428CJ

Just out of curiosity: If you dry clean raw unsanforized denim, does it shrink in the dry cleaning chemicals? I would think so, as the garments are still getting wet (just not with water).

I would go with '55s as summer jeans. The '76s are much more tight hipped.

Best fit depends in your body and your aesthetic preferences. ’47 is medium slim and has a healthy rise. ’55 is kind of like as if you upsized a ‘47, and then had the waist taken in by a tailor. ’54 is a different animal. It has quite a taper for the era...but still has a comfortable upper block.

For those interested in some measurements off of a pair of 1880s (34-34):

Yup. Why I grabbed everything I wanted before the change. Just in case. 1880s, ‘15s, ‘33s, ‘44s, ‘55s, ‘66s, ‘76s, TPB, type 1. Most of it I already had. But when Cone announced its closure, I made extra sure to get ‘33s, ‘76s, and a type 1. Still managed to get it all with good discounts too.

If you can fit a 34 waist, I'm considering selling a pair. I was planning on doing it well down the line.

Didn't they? The denim on my TPB looks exactly like the denim on my 1880s...and it fades very quickly, like natural indigo dye does.

Probably just not as much demand for the ones they are making now, and they overproduced. The new ones are probably no better or worse, all things considered. But many LVC people want their M.I.U.S.A. jeans made from White Oak material, and many of those are still out there in good condition or dead stock. Let some years pass, and I'll bet people will wear through their White Oak pairs while the dead stock gets picked over as well, then demand for the new models will return.

That's right! He needs to spend all his time "at work" developing and marketing new products, promoting his scam on Instagram, and posing for gay photo shoots with his hipster buddies.

I can't believe Levi's refunded you for a de-tagged and shrunk pair of Rigid LVCs. User error, and they are the ones who end up losing a bunch of money. Very generous move. They didn't even look that tight shrunk. Tighter jeans than that were the norm in the '70s and '80s, which this cut is based on. And it sounds like you didn't even give them time to relax back out (which they definitely would have done). You could have worn them wet-to-dry, and all the stretch you could get from them would have happened in a day. 28 was not a wise choice, based on a size 30 in 1890s feeling loose. The '76s are a slim-hipped cut. The 1890s are a loose-hipped cut. Sizing properly isn't about tag sizes and waistbands. It's about cuts, and the actual measurements of the hips and the thighs. You should have gone with the 30s in the '76s. The "later denim shrinks more" conclusion is not only wrong IME, but it cannot even reasonably be made unless you actually took detailed pre and post wash measurements from all styles of LVCs, and washed and dried them all identically. Anecdotally based conclusions based on two models should be taken with a grain of salt by all reading. I would venture to guess that what you felt was the difference between a relaxed fitting cut sewn in lighter weight denim, and a tight fitting cut sewn in heavier weight denim...two tag sizes smaller. You got lucky with Levi's being very kind to you. I would simply take the exchange for a pair of 30s, consider yourself very lucky, and come away from the situation hopefully better educated. The 1890s can be washed hot and machine dried hot to maximize shrinkage. You can also cinch them up, obviously. That's what it's for.

I am not sure what you mean by "counterfeit" in this case. They are either original ("vintage") jeans, or they are authorized reproductions made by Edwin under license from Lee. Neither of these could appropriately be called "counterfeit." "Counterfeit" would be an unauthorized reproduction. Again, the question is whether they are old jeans, or authorized reproductions. "Counterfeit" is not really one of the likely options.

Not possible to tell whether they are Lee Archives or originals, without more pix. The fades certainly look fake to me. But that said, sometimes old fades that are totally genuine can look what we would call "fake." The rear tag going threadbare and the rear patch shrinking, hardening, and falling part of the way off would not be factory distressing. That doesn't mean they aren't repros, though. They could just be worn and repeatedly washed repros. Are there any inside tags, or evidence of them formerly being there?

Perhaps, and perhaps not, and no way to know. But I said what I meant and meant what I said, and that's all that matters to me. You can't force anyone to read something or to hold a certain opinion. None of that is my goal. With limited options, I did was I could to make a truthful series of statements, and I can't do much beyond that.

As explained in my initial post on the issue, this is a case, metaphorically speaking, of "the attempted cover up being worse than the crime." The work was an embarrassment. However, I kept my cool about it and was reasonable about a solution, giving a little on my end just to settle it quickly. In the end, the real-world solution would have been easy: hem the pants higher to salvage some material for me. I'll fix the patch by hand. I'll compromise with Railcar by spending 40 to 60 minutes of my time driving there and back, and 20 or 30 minutes of my time hand sewing the patch. They spend five minutes doing a hem job. Done, and seems beyond fair to Railcar. Why that very reasonable offer of mine was an unacceptable solution to them is beyond me. They keep saying they couldn't have satisfied me...but I told them exactly how they could, and that they could knock it out that day if they were available. Instead, I get a bunch of nonsense from them simply because they took personal offense. Then they come here and post distortions and lies and continue their nonsensical arguments. Again, five minutes of their time to realize a solution that is beyond fair...or possibly get this crap (which, believe it or not, I dislike too)? Hopefully THAT is the "learning experience" that the owner spoke of. I quite honestly don't care what people think of me, and I didn't come here for "support." I'm not going to dive in to that whole leg of the discussion beyond this paragraph. I came here to lodge a review, and I was truthful in my posts. I don't run a business here, and it's just a hobby club, so been unpopular doesn't "ding" me. We don't need to love each other or agree with each other. I've stated what I felt needed to be stated to make my points to at all steps of the way, and that's good enough for me, regardless of how it is received. Totally willing to go private again, but if nonsense and bent truths keeps getting posted by RFG, then I will, of course, respond with sensible counter-arguments. This really had to be two posts at most. I complain. RFG says sorry we'll fix it like you wanted after all. Oh well.

Nobody needs to have any "interest" in this. Nobody needs to like any of my posts. The point is that it's posted, and there it sits. Private communication was shut down unnecessarily, over a very easy to solve issue. At that point, it turns into a publicly viewable complaint that hopefully makes a few people think twice.