entertainment!

Kinda sad that levis customers have to finish the job hardwear-wise.

But yeah entertainment, 100% agree with you about the the beautifull denim.

This pair was even sadder: 2008 Oldest Oldest. I moved the patch from the center to the side (per Paul T's comments), shortened the cinch strap so it would function, flattened the rivets (no patent date on these), repaired an unraveled side seam and shortened the hem. After one two hour warm soak and a five hour cold soak, the inseam and waist each only shrank less than one inch. The waist stretched back to pre-soak on the first wear. The length was marked as 36 but it was actually 38, so it ended up at 37" before I rehemmed. Now they do look pretty good though.

I must have too much free time.

I think it is time to investigate the Leepros. (Though I have been happy with my 1933 and later lvc, except for some funky pocket construction.)

The buckles SUCK on LVC. The got REAL close with the 1915s but they screwed up in the fact that under the fabric on what should be the solid straight bar it has a split so that when you clip them they now no longer function. I have a replaced mine with other buckles. I have some original turn of the 20th century original buckles that I have on some of my buckle backs and have found a couple of places that supply much better repro buckles.

Heres a turn of the century original.

Yes, the buckles do suck. I guess it is a moot point what type of buckle lvc used on the 1915s since it was completely non functional. I replaced it with one from River Junction. (Thanks for pointing out that source, airfrog.)

I also flattened the rivets per Paul T's suggestion. They look much better. The rivets were the other thing I didn't like on the 1915s. Many of the washers were cockeyed on my pair. But the denim is so beautiful!

The other thing it seems to me that lvc gets wrong is the buckle on the cinch. I would class these into two types. Type A seems to be the earlier type where the sharp points rest on a loop that is not wrapped by the denim strap and type B where the points rest on a loop that is wrapped by the denim strap. Type A is used on the earlier repros and Type B is used on later ones. The new 1915s have the Type A buckle, but from looking at the Lyn Downey Evolution of the 501 book, it looks like the Type B buckle was already used on the 1901 501. I looked at the vintage jeans on marvins-jp.com and it seemed that after 1900 or so, the Type A buckle was only used on the 201 series. Of course, buckles could have been replaced on the vintage jeans.

Mine matched up...stupid question but are you evening out the top of the waist so that the front is on top of the back? A common mistake that sometimes is missed...

A while back, I asked Cultizm how they measured the waist and was told that they laid the jeans flat and measured across the back which I interpreted as being different from matching the tops of the front and back and measuring (BiG style). This means that the waist measurement will be one to two inches smaller than measuring BiG style (depending on the year of the jeans).

I have had the best luck with sizing from Cultizm when I asked for the actual measurements of a specific size of jeans (i.e. 33x36 or 34x36) rather than specifying what actual size waist I wanted the jeans to be.

Thanks for the tip man! i'll go TTS. How much did they stretch out???

I from my previous experience with 47s they stretch quite alot.... but i'm not so sure about the 505 kaihara denim ay.....

On the 67 505, I tried a 33x36 and a 34x36 and while the waist on the 34x36 seemed right, the butt and thighs were not as slim as I wanted. I went with the 33x36 which were tight in the waist but fit well otherwise. They measured 34" in the waist BiG style and have stretched to about 35" now after about ten wears.