entertainment!

giantsdrink-My 1967 505s have stretched out about 1 inch after about twenty wears and seem to have stopped there (at least I hope).

They're great jeans.

Paul T- Any thoughts on the width of belt loops and when they got narrower?

Personally, I wouldn't hem, I would cuff. And if you're going to get a chainstitched hem, I honestly think it's better to do so before the first soak - otherwise the fabric won't move, and you won't get the roping, which is a big part of the original look. In fact, I had my non-chainstitched 'first blue jeans' hemmed after I soaked, and that looked wrong too.

I completely agree with your advice Paul T. I did have a different experience with my Oldest Oldest than you did with your 'first blue jeans' though. I rehemmed my Oldest Oldest after two soaks. I still have the cut off hem and don't see much difference between the new hem and the old hem. It's probably because this fabric (2008) doesn't seem to shrink at all. There is no roping, just what I would call faceting when the multiple layers bend, i.e. the fold are vertical, not sloped. But I definitely wouldn't have hemmed them if I had got any roping first.

The 55s have skinnier belt loops than the earlier models. I've seen'm skinny on originals and the off set belt loop, Paul, didn't you say that you thought that was a trait from one particular factory?

Thanks, Airfrog. I looked on Marvins to check out vintage models. There was one 501z that I thought might have had skinnier belt loops, but I couldn't really be sure from the pictures. The ones in the Lynn Downey 501 book look like they are the wider 5/8" ones.

Just started wearing the pair of 1954 501z that I bought for the contest. I got them because they were the only ones between 1915 and 1966 that were available in my size that I didn't have in rotation already. I thought they would be like a 1955 but with a zipper, but they are more like a modern skinny jean from the knee down (APC New Cure) mated with a vintage levi's fit from the crotch up. If that sounds strange, it sure is. Luckily I have skinny legs, so they fit me quite well. But I don't feel like I am wearing a vintage jean.

They also have very skinny belt loops (1/2" width) like 1960s models that seem inauthentic to me.

Guys I need your help here, my '33 hasn't much room left for me in the waist, I would say it's quite tight actually. So should I soak them? Or maybe soak them while wearing them to prevent any waist shrinkage?

Quite confused here...

I would cold soak to shrink the length and get some leg twist, then spin if possible, and wear until dry. I usually go true to size in the waist with lvc and this will keep the waist from shrinking. It may take a few wears to stretch back to original size.

Customer #19 checking in

My 1915 is a 32/36. Before soaking, it measured 17" across laid flat and 35.5" measured BiG style. The length was 36.5". After a soak the waist fit is pretty similar to my one soak 34/36 1937s marked SE 07 (Spring 2007 I assume). Both are a little loose on me. I'm using the cinch on the 1915. I don't think it shrank too much, but can't remember what sort of soak I did. It definitely stretched back a little. I usually aim for about a 35" waist measured BiG style when all is said and done (depending on the cut of course).

Just found a note about the soak I did on the 1915s. I did a three hour room temperature soak and then wore them until almost dry. That may be why they didn't shrink much. There definitely was some shrinkage, but they did stretch too. In the beginning, I didn't need to use the cinch. I have been progressively hiking up on the cinch. They are now a little over 35" in the waist measured BiG style.

wow, I guess I should get a 32/36 then. thanks for the measurement.

Erk-You probably know this, but the buckle on the cinch doesn't work on the 1915 (unless it has been modified since the first production). I replaced it with one from River Junction. The denim is great though. I think Airfrog said it was the best on any LVC he had ever seen. It's very different from any other Cone LVC denim I have seen.

I was referring to tagged size so, the 33/36 would be 35/36(according to users here and cultizm). Most of my jeans end up measuring around 34.5-35 after stretching and soaking, so figured I'd go with that.

My 1915 is a 32/36. Before soaking, it measured 17" across laid flat and 35.5" measured BiG style. The length was 36.5". After a soak the waist fit is pretty similar to my one soak 34/36 1937s marked SE 07 (Spring 2007 I assume). Both are a little loose on me. I'm using the cinch on the 1915. I don't think it shrank too much, but can't remember what sort of soak I did. It definitely stretched back a little. I usually aim for about a 35" waist measured BiG style when all is said and done (depending on the cut of course).

I would follow Paul T's advice then spin dry. This gets rid of lots of soap which remains in the wet jeans even after a rinse. Soap attracts dirt once it dries in the fabric, so you want to get remove as much as possible. After the spin, I would put them on and wear them until they are dry. This will prevent most of the shrinkage where it counts but not in the length of course.

Paul T,

I just wanted to join the chorus and say how sorry I am that you aren't participating in the contest. You get such great fades. But there should be a lot more examples for the 501- Visual Guide thread in six months or so.

I wish I had read your comments about the 1954 501z in this thread before I bought my contest pair. They are really tapered, much slimmer even than the 1947s. More like a modern slim fit than anything, and I haven't even soaked yet. It would be good if you added the 1954 to the Visual Guide as a warning. Not that I won't enjoy wearing them. They're a good fit for me.

You can't necessarily go by Paul T's measurements when ordering from Cultizm because Paul T's dimensions are for the Spring 2009 production and the ones Cultizm are selling may be from other seasons.

Here's some pics of the pair of real Big E's I picked up last week in a huge size of 42x36!

They're from 1966-1971. They also have a metal inside rivet and copper on the outside... anyone know this one?

They're currently on ebay.

I like those diamonds in the arcuates that cross over the lines. Those seem to be somewhat common in true vintage Levi's, but the LVCs always seem to have the corners of the diamond meet the lines of the lower arcuate line. The diamonds that cross over look a little more handmade to me, which I like.

