JohnM

1944-45 tchengaa and, yes, Zachary’s makes a great pizza, as you know Julian — both deep dish and cornmeal thin crust!

After noticing the asymmetry of the S601XX 1944-45 back pockets in the pic above (the right pocket is a half inch lower than the left pocket, closest to the middle seam), I reached out to Freewheelers to understand whether this was an out of spec sewing error or intentional.  Here is their response.  In short, I liked the jeans even with what I thought was a sewing flaw and like them even more now ;-)

"Thank you very much for your purchase, we’re happy to hear you’ve got the jeans,

And thanks for informing that the pocket of the jeans is tilted.

Yes, the pocket is not symmetrical… it’s tilted intentionally, as the design in fact.

The designer of it loves unevenness of products in that era. He loves the imperfection of old American products.

He’s making asymmetrical back pockets by requesting sewing factory to do so, and by using ‘greige’ denim as vintage denim.

So… pockets of other S601XX pair are tilted too (more or less).

However we understands it’s not easy to accept for most of people. Every pair of modern jeans are symmetrical naturally.

Compared with modern one, ours may be like defective products!

Anyway, this is our way of designing jeans.

We really hope you enjoy it.

Best regards,

Freewheelers & Co."

It was the 01, yes. I can’t remember if 03 was an option, but 01 is wide enough for me — especially since I’m most familiar with 02 ;-)

My understanding (from WorldShopping and BarnStormer) is that May-June was the original, estimated release date, but that production will now begin in July.

^ Thanks Broark. I agree that the TCB 40s jacket runs small.  My 44 fits more like a 42.  I’d guess the TCB and FW jackets are otherwise similar — both very nice, dark denim and WWII details. 

My washed pair of FW 1944-45 (34) jeans came today. Other than a slightly asymmetrical back pocket placement, I love em — beautiful denim, long enough (33”), and a roomy top block and high rise. The waist measures only a little over 33” but will likely (hopefully) stretch with wear. 
 

Jacket looks great Broark -- nice, dark denim and fit!

How would you compare it to the TCB 40s, which (if I recall) ran a little smaller?

Nice work Duke on the measurements of your FW jeans.  With your inspiration, I found a pair of washed 1944-45 in 34 from Mirrorball in Japan (raw is long gone) -- should be here in a week or so.  Over the course of asking about various FW models and their availability (or unavailability), I received an email from FW that described the basic differences between the 1943, 1944-45, 1947, 1951 denim as follows:

"Regarding the difference of denim, new fabric for 1945, and previous WW2 denim for 1943, are darker and thicker than our standard XX denim (for 1947 & 1951).  1947 and 1951 are our standard item.  It means we’ve been producing them for several years."

Regarding cut differences, FW said this:  

"About the cut of 44-45, it’s same as 1943 model.  43 and 44-45 are in the middle.  It means those are little bit wider than 1951, and little bit slimmer than 1947."

... as well as this about the future availability of the 1944-45:

"We'll produce them again in the future for sure (the specific time is not decided).  Please look forward to it anyway!"

Any suggestions on sizing the S601XX 1944-45 jeans?   I was thinking 34, but the one-wash versions look a little small in the waist.  I'm typically 36 in Ooe, 34 in Warehouse.

Duke,

If I understand the graphic above, does the waist on the '51 tend to run small relative to the others?  If so, I might size up to 36 from 34.

In addition, where does the inseam end up on these after a few washes?

John

The G-1 is a great jacket -- looks good, fits well, and is practical with an interior pocket and two reasonably wide outside pockets.  Nice pick-up srudy.

I like the A-2 too, especially the versatility of lighter weight and the simple collar, but it's otherwise less useful, due to the small pockets, as JDelage says.

Hi Broark.  I have the 710 in 36 and the waist is big.  I ran them through the dryer yesterday and the waist measured 35" before stretch.  I think you could make a 38 work.  Yes, the thighs are trim but the denim is stretchy.  I like the jeans, especially the hairy denim and nice construction, but the cut is a little unusual, no doubt.  Measurements are important, as we know, but denim stretch makes a big difference.

6 hours ago, Duke Mantee said:

I can’t narrow that down I’m afraid - their tees are in a big variety of fabrics and shapes.

If the dinosaur tee is this below, then it’s a lightweight cotton but not cut like the MF skivvy if that’s what your referring? 

Couldn't resist this t-shirt.  Drove across the country in 1981, including a trip to Big Bend National Park, then across the Rio Grande, and on horseback into Boquillas for tacos.  Wallet flew out of my pocket on the way back and a local chased me down on horseback to return it.  His horse was faster, thankfully.

Those jeans look great b_F -- 710 or 711?  So does the t-shirt, by the way.

^ thanks -- weight in oz.?

Congrats Bobbo, very nice.  I wonder if Warehouse will be making more of these and what the weight of the denim is -- somewhere between 13.5 and 14.5 oz., no doubt, and I won't sleep until this is resolved ;-)

Here’s the 1000XX DSB next to the S1000XX DSB after a warm soak. Pics are lousy but the 1000XX looks bluer and feels lighter, softer, less crinkly/stiff than the S version. I’ve heard 1000XX is 13.5 oz. — not sure about S version’s weight. 
 

Nice jeans and fit b_F.  But don't lose any more weight -- you're trim and fit enough!

Like Flash (with less knowledge), I had been wearing a pair of Conners for the past month, but recently picked up a couple pairs of Warehouse in size 34 raw -- the 1000XX DSB and S1000XX DSB.  Look forward to comparing them.   Interestingly, the waist of the 1000XX was 35" raw vs. 36.5" on the S1000XX.  I know the 1000XX denim is 13.5 oz. -- not sure about the S1000XX.  Nice jeans, from what I can tell so far.

Happy for you Tilmann and for Ellie, Duke. Good health to both little ones. 

Best to your daughter Duke -- may everything go well, including a quick recovery and superb health.

^ Agree!  This is my first pair of Warehouse 1000XX and I can see why it's well regarded -- classic and comfortable proportions.

If you or others know what Levi's year this pair is modeled after, I'd love to know.  Regardless, it has the feel of simple, no frills Levi's from years ago.

Here you go Dr_Heech:

Size 34, 1000XX DSB, soaked (warm water, 60 minutes) and worn for two hours (denim stretches easily):

Waist:  35.25"

FR:  12.5"

BR:  17.375"

Thigh:  13.25"

Knee:  9.875"

LO:  9.18754421985"  ;-)

Inseam:  33.0"

6 hours ago, LazyS said:

Thanks! They are definitely my favorite pair now

LazyS -- love FW but never tried their jeans.  What do you love most about these?

^ Sure -- I'm soaking them now, but will get some measurements post-soak.