Levi's Vintage Clothing

[dr.house]

Who else here has a pair of the Pomata 55s?

Whazzat? :confused:

[aho]

Who else here has a pair of the Pomata 55s?

If I recall correctly, many were on mynudies? Just off the top of my head though...

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Whazzat? :confused:

Pomata/Lemmy found some '55 from the SF factory (555 stamp) in a shop nearby for cheap and sold them for below 100€ if I recall correctly

[Paul T]

Who else here has a pair of the Pomata 55s?

I have.

Had to sell a bunch of stuff recently. But not these. Will post photos.

[jewellben]

Any advice on sizing raw 1937 501s please? The only LVC I have experience of are washed - I'm a 34/34 on 1944s and a 36/34 on 1954s. Cheers.

I'm a 34" / 34" in pre washed LVC but have both 36/36 and a 36/38 in the raw 1937. I like to get the shrinkage out before wear and you need the extra length in the leg more than the waist I find. the 36/38 are cuffed but the 36/36 are not if that helps

[Mifune]

Do any of you guys know where to find LVC (MiJ) 55s in 38x36?

[dr.house]

Pomata/Lemmy found some '55 from the SF factory (555 stamp) in a shop nearby for cheap and sold them for below 100€ if I recall correctly

Too bad, he has forgotten me

[beautiful_FrEaK]

That was "ages" ago in your Nudie-prime

At the beginning of last year IIRC

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Do any of you guys know where to find LVC (MiJ) 55s in 38x36?

you might be to late to the party. If you haven't found it on Rakuten then it's gonna be tougher from day to day

[Paul T]

Too bad, he has forgotten me

It was a couple of years ago, before you arrived I think, dr!

They are gorgeous jeans. I love them because I visited the factory in SF in 96, a couple of years before these jeans were made (April 98), so these are almost like a souvenir of a bygone era. Levi's closing this factory was a cultural crime. The boss who did it is now gone, after pocketing a huge payoff I suspect.

Note how fluffy and dark the fabric is (in the flesh it's more obvious). There are errors in the sewing that make them feel more period to me, the watch pocket is askew and the stitching of the yoke is slightly wrong, there should be a "stagger", as discussed on mizza's Making a Pair of Jeans thread.

But if you end up with the current 55, don't despair, they are better in some ways, albeit without the faults I personally like.

I think the denim on the current run is terrific; there is just a rightness about it, it's slubby but not overdone, it ages in beautifully but subtly, looks good at 3 months, 6 months and 10 months. It's really not like any Japanese denim; SDA is closest, of stuff I've worn, a similar subtle, not too high contrast, authentic look. Personally I think these are fantastic jeans, but I do wsh they'd had the paler stitching around the pockets. Note more worn-out pocket linings.

[Mifune]

I think the denim on the current run is terrific; there is just a rightness about it, it's slubby but not overdone, it ages in beautifully but subtly, looks good at 3 months, 6 months and 10 months. It's really not like any Japanese denim; SDA is closest, of stuff I've worn, a similar subtle, not too high contrast, authentic look.

Paul,

I was in the LVC store in Paris yesterday and saw the Cone denim '55 model. I was very disappointed by the quality of the denim. It was very thin and papery. It did not have the richness nor density we associate with Japanese denim. Do you think LVC is shipping a lesser quality to Europe?

[Paul T]

Paul,

I was in the LVC store in Paris yesterday and saw the Cone denim '55 model. I was very disappointed by the quality of the denim. It was very thin and papery. It did not have the richness nor density we associate with Japanese denim. Do you think LVC is shipping a lesser quality to Europe?

I like the Cone denim. Maybe that's just me! There is of course considerable sample variation on Cone fabric, due to the old looms etc. THere are some people who agree with you - but I shall leave it there.

One thing worth pointing out is that all LVC denim is 12.5 oz - that's the correct weight for the originals, although many Japanese repros of course use heavier weights.

