Levi's Vintage Clothing

[Mr Black]

OKi-Ni have loads of LVC stuff on sale too.

[setterman]

contacted the guys at cultizm this weekend and received an interesting response. the sizing on the 55s is completely fubar -- size 34 is true to tag, while the size 36 is 2" larger than tag. dirk informed me that the sizing is different for all of the sizes, so beware. way to get it right, levis.

What the fuck is their problem? Is it that tough to make the entire line measure tagged size, or two inches bigger, at the waist?

So, I was planning on buying a pair of size 38 1955s, assuming they'd measure 40" at the waist. Guess I need to email cultizm first.

[Shorty Long]

Is it possible cultizm is working with stock from two different seasons (ie, Fall 09 and Spring 10)? That's one possible explanation...and about the only one that would make any sense.

What the fuck is their problem? Is it that tough to make the entire line measure tagged size, or two inches bigger, at the waist?

So, I was planning on buying a pair of size 38 1955s, assuming they'd measure 40" at the waist. Guess I need to email cultizm first.

[Mr Black]

You would have thought that the patterns are lazer cut (or whatever modern tomfoolery is used other than chalk and scissors) and computer controlled If that were the case there should only be a few mm tolerance and ll the factories should share the same pattern.

Can't understand why there would be THAT much difference between seasons and/or factories.

Confused of London

[setterman]

Is it possible cultizm is working with stock from two different seasons (ie, Fall 09 and Spring 10)? That's one possible explanation...and about the only one that would make any sense.

As far I as know, they were completely out of 55s, so everything in stock now would be from 2010 production. No excuse for sizing variation within a model, and like I said, really no excuse for it across the line. 1915, 1927, 1947, 1966, etc. doesn't matter what year, you make it pretty easy on your customers when they know a pair of jeans labeled a size 36 actually measure 36" at the waist. Or everything is two inches bigger than tagged at the waist to account for shrinking. No reason for all the variation.

[Paul T]

Fairly sure spring 2010 is not out yet.

Needless to say, size variation within the range is totally unacceptable. Apart from anything, it will cost retailers a bomb.

[josh mullen]

regardless of what sort of explanation any one of us can muster, this is -- to agree with paul t -- unacceptable. i'm totally fucked on the 55s: 34s will be too small, 36s too large. and in addition to the waist sizing issues, they did not receive any 38 inseams. i went for a pair of 37s. also considering some 44s. anyone with a pair of 44s: was inseam length true to tag? hoping they, like the 1915s, are longer than tag.

[L555BAT]

When I made my order on Sunday from cultizm there was a note on the 1955 page saying that all jeans measure 2" larger than tag. That's the reason I went for a 34". Just went back to the website and the note is no longer there. So I assume these rather expensive jeans are not going to fit.

Thanks a lot cultizm.

[Shorty Long]

I would wait until I actually received the jeans and attempted to work out any problems with Cultizm before I came on here and bashed them. Just a suggestion. They've always been really helpful with me in the past.

When I made my order on Sunday from cultizm there was a note on the 1955 page saying that all jeans measure 2" larger than tag. That's the reason I went for a 34". Just went back to the website and the note is no longer there. So I assume these rather expensive jeans are not going to fit.

Thanks a lot cultizm.

[beautiful_FrEaK]

they are always helpful with everyone

just write them now so that they keep a pair for you on hold if yours won't fit

[blm14]

I dont understand this whole sizing problem. I have like 10 pairs of LVC and they're all the same size and fit me fine. The only exception is a pair of 55s which I got a size 40 and wish I had gotten 38 instead.

[RRLselvageDenim]

That word "assume" is never a good thing when it comes to Raw Denim because you end up being disappointed. Why can't Levis get their act together when it comes to sizing issues. Reading your comments, I sense your fraustration and anxiety. I think it's only fair that if you guys drop $200+ on denim you deserve to get the size issues correct and not have to guestimate.

On a side note:

How effective is Supermarket? I get the feeling (at least from my experience, list and selling in Supermarket is a waste of time. One's better off listing on ebay - (I guess you reach more people?

[L555BAT]

I would wait until I actually received the jeans and attempted to work out any problems with Cultizm before I came on here and bashed them. Just a suggestion. They've always been really helpful with me in the past.

