Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

165 making progress

About 428CJ

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • style
  • attitude
  • location:
    Los Angeles, CA, U.S.A.
  • wish i was in
    Los Angeles, CA, U.S.A.
  • denim
    size 36
  • t-shirt
  • shoes
    us 10.5 uk 10 eu 44 jp 28
  1. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    There is a way to triple cuff in order to fold in a huge excess of length, without making the cuff too ugly. Example: I am 5'11". When cuffing, I cuff somewhat high, at about 29"–30", regardless of inseam. If you are 6" shorter than me, let's say 3 inches of that is in your inseam, as opposed to in your torso. Thus you probably want to cuff at 26" for a high cuff, and maybe 28" for a lower riding cuff. I'll use the midpoint of 27 inches, and assume your pants came with 10 extra inches of inseam. With the 10 extra inches, you don't need to fold up a huge 5" double cuff, nor do you need to roll your factory hem all the way in to the interior of a triple cuff (which will make it hard to get a sharp cuff). Instead break the 10" into three sections, with one of the sections being a bit shorter than the other two. For 10" excess, the sections could be 3.5" + 3.5" + 3". The first cuff is made at the last number plus the middle number: 6.5". The second fold is made at the first number: 3.5". Important: The second fold is made 3.5" *up from the first fold* (through the layers of the first cuff, not at the point where the factory hem now sits). What happens is that you get a meaty, four-layer-thick 3.5" triple cuff, but the factory hem stays loose and at the top of the cuff (yet hidden by 1/2"). It doesn't end up buried inside the cuff. It's a neater and looser cuff than a straight end-over-end triple cuff that tightly buries the factory inseam deep inside the cuff. 3.5" is still a damned healthy looking cuff, but it's not totally ridiculous like 5". Also, you might not have 10" of excess length, plus you might want to ride your cuffs a bit lower – two things that would shorten that 3.5" cuff.
  2. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    The availability of a wide variety of hemmed inseams is indeed something that came about in fairly recent history in the clothing industry. I'm not sure exactly when; maybe mid '50's to early '60's (someone here will know when). Jeans, just like dress pants, used to come in just one, or maybe a handful, of lengths. The thought was that you'd have the retailer or a tailor hem them for you after you bought them. Not everyone did this, hence the relatively common use of healthily tall cuffs. The trend of modern jeans companies doing roughly the same is actually a nod to the past, not something new. Even some lower-end jeans companies still do this on women's jeans. For instance, Lee women's jeans come in a variety of waists, but only a few lengths: S, M, L...and sometimes P (petite) and SP (super petite).
  3. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    Welp, over the past few months, I finally purchased the last two pair of LVCs I wanted to have: '33's and '76's. I was waiting for sales, hopefully before the end of the Cone Mills denim supplies. Decent enough ones finally popped up. Now it's time for a few solid decades of break in. Here is what I've collected: 1880 (x2 - 34's and 36's) 1915's (x2 - 36's and 38's) 1933 1944 1955 (x2 - 34's and 36's) 1966 1977
  4. W. H. Ranch Dungarees

    Wow. I ordered mine back in December, and haven't thought about them once since some time in January...till coming across this thread again. Looks like I only need to do that about 6 or 8 more times, and I'll have my jeans!
  5. Which pair if you were stranded on an island?

    Something loose fitting and cinch backed, and not that heavy: in other words, comfortable, no belt required, and durable. That said, I'd hope to be wearing a pair of Dickies when I got stranded, instead of a pair of jeans. They are far more durable.
  6. Roy. (expurgated edition)

    The belly (or the belly button, to be more accurate) *is* the waist, or close to it, on most people. You probably mean that you prefer to wear them on your high hips (which is where most jeans are worn, because they don't have enough rise to make it to the true waist).
  7. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    Those are not current manufacture. They are old stock. Cultizm has had them for a very long time, and they are down to only one size left (30/34). Aero Leathers have more sizes in stock than that, but their supply is still quite limited (30/32, 30/34, 32/32, 32/34, 34/32), and their prices quite high (185 GBP plus a rather high shipping charge).
  8. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    Wear the thing. A size 40 denim jacket on a size 36 chest is not that big of a fit. I have a 42" measured chest, and I need a 46" chest measurement on a denim jacket in order to allow full freedom of movement, and full buttoning. (I need 48" or 50" on lined jackets, and even wear up to 52" measured chest on my blanket-lined Type I.) The older-style pleated jackets, with their lower yoke seams, are even more restrictive, so can use to be sized up even more. The stenciling on the back is kind of cheesy, but what the hell?
  9. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    Gorgeous! If those were 34's or 36's, I would be bidding from across the Pond. If he needs the 1947 rise, then I am not aware of anything LVC like that that is tapered. He should just get a pair of '47's altered, or check out Sugar Cane Type III's.
  10. Naked & Famous Denim

