Freewheelers, Bootleggers Reunion, Bubo, etc.

[shredwin_206 8,069]

Neal Chambray
1937 jeans 

[Broark 16,997]

Almost done with the move, I've got a back yard to take photos now.
601XXC 1937 worn since November / December, one initial wash and two subsequent washes.
Aiming to get a little more contrast with these, but it's tough since they are pretty loose.

[indigoeagle 1,121]

1 hour ago, Broark said:

Almost done with the move, I've got a back yard to take photos now.
601XXC 1937 worn since November / December, one initial wash and two subsequent washes.
Aiming to get a little more contrast with these, but it's tough since they are pretty loose.

 

Did you get them non-wash or O/W?

My O/W 1951 jeans were super soft, the 507XX in raw quite stiff.

Edited May 22 by indigoeagle

[Broark 16,997]

@indigoeagle these were non-wash, the denim used is a bit more rigid than the standard 47/51 denim but less rigid than the 44/45 war era jeans / jackets.

[indigoeagle 1,121]

@Broark Seiichiro and TheRising/Mirrorball seem to be the shops, that offer most FW denim in N/W, right?

[Broark 16,997]

@indigoeagle Seiichiro will definitely get you N/W if it is available!
I believe he does stock some N/W models, not sure how much he has on hand in relation to O/W models though.

[LazyS 1,364]

 

[Duke Mantee 15,196]

22 hours ago, indigoeagle said:

@Broark Seiichiro and TheRising/Mirrorball seem to be the shops, that offer most FW denim in N/W, right?

All the stores would be committed to a balance of stock, then depending on interest would add further n/w or o/w as they would judge worthwhile. As @broark mentions you can only buy what’s available.

I’ve noticed a strange approach during this upsurge of interest in FW denim in that folk believe they can simply buy any model they might have seen. That might work for 47 or 51 model jeans since FW see them as permanent designs, but most of the rest will only be offered in the season of the year of production … and FW production runs are not on the same scale as most of the other manufacturers (Warehouse etc). Basically you are relying on luck a lot of the time if it’s something from more than a season or two back.

[shredwin_206 8,069]

Every time I’ve bought from Hoosier he only has one wash. Not a big deal. 
I’ll also emphasize that @Duke Mantee said. If you’re not quick on what you want you will most likely miss out and not have a chance at that piece again. 

[CSL 3,054]

I discovered this recently when, after warming up to the WW2 jeans that I bought on a whim, I decided to seek out the matching jacket. There was a size 46 on Yahoo auctions that I watched go through one cycle unsold. I held off thinking he might drop the price but someone else bought it on the next go round. Can't find that size anywhere else...

[Broark 16,997]

Neil chambray from 2017.
Probably one of my most regularly worn shirts, elbows are starting to go.

[mstax 41]

1 hour ago, Broark said:

Neil chambray from 2017.
Probably one of my most regularly worn shirts, elbows are starting to go.

That’s a nice shirt! You know if it’s cotton stitched?

[Broark 16,997]

@mstax Yes I believe so, but I am not 100% sure. Perhaps Duke could chime in?

[julian-wolf 8,219]

Yeah, all the stitching on the Neil shirts is cotton (besides maybe silk for the buttons? Can’t remember, but don’t think so)

[indigoeagle 1,121]

Do FW use poly stitching on any of their products (except Ultima T)?
 

[Duke Mantee 15,196]

@Broark - Neal question answered (made me sad they had to change the label though)

@indigoeagle - The catalogue is too big and too varied to say that every thread is cotton. I would suggest it’s not the case - simply because cotton isn’t always the best solution (where does this obsession come from?) but who knows? I definitely not going to go through my database to check that detail - sorry.

[Duke Mantee 15,196]

[shredwin_206 8,069]

@Duke Mantee I love those old labels! Let me know if you ever part with any of them……..

[shredwin_206 8,069]

1927 type 1
Neal chambray 
1937 jeans 

shows well the 1927 vs 1937 denim 

Edited May 27 by shredwin_206

[MJF9 11,519]

They just keep coming... 506 XX 1922 jacket, 1915-1927 model... I'm sitting this one out... anyone copping?

 

Edited May 27 by MJF9

[indigoeagle 1,121]

28 minutes ago, MJF9 said:

They just keep coming... 506 XX 1922 jacket, 1915-1927 model... I'm sitting this one out... anyone copping?

 

 

Shoulders are very wide with this one, also with the 1922 one, the same as chest size.
And this 1915-1927 seems to be quite short.
The jackets got longer and slimmer over time, also type 1s.

[shredwin_206 8,069]

@MJF9 I don’t like the low pocket or the hammered rivets. I like those fuckers sharp enough to draw blood like on my FW jeans. Haha   
Glad I own the 1927 I think it’s the best type 1 they’ve made. 
Also keep in mind that this does have the wide body cut and short sleeve length like the 1927 and 1933 jackets

[MJF9 11,519]

Yeah the dimensions are in keeping with the era. Moreover, looks like this version has wider shoulders than the 27 and 33 to give even more of that drop effect. Also looks a touch shorter with even shorter sleeves, though that'll be offset by the drop shoulder. All in, a nice blouse. 

I like it... in fact, I'm nearly talking myself into it

[AlientoyWorkmachine 1,676]

I keep telling myself I’m done but no pocket flap and wider shoulders I have to think about it. Those will probably make it the most comfortable fit for my build. I do lack a proper type 1 (that isn’t flannel lined at least). Gah. 

[Dr_Heech 568,658]

9 hours ago, MJF9 said:

They just keep coming... 506 XX 1922 jacket, 1915-1927 model... I'm sitting this one out... anyone copping?

 

I'm very interested in the early development of the 506xx and love the cut and details of this model but for me the movement issue means l couldn't work in one. I had the 1900 lvc pullover denim and the duck version and sold them for the same reasons. There's just too much excess material under the arms when wearing imo. There's a lovely photo of a well worn 1915 213 (obvs same cut as 506xx) in the Vintage Levis book and the underarm wrinkles are evidence of this. I'm not knocking that older style of jacket, as l said before - l love the history/development - it's just that the 1927 jacket was the first to have the curved underarm seam, but still retains earlier hardware and details. 

 

Edited May 28 by Dr_Heech

[MJF9 11,519]

Coincidentally I just had my head in the book and seen your post Doc

Jacket #01 from the book 1915 shows your point with the width of the arm opening.  Some might get away with the shape when doing keyboard tapping work .  Notably also, this has a single row of stitches at the arm opening and the down pocket is curved

Looking at #02, the 1922 model has same wide shoulders but with a double row of stitches and a pointed down pocket.  The owner even cut down the sleeves - must have had especially short arms!  I've known a few fellas like that - short arms, deep pockets 

[Dr_Heech 568,658]

@MJF9 this is the the particular blouse l was referring to - shows the underarm wear better. Number 56 in the book.

I dont even like t-shirt or shirt material getting bunched up like that under me armpits, let alone 9 or 10oz denim 

 

 

 

[MJF9 11,519]

That's outrageously delightful under-arm creasing!  

[shredwin_206 8,069]

I can’t stand stuff bunched under my arms like that 

[MJF9 11,519]

WW2 pre- and post-wash

Coming along steadily... puckering developing on the yoke and back pockets - shame I can't see it when wearing though, just can't twist my head that far