[dr.house]

Thanks b_F and Paul. Okay, got it. There is a lot of LVC stuff (mainly 555 models, but nearly all prewashed) on german ebay. It's from Monika, she's got a warehouse in London and also sells on ebay.uk.

And yeah, the denim on LVC's feels indeed papery compared to japanese repros. I like it too, especially in summer. And as said before, I'm pretty sure my SDA 203 is made of the same denim like my 47's LVC. They look and feel like sisters.

[blm14]

Who else here has a pair of the Pomata 55s?

I do. They're friggin great

[setterman]

Paul,

I was in the LVC store in Paris yesterday and saw the Cone denim '55 model. I was very disappointed by the quality of the denim. It was very thin and papery. It did not have the richness nor density we associate with Japanese denim. Do you think LVC is shipping a lesser quality to Europe?

I don't have any originals to compare to, but I've always felt the denim used in the LVC items I own was too light (I know they advertise as being the correct weight, but has anyone actually ever weighed a yard of Cone denim?) . I know when I showed the first pair of 55s I bought to a friend of mine who grew up in the 50s his reaction was "they're way too light, I remember them being heavier". But, he had the same reaction to my '47 Sugar Canes which are certainly heavier than LVC.

LVC isn't shipping lesser quality to Europe. You've just had prior experience with Japanese denim, and after that LVC can be a bit of a let down. My current 55s fit great and I can see they're fadeing like vintage Levis, but the denim isn't on the same playing field as the jeans I have from Warehouse, Sugar Cane, or Full Count. And that's fine, they are what they are, and what they are is the closest reproduction on the market of $5 Levis from the 1950s.

[crownzip]

Maybe it's just that I'm used to my old LVC, but I too noticed the current batch of denim for the '44's '47 and '55 LVC denim seemed lighter weight than my older LVC stuff.

On the other hand, the 1915's look amazing!

[airfrogusmc]

Thanks b_F and Paul. Okay, got it. There is a lot of LVC stuff (mainly 555 models, but nearly all prewashed) on german ebay. It's from Monika, she's got a warehouse in London and also sells on ebay.uk.

And yeah, the denim on LVC's feels indeed papery compared to japanese repros. I like it too, especially in summer. And as said before, I'm pretty sure my SDA 203 is made of the same denim like my 47's LVC. They look and feel like sisters.

555 were models made at the Valencia st factory which has been closed for quite a while now and it just depends on what you're looking for. Because they haven't been made there in years it will be hard to find a raw pair and the new cone denim that I've seen is for the most part more accurate in texture and weight. If you want denim thats the correct weight then many of the LVCs have correct weight where some others use denim thats to heavy so it just depends on what you're looking for. The 1933s are even lighter weight than the 1955s but they are as Grant and Cheap pointed out STRONG as nails. Heavy denim doesn't mean accurate or always mean stronger.

[airfrogusmc]

Maybe it's just that I'm used to my old LVC, but I too noticed the current batch of denim for the '44's '47 and '55 LVC denim seemed lighter weight than my older LVC stuff.

On the other hand, the 1915's look amazing!

Grant I think for a while until about last year LVCs had really slipped with the exception of a few models. I know the 47s cone denim on my 2010s is the in the same league as my 1915s and much better than the several pairs I had of earlier denim with a pair of 47s from a few years back being my least favorite and the early ones being my favorite until the 2010 model. The new cone denim is really nice anyway the stuff thats on my 18915s and my new 1947s. Some of LVCs Valencia St models had great denim but some of it was to heavy and not the right denim.

[airfrogusmc]

I don't have any originals to compare to, but I've always felt the denim used in the LVC items I own was too light (I know they advertise as being the correct weight, but has anyone actually ever weighed a yard of Cone denim?) . I know when I showed the first pair of 55s I bought to a friend of mine who grew up in the 50s his reaction was "they're way too light, I remember them being heavier". But, he had the same reaction to my '47 Sugar Canes which are certainly heavier than LVC.