    Be sure to look at size charts again. The Easy Guys are not high rise jeans by anything but the use of highly relative marketing terminology. They are higher than any of N&F's other men's cuts (IIRC), but they're not high on an absolute level. They're definitely mid-rise jeans. My 34 Easy Guys (which are actually 37's due to a healthy amount of vanity sizing) have a 12 inch rise, which is actually a tad low for that size waistband. That's exactly how Gustin sizes their Straight cut jeans (12" rise with 37" measured waist). Both my Easy Guys and my Gustins have a slightly lower slung feel than all of my 501's...and those 501's are mid-rise jeans. All the so-called "high tapered" cuts I know of are not *actually* high rise jeans; they're just "higher" rise jeans than most of the other stuff the company makes. If you want a truly high taper, you'll probably have to buy a high-straight cut and then have it altered.
  11. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    Do not assume that. It might be the case sometimes (Levi's is notoriously inconsistent), but IME, it is not. As an example, look through the last page or two for my measurements from a rigid LVC item vs. a rinsed one (two Triple-Pleat Blouses in this case). With the same tag size, the pre-rinsed one has a significantly larger pit-to-pit measurement than the Rigid one, and that's before the Rigid one has ever seen water (i.e. the difference will be even greater once they are both rinsed). This would suggest to me that LVC, at least sometimes, uses different patterns for items that will be pre-rinsed. They might even use different denims and different factories. Bottom line, you need to track down a size chart for pre-rinsed '54's specifically, not just view a Rigid '54 size chart and extrapolate.
  12. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    I was actually going to reply to that poster to be very leery of the size charts from a store called Union Made. Some of those charts are wacky, nd obviously dead wrong...and they're the ones that seem to pop up most in Web searches.
  13. Lee Japan denim

    I need to re-report after the jeans completely dried. In fact, there was zero shrinkage. All measurements are identical to the pre-soak measurements. Wish I had just worn them as they were.
  14. Lee Japan denim

    Just shrunk my 1950 101-Bs in 50–60 C water. Based on comments here, I expected shrinkage similar to an unsanforized pair. Instead, I got the standard shrinkage one would expect from sanforized denim: about 3 percent. The pocket bags and rear pocket linings, however, shrunk up much more; they must be made of unsanforized canvas. Now, due to the tightly shrunk canvas, the back pockets each have a big hump across them, and the denim fill panels at the tops of the front pockets are misshapen. It's too bad. I was hoping for more shrinkage on these. Now I think I'll have to take the waistband in. I'm quickly getting them wet again and giving them a brief run in a hot dryer this time. I hope this doesn't shrink the leather patch too much.
  15. Levi's Vintage Clothing

    You're right. When I wrote my last post to you, I was calculating based off of a $140 starting point, minus the discounts. You are quite correct that the thing actually did cost more. I think it was actually $180 or $190 to start, minus the 30%. It was a couple other items that I ordered that were $140 before applying the sale. It isn't a tight fitting shirt, and it will always be worn with an undershirt (as I wear all my button shirts). I do a degree of manual labor most days at work, and it does get hot here. But my sweat is not particularly potent, and I wouldn't be wearing the Sunset Shirt in hot weather anyhow. My denim shirts that are much tighter fitting and made of heavier fabric take many months of actual wear to get even a hint of an armpit odor. And when I said I probably wouldn't wash it for years, I didn't mean years of actual wear—just calendar years, being worn sporadically. I usually decide it's time to wash a denim shirt after three to six months of actual wear. I don't decide based on a certain number of days, though. I wash it when it needs it. Considering that I will wear one of my denim shirts at most 30 days out of a year (if it's one of my favorites), I can't see this thing needing a wash until it's at least two years old, and probably three.