428CJ

I don't know how they "decide" it, but I can say based on measurements that my contemporary STFs and OFs have been fairly close to what I would imagine as halfway in between my '66 and 76 cut LVCs. Not as bell shaped in the upper block as '66's, but not as tight hipped as '76's. Modern 501's and 505's are actually a very good fit on me, and they look great in the Rigid sanforized material. Darker than LVCs, and fade plenty quickly and quickly for a "cheap" jean. I have a $19 discount store pair of irregular 505's from within the past two years, and they are one of my best fitting and best looking pairs. I wear them indiscriminately with my LVCs.

I don't know where you get "pleasure" from. I reported that I got a quick response, while others have reported otherwise. No more; no less.

I really wonder what accounts for different people's experiences with customer service, i.e. contact with Ryan. People report being completely ignored by him. But every time I have contacted him, he has got back to me very quickly. I asked today for a 12 month update, and he responded within an hour.

^^^ That is, what you are describing the 1880's as matches the little cartoon drawing for the 1890's very well.

What you are describing matches the little cartoon drawing for the 1890's very well, though.

I wonder how the LVC 1880 waist overalls compare to the 1890's in that drawing.

Thanks for the information. It's most appreciated. Thank you for your input. The 505 reissue is even less suitable for me, as the rise is quite a lot lower. Anything below 12" feels bad to me, and I like 13" and over, in an ideal pair. I was really just hoping that the '54's were a zipper fly '47, with perhaps just a slight taper. It's okay; it's not like I need another pair of jeans!

Can anyone describe the '54 cut to me, relative to '47's and '55's? Based on the written description on the Levi's Website, I would think it would just be a '47 with a zipper...but Levi's also specs it with a 2"smaller leg opening than a '47, which would seem to indicate a more dramatic taper than most 501's...yet they also say it's straight legged in the specs listed. Due to the greater taper, and the lack of specificity in their description of front rise, my suspicions are raised that it might not actually be as high in rise as the '47's and '55's. According to Levi's: '47, '54, '55: "Sits at waist" – So I would assume they all have approx. 13" rise in size 36, like my '55's do. '47, '54, '55: "Regular fit through thigh" – So I would assume they aren't a snug fit when worn TTS But: '47, '55: "Straight leg opening: 17" and '54: "Straight leg opening: 15" So is the '54 a high waisted tapered cut? Hard to tell from pix. I'm into it if it's basically just a '47 cut, but with a zipper and a little bit of taper, but I'm not interested at all if the waist sits lower than a '47 or '55. Thank you.

With all the LVC 501's I have, I've still not gone for the '47's. I always figured I would go for the Sugar Canes instead, but knowing that the LVCs will still be Cone next year has me interested in taking the last shot at the "real deal" without it being a special run or something. I felt the same way about '54's, but might grab a pair of those next season as well.

IME, size up two to four sizes from your measured chest size when you have a thick blanket lining, with each "size up" being a 2" increase in chest size. I.e. if you have a 42" measured chest, then get a jacket that measures 46-50 actual armpit to armpit measurement off of the jacket. Go two if you don't need to layer a lot; go three if you do, go four if you do, and you also want a somewhat relaxed fitting jacket on top of a few layers. But it appears that Lee Japan have done this already in this case, based on the 48" post soak measurements for a size 42. That is a good looking jacket, I must say. I almost like it better than my late '70's dead stock one, because the lining of the repro is probably 100 percent wool, instead of the blended (or is it all poly?) blanket lining that mine has. FWIW, my measured chest size is 42, and I like a 46" UNLINED denim jacket (actual armpit to armpit measurement, not tag size). I like my heavy blanket lined jackets at about 49–51" armpit to armpit. 49" for a snugger fit without a lot of layers, and 51" for what I consider to be a "proper" fit for a heavy blanket lined denim jacket, i.e. big enough to wear several layers underneath (thermal, tee, and thick button-up shirt, at least) and still move around comfortably.

Very cool, and congrats. I have a dead stock late '70's one, so I don't think I will be biting...but out of curiosity, do they make them in 44 or 46? I can't wait till the Archives '59 101Zs are made again. I think I might buy several pair. I'm hoping these get made again, but maybe not. Most people like the earlier '50's cuts. I like the '59 because it has 7 belt loops.

Actually, when I pulled the jacket out to snap a few pix, I saw that it is actually a size L, not an XL. It just runs so oversized that I had it in my mind as an XL. It has a 51" chest and 22" shoulders – huge for a size L. It is supposed to shrink 5 percent, though. I usually wear it over an undershirt, a button-up shirt, and sometimes a vest too. Very cozy jacket. I love oversized type I's and II's (these cuts work better and look better oversized IMO). I was very happy to find a type I or II so huge. It is almost certainly a style with discontinued specs. It is not a vintage accurate piece, but it is L.V.C. (I have all the original tags and flasher). It has a yellow selvedge I.D. (weird, but cool looking IMO), and a modern style wool-poly blend for the blanket lining. The interior tag might not actually be leather. I do have the original tags and flasher somewhere, but I can't dig them up at the moment. I bought it N.O.S. from an independent party in England, via E-Bay. Made in Turkey for the EU market.

Welp, the end of the year budget is significantly smaller this year, so I have limited myself to just one item during the first round of the 40 percent off sale: a Rigid Type I jacket in XL. It was that or the LVC Type II. I already have the Sugar Cane copy of the type II, and I already have an oversized EU LVC blanket lined Rigid Type I. In the end, I decided that the unlined Type I was a "necessary" addition to my collection more so than a "proper" Levi's Type II. The Sugar Cane type II copy is such an outstanding jacket that the LVC Type II would have been pretty redundant. As for the blanket lined Rigid LVC Type I that I already have, I purposefully sized it so that I am swimming in it, and it is also simply too warm for many occasions. Therefore the unlined, more regular sized Type I will be a much more welcomed addition. Can't wait to get the thing!

Their pre-rinsed stuff seems to be tagged "after" the rinse, while their raw stuff is tagged "before" the rinse. For example, my single rinse XL Triple Pleat is pretty much identically sized to my Rigid XL Triple Pleat. As such, the Rigid will be smaller in the end, even though they are both XL.

Definitely need to be sized down for a more standard fit. I wear mine very loose and sag them, even with both cinches tightened. I'm not sure if they shrink or not. I'm 70 days of wear in to them, and I haven't washed them yet. I am hoping that they do shrink quite a bit. If not, my attempt to improve them will be moving the cinch straps around half an inch each side, to the outseam area.