LVC isn't shipping lesser quality to Europe. You've just had prior experience with Japanese denim, and after that LVC can be a bit of a let down. My current 55s fit great and I can see they're fadeing like vintage Levis, but the denim isn't on the same playing field as the jeans I have from Warehouse, Sugar Cane, or Full Count. And that's fine, they are what they are, and what they are is the closest reproduction on the market of $5 Levis from the 1950s.

But what are you looking for, accurate or better? There are repro flight jacket companies that make replica WWII flight jackets and some make jackets much better than the ones made during WWII but the leather is to heavy. Better quality wise yes but not accurate and as a result the jacket doesn't drape correctly but its a great jacket. I prefer the more lighter more accurate leather weight. I also prefer LVCs 55s because of the proper not over done denim weight. LVC nails the denim on the 55s. I have had a chance to see a raw NWTs pair of original 1955s and a pair of LVCs 1955s both the same tagged size both raw right next to each other without seeing tags you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. If you prefer the heavier weight thats cool.There are many that prefer the heavier leather on their A-2 flight jackets.

[Eli Danoni]

I'm a 34" / 34" in pre washed LVC but have both 36/36 and a 36/38 in the raw 1937. I like to get the shrinkage out before wear and you need the extra length in the leg more than the waist I find. the 36/38 are cuffed but the 36/36 are not if that helps

Thanks. I like the extra length where the hem is narrow enough for the denim to stack rather than needing a big turn up (as on the '54s). It's a bit confusing (I'm new to this) that 38" inseams in raws actually seem quite hard to come by, whereas 32" inseams are easy to get - when you would think that very few people would need a 32" inseam, which is going to be a pretty short 29" after shrinkage...

[Paul T]

It's worth pointing out, also, that there's a difference between heavy denim, and bulky denim. My belief is that fluffier, sometimes shorter staple denim, as well as the method of spinning the yarn, can look bulkier, even if it's not heavier.

The old 555-era denim used to vary a lot. One dayat Cinch they let me down into the basement where they'd pulled out all the old stock and end of lines. The had a very characteristic look, but all the same we put a couple of 55 pairs alongside each other and they were almost unrecognisable as the same fabric. Same colour, but a tighter weave on one, as well as apparently bulkier yarn - some of the difference, at least, would be down to variance in the cotton they use (which mostly comes from Texas and the Carolinas, I think).

At Cone, they told me that simple things ilke ambient temperature affect the weave with the Draper looms, too. A lot fo Japanese farbicwill be made on more modern TOyoda looms, so it's possible it will be way more consistent.

i agree with you both about the 1915 fabric - it's got the plain look of vintage levi's, but with the kind of flaming you'd get on some of the upmarket SC denim from Menpo.. Let's hope it's a harbinger of more good stuff.

I do have a friend who has several original 55, worn and used. If I manage to hit my nexrt deadline, I'll try and get down and do a comparison. He also has a pair of the very firsst Capital E reissues, I'll try and shoot those too.

[airfrogusmc]

It's worth pointing out, also, that there's a difference between heavy denim, and bulky denim. My belief is that fluffier, sometimes shorter staple denim, as well as the method of spinning the yarn, can look bulkier, even if it's not heavier.

The old 555-era denim used to vary a lot. One dayat Cinch they let me down into the basement where they'd pulled out all the old stock and end of lines. The had a very characteristic look, but all the same we put a couple of 55 pairs alongside each other and they were almost unrecognisable as the same fabric. Same colour, but a tighter weave on one, as well as apparently bulkier yarn - some of the difference, at least, would be down to variance in the cotton they use (which mostly comes from Texas and the Carolinas, I think).

At Cone, they told me that simple things ilke ambient temperature affect the weave with the Draper looms, too. A lot fo Japanese farbicwill be made on more modern TOyoda looms, so it's possible it will be way more consistent.

i agree with you both about the 1915 fabric - it's got the plain look of vintage levi's, but with the kind of flaming you'd get on some of the upmarket SC denim from Menpo.. Let's hope it's a harbinger of more good stuff.

I do have a friend who has several original 55, worn and used. If I manage to hit my nexrt deadline, I'll try and get down and do a comparison. He also has a pair of the very firsst Capital E reissues, I'll try and shoot those too.