My problem is that my four year old daughter won't wear anything with pockets, which makes a five pocket jean something like the antichrist. I have even had to sew up some side-seam pockets on dresses so she would wear them. Perhaps if the jeans were selvage denim she might reconsider?

There's a ton of LVC 40% off at Oki-ni. You have to use the code SEASONEND under 'Additional Services' during checkout. Here is the stuff that it works on. Most LVC is on page 2.

Once again, I would have bought a pair of oldest oldests, but I usually wear 32/34 in jeans, and they only had 34/34 The consensus around here seems to be go true to size, but post-shrinking, the 34s should measure 33, and my fully stretched jeans are 34-35 in the waist. Worth a try?

I think the 34 would be way too big in the waist. I bought a 32 and it measures about 36" (BiG style) in the waist after two soaks. It did shrink but stretched back right away. Didn't put them in the dryer though.

The standard history of Levi's always states that the rivets on the back pockets were covered in 1937 to avoid scratching saddles and furniture. While I don't doubt this rational since the covered rivet detail must cost more to execute than the exposed version, I was wondering if anyone wearing an LVC reproduction of an early model with exposed rivets has actually scratched a piece of furniture or anything else. Sometimes I think I must be crazy when I put down a towel before sitting on my leather-covered dining room chairs!

Airfrog, did you wear those 1915s with suspenders or just use the cinch?

They look great! I need to put more wear into mine, but I am rotating too many pairs.

yeah they do. there is some disclaimer on their section about how 3sixteen is available from selfedge because they really like the people behind the company or something like that.

they only have one cone mills product and its made with resin coated non-selvage black denim.

I was told by someone who works at Self Edge that one of the people who runs 3sixteen is or was an owner of Self Edge but was more interested in creating denim than retailing it. That would help explain why Self Edge carries 3sixteen.

Got my 1901s in the mail yesterday. Was a bit disappointed with the size... ordered a 32/34 and was expecting true to size on the waist, but the true size is closer to 34. I'm guessing the problem is that Cultizm doesn't measure with the waist aligned (BiG style), but dipped.

So instead of going undersized (which I was hoping for), it looks like these will be true to size after the first soak. After much hmm'ing and ha'ing I've decided fuck it, I'm gonna rock the loose vintage fit, put the cinch to good use, and hold em up with my filson suspenders. At least it will be something a little different for the contest.

If it's any consolation, I've found that the older styles with very high rises fit better with a larger waist. My 47s measure 34.5" BiG style, but my Oldest Oldest measures 36". Both fit pretty well.

For those who live near New York City, I was in the J Crew Men's Store on Broadway in Soho last week. They had the rigid 1967 505 in lots of sizes for $195. They also had the 505 in a washed version as well as other washed lvc. I am not sure exactly which ones since I was only interested in the rigid though.

Some nice models were made in 2005: - the 1886, the 1890 (second issue with the hammered rivets), 1944 wartime with front pocket lining made from stripe shirt material. Really well made.

Also the second variant of the 1955 (the variation being the yellow stitch is to the outside of the back pockets, rather than the inside) - they were really solid.

.. and, unfortunately, the 'wrong arcs' 201.

I also have the 40's 'hap jones' sweat from '05, which is just too short to realistically wear for me, but is a quality item nonetheless. Great chainstitching and details.

I have a pair of those 1944s from 2005. They are great, Dr Heech, but there is one detail that I have always wondered about. The edge of the denim in the pocket on the fly side is unfinished. Is this accurate to construction from that era. (This detail is also present on a pair of 1933's from 2006 and 1937s from 2007).

Here is a picture of the detail on the 1933s:

On the 1944s, since the bar tack of the belt loop doesn't overlap the pocket (the belt loops are set too close to the fly), the raw edge would always pop out of the pocket when I sat down. That drove me crazy, so I ended up sewing the edge of the pocket bag to capture the raw edge.

Like the original Doctor said, they're Valencia St 55.

The other clue is the serif font for the "501 XX" on the tag which is only used on the 1950s repros (1954 and 1955), afaik.

67 505's - What's the best way to go about sizing?

I've never had any luck with 501 STF's. Always too long, too baggy, something goes wrong.

I'd like to order these, hell, maybe even enter the contest but I'm not sure how to go about sizing for these.

My waist is about a 33-34. Would like about a 33-34 inseam.

* Since they're pre-shrunk, that means no soak is necessary, am I correct? I'd be OK to order a 33/34 (33 is measured 32 1/2 but I figure they'll stretch).

* Would I be better off sizing down? I'm a bit of a more muscular build, especially my thighs so I wouldn't want anything skin-tight.

Thanks for any help guys, look forward to possibly entering the contest.

These are slim but not super slim, so if you are muscular, I would go close to your true size in the waist, maybe slightly undersize. I am slim, so I sized down one inch, but I am not sure you should.

Like most sanforized denim, these will definitely stretch in the waist. I have two pairs, one unworn and one worn ten to fifteen times. The ones that I have worn are now one inch bigger in the waist and they were definitely the same size to start.

I soaked mine because my hands turned blue just from handling them, but my other pair doesn't do that (go figure, they are from the same year). I am not planning to soak my other pair.

They probably will shrink a little in length. Mine are an inch longer in the inseam than marked, so ask for a measurement if you are concerned.

Here are the rivets on my 1886s.

And they have one of my favorite arcuates

Airfrog, those rivets are so beautiful! What year did lvc make those 1886 repros?

I would never alter any LVC until they have full shrunk and that really takes 10 may 12 wet to dry cycles.

Even after rehemming, my Oldest Oldest are still way too long. I still have to turn them up twice. They just didn't hang right before.