeans.

Looks better than the lvc distressed stuff

Nope. 

47 minutes ago, beautiful_FrEaK said:

@Dr_Heech not from me 😅

😢

Can we get some pics of the 37's @beautiful_FrEaK? 😁

Awesome.

33 minutes ago, redragon said:

The book also covers the changes in weight calculation after the war, can get it up here if anyone’s interested… 

Thanks and why not, it would be good to have some insight if the info is solid.

Knew l'd seen those 1940/1941 bucklebacks before,  they are owned by the Jukebox guy.

They are identical (in terms of patch, flasher and guarantee ticket) to the pair in the 501XX book which are labelled as a rare transitional model, made in 1941.

Here is a post on lg showing them to be a 1937 model(?)

So in conclusion, they are a late 30s/early 40s model 501XX 😂

@redragon Thanks a bunch for that info btw

Interesting that the reverse yoke model is dated at c.1940. I wonder what the actual dates are for that model. Normally the reverse yoke is just stated a flat 1941 model, which is vague at best. Would love any insight into the actual date that this decision was made (probably by Milton Grunbaum l would imagine) but l doubt that info is in the book??

12 minutes ago, Maynard Friedman said:

VIZ: Readers Top Tips!

I am a peasant.

*Gushes with pride*