I know there seems to be a "love in" with cultizm on here so I wasn't bashing them. Was just pointing out that when I ordered it said all sizes measured 2" larger. Now it no longer says that. So because of that the jeans I ordered might not fit. I just wish that the site had the correct information when I clicked buy.

[milosz]

I've never had anything but good experiences with Cultizm, but it would be nice if they'd put together size charts ala BiG or SelfEdge, at least for the LVC.

[jstavrin]

LVC sizing is pretty whack from my experience. I have a pair of 47s that are a size 34 (i normally wear a 32) and after washing them they are no longer wearable.

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

i don´t understand your points, if i am nt sur for corretc size i´d go for the smaller one, because every denim stretches out, even the 37 201xx which i got in a w30, i really couldn´t breath in em the first few hours of wearing but even these stretched out.... and jstavrin, those 47s will stretch back...

[edmond]

just got my bargain 55" from oki-ni soaking em now!

[Mr Black]

just a very quick question re the '67 505's. How do these generally measure up to their tagged size?

Thanks in advance and apolgies if it's already been covered in one of the 676 pages of this thread.

[edmond]

pre soak measurements

size 36

raw

waist 18 1/2"

inseam 35 1/2"

back rise 17"

front rise 13"

thigh 13"

knee 10 1/4"

hem 9 1/4"

[fardin]

what pants are these? look kinda like the spring bottom pants

check this e bay link

http://cgi.ebay.com/RARE-LEVIS-691-Western-pocket-BUCKLE-BACK-pre-201-LVC_W0QQitemZ270517693937QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Men_s_Clothing?hash=item3efc1c6df1

[Shorty Long]

Pretty sure those are the Spring Bottoms

what pants are these? look kinda like the spring bottom pants

check thsi e bay link

http://cgi.ebay.com/RARE-LEVIS-691-Western-pocket-BUCKLE-BACK-pre-201-LVC_W0QQitemZ270517693937QQcmdZViewItemQQptZVintage_Men_s_Clothing?hash=item3efc1c6df1

[fardin]

but the spring bottom pants i know are 1919 repros , and have different details, and no belt loops.

[runormal]

just a very quick question re the '67 505's. How do these generally measure up to their tagged size?

Thanks in advance and apolgies if it's already been covered in one of the 676 pages of this thread.

My experience with 2 different pairs of '67 505s are they both measured as tagged - both about 0.25" smaller than marked in waist and inseam was correct with both pairs.

The 67 505s have a curved waistband, I wonder how that affects the measurement - if at all - from the BiG measurement compared to how the fit on the waist.

[Paul T]

They don't look like the LVC spring bottom to me. I think they're more of a generic repro, with jeans style front pockets. I've seen other odd semi-repros that come from Europe with similar fabric.

The denim on the LVC, and the original, is beautiful, very distinctive:

http://www.joenet.co.jp/casual/levi/vintage/19100/19100-0001/19100-0001-sample.html.

[Rob]

They are a generic repro as Paul says.I remember seeing them in Levis stores in 2002-2003 or thereabouts.

[edmond]

fuck shit my 55 501 i just soak only shrunk like 3/4" on the wasit and all over except for the inseam shrunk 2" fuck have to sell these and get a 34 fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck!

[airfrogusmc]

fuck shit my 55 501 i just soak only shrunk like 3/4" on the wasit and all over except for the inseam shrunk 2" fuck have to sell these and get a 34 fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck!

You can do what you want but 1 soak doesn't get all the shrinkage out. It takes 3 maybe 4 to get most of it and I still have inseams shrinking for up to 10.

[jstavrin]

I can expect the 1955 501 to shrink about two inches in the inseam, right? Is the rule now to size up one? I want to get a pair, but I want to get an inseam greater than 36. I e-mailed Cultizm and they don't have anything.

EDIT: The problem being I have a 32 waist.

[almostnice]

fuck shit my 55 501 i just soak only shrunk like 3/4" on the wasit and all over except for the inseam shrunk 2" fuck have to sell these and get a 34 fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck!

give them a hot,no detergentwash,if thats not enough use the dryer.you know how it works.

[jstavrin]

Seriously though, I'll give a BJ to anyone who can find me a 34/38 LVC 1955. <3