Dr_Heech

It's about time they stocked the raw '22 model.

Mmmmm......not sure..

It looks like the bottom half of the legs have been dipped in something.

Probably easier, and cheaper, to buy the raw version and wear 'em in..

..And the big question is, with constant wear, how long will the knees hold out before the bottom half of the leg gets seperated?

hey dr heech check this out!!!!

again the warehouse lee blog. klick on the pic of the 101J,

now thats pretty cool

http://ameblo.jp/wh-archives/

Fardin, you are the MAN !!

That's the !st 1945/6 Lee 'Riders' jacket but with the Lee 'Cowboy' buttons (crossover variation) we discussed earlier - same as the one on the cover of the David Little book.

That 101LJ is nice, and it's called a 101-LJ, rather than the Real McCoy's early version, which was titled 1101LJ (why.. I do not know). Although their current version (you posted a link somewhere before) isn't bad.

Are you gonna get one? What size are You? What sizes do they go up to?

I've got a couple of denim jackets on ebay as I've got WAay too many..

mini rant:

the whole sizing issue is completely ridiculous. Any clothing manufacturer worth a crap should be able to make a pair of pants the size they are meant to be. be they valencia st. or caitac. I just hope the 1915s are correct sized enough that I can get a pair that measure 34-35 in the waist with a 36" inseam.

Erk,

If the 1915's are anything like the 1927's or the 1917's they wont be accurate at all. My 1917's are tagged a 32/34, but measure 35.5/33.5.

It's worth contacting your supplier (I talk to Will @ Aero) to give your measurements to first, then hopefully they can get it right even if Levis cant.

looks like lee x warehouse are going to have some nice frisco jeens repros coming this fall, i wish they would have made a cant bust em repro instead but we will see. plus i can wait for the beautiful stormrider

check out their blog

http://ameblo.jp/wh-archives/

Fardin,

Will be interesting to see what the back length is on those jackets - compared to my original 1959 jacket, which is only 23.5 inches in length from collar seam to waist. Doubt if they would do my sizeanyway (46 long)???

Sympathy,

If they are the 90's 'natural indigo' version, then they will not shrink at all, if anything they will stretch out an inch. There's a post somewhere on this thread from Paul T about those particular jeans and their shrinkage(or lack of..) qualities. I have a pair in a size 38/36, but measure 40/36. This means they will probably fit someone who is a 42 inch waist. And that, unfortunately, is not me!

AF,

Looking at your 33's and the earlier posts of your 1917's, you favour the smaller cuff (about two inches?) but turned up four times.

Have you worn any others with bucket turn-ups or even wear them gathered on the boot? If so, any pics?

There is so much variation from year to year with each model. Look back in this thread and see my comparison posts with pics of the 55's from 1998, 2003 and 2005. The 98's are very hairy/slubby, the '03's (currently on ebay) are lighter and streakier, and the 05's are also dark and VERY stiff and solid, but not hairy or streaky.

I had a pair of the 555 33's and compared to the 2004 33's I have, they are darker. I think Airfrog has a pair of 555 33's, and there are some pics of them also somewhere on this thread.

AirFrog, check your messages - i've PM'd you.

I noticed the Fall 09 Collection lacks e g a '47 or '55. When does usually come the collection for spring / summer? And as the 47 and 55 are sold nearly everywhere, they should be avalable then.

ThomasK.

The S/S collection usually appears at the begining of January.

Dr H the denim on the 333s is so much different than any other LVC. And I like the fact they and so different in design. Some of LVCs best effort. I say some photos of a pair of originals about the time I bought mine. These are a very good repro of a very rare pair of Levis.

AF

Yeah, No I appreciate the denim looks fantastic and is probably much better in 'the flesh', but it's the style which I'm not keen on.

I know they were originally a cheaper alternative to the other models of that period, and it's good that Lvc pulled their finger out and made a decent repro of them, but for me I'd prefer the 201 or your 209 bib overalls that's all. I have a photo of a one pocket pair somewhere, i'll try and dig it out and get a pic of it for you.

Getting shot of this soon:

©1929 Levis 213 pleated blouse/jacket from 1999:

The neck tag:

And for further reference, For those of us who are interested, the inside info label and button back:

And a 557xx (+ bluebell/wrangler 11MJ)

Getting shot of this soon:

©1929 Levis 213 pleated blouse/jacket from 1999:

The neck tag:

And for further reference, For those of us who are interested, the inside info label and button back:

Plus a 557xx (and a Bluebell 11MJ)

Those broken raw 333's have a nice patch and cool buttons, but that's about it. They look a bit like navy denims. Much prefer the 201 or 501xx of that period.

why the fuck cant I add those 333's to my cart and have them shipped to the US?! They arent even ON the us site. What gives?!

I was the same with the 1890's from 2005. They had them in a size 34/36 on the US site but not on the UK one. They should have one international site so any one can get anything. Whinge, moan..etc

Yes I think those are the 1880s...

Defo 1880 (knappave I think).

I have the 1886s...

Well AF, If I do ever sell my 1886's, I'll let you know first.

Dejan has some raw and in my size too.

http://www.cultizm.com/product_info.php?info=p207_Levi-acute-s-reg--KNAPPAVE-1880-s-JEANS-RIGID.html

I thought you had a pair of 1880 knappaves? I'm sure I've seen some fit pics of you wearing 'em?

Thanks Dr H. I might have to see if I can score a pair. My 1886s are getting pretty beat.

I have only seen one other pair, on ebay actually, and they went for over £300.00!. They are rare (although I'm sure there's a few SUFU members who have some squirrelled away somewhere!), so maybe you're better off with an alternative - say the 1890 or the 1870 oldest/oldest?

Hey Doc a question do you like the 1880s better than the 1886s?

I'm leaning towards the 1880's after a discussion with Paul about the evolution of the 501xx and the 'nevada'/knappave style work pant. For me, it's the denim pockets on the 1880.

I'm a bit of an accuracy freak.

The front pockets are shalllower than 27 and the 01s I had IIRC but not overly shallow to me anyway about he same as my 555 1933s.

Yeah, it's strange how certain variations with the different models aren't consistent. I do like the 1917's, but will probably sell them as I've got too many Levi's. The only pair without beltloops I want to wear are my (Knappave) 1880's. Your 17's are looking good though...

AF, do you find the front pockets shallower on the 17's, compared to other models such as the 1901's and the 1927's/33's?

It's amazing that dude can get the second pair over the first.

... Would be funny if there was a third pair underneath those two!

(and what's the cop up to - checkin his Lee's have the red centre tag?)

I also like my 1927's, apart from the obvious lack of details - they're really growing on me. I may break in a pair of 1933's, which are similar in weight, to see how they both wear.