Thanks Paul also I think it was you that said that Cone in the last year or so have really made an effort to start getting the right weave and right weight on the denim used for each year being reproduced.

Also I do find it interesting that from what i've seen posted and heard what you've been saying as you stated in your last post that the 55s have been pretty consistent over the years where as some other model LVCs haven't been.

[beautiful_FrEaK]

since you're talking about the '55 cut here are some pics of a BNWT pair which is displayed at the Levi's Strauss Museum. (pics were taken by a guy from mynudies)

[Paul T]

Thanks Paul also I think it was you that said that Cone in the last year or so have really made an effort to start getting the right weave and right weight on the denim used for each year being reproduced.

Also I do find it interesting that from what i've seen posted and heard what you've been saying as you stated in your last post that the 55s have been pretty consistent over the years where as some other model LVCs haven't been.

That unusual 55 twhich I mentioned was an earlier, Valencia St one, I should have said. Since then the 55 has been pretty consistent as far as I know.

I did think my 2006 47 weren't as good as the earlier season's pair.; but they started looking really good after their second wash. Weirdly, my SDA103XX seem to have come thru in exactly the same way. Is it the denim, or did I use the wrong soap? I have no idea, altho to be honest I don't worry about it.

I suspect, now, Cone have more volume going thru, and the buying is centrallised, with Japan buying the finished product, maybe we'll see more consisency. But I like what I see in the Cultizm spread, especially the 1944 and 1915, neither of which I own.

[jewellben]

Thanks. I like the extra length where the hem is narrow enough for the denim to stack rather than needing a big turn up (as on the '54s). It's a bit confusing (I'm new to this) that 38" inseams in raws actually seem quite hard to come by, whereas 32" inseams are easy to get - when you would think that very few people would need a 32" inseam, which is going to be a pretty short 29" after shrinkage...

I got mine both from Cultizm, the 36/36 will be what your after.

[setterman]

But what are you looking for, accurate or better?

When it comes to LVC, wouldn't those two things go hand in hand?

As Paul pointed out, there's a lot of different factors that go into how a peice of denim looks and feels. And like Mifune, to me LVC (for the most part) looks and feels too thin and light. Whether it actually is, or it's just my perception, who knows? Is it enough to turn me off from the brand? Obviously not as I'm wearing a pair of '55s four or five times a week for the cultizm contest, and an LVC 506 as much as I can.

Personal taste? Would I like to see a little fluffier, bulkier yarn used for LVC? As long as it's correct, yes!

[cheapmuthafukr]

here's something i was wondering about after looking thru my "found" book that cone put out a few years back... there was an old cone denim ad in it that called out the weight of the cone deeptone denim fabric as one weight for a yard of fabric, and one weight per square yard... does LVC measure weight by square yard, or by yard of fabric? what about the japanese brands?

basically, if you have fabric that is 14oz per square yard, then a yard of the fabric will weigh less than 14oz... but if you have 14 oz per yard of fabric, it will be more per square yard. i have a feeling that this is part of what the difference in weights that we see is...

[dr.house]

555 were models made at the Valencia st factory which has been closed for quite a while now and it just depends on what you're looking for. Because they haven't been made there in years it will be hard to find a raw pair and the new cone denim that I've seen is for the most part more accurate in texture and weight. If you want denim thats the correct weight then many of the LVCs have correct weight where some others use denim thats to heavy so it just depends on what you're looking for. The 1933s are even lighter weight than the 1955s but they are as Grant and Cheap pointed out STRONG as nails. Heavy denim doesn't mean accurate or always mean stronger.

Thx airfrogusmc, I know about the 555 specialities. Since cultizm got no 31/36 55's for me I'm so naive and hope to find a 555 55's in my size somewhere in the world

I've got no problem with the lighter cone denim, as said before, I really like it, especially on my 44's which are still my favourites. Interesting thing is, that Paul T. also admits similarities between his SDA and his 47's. Again, I could bet that my 203's (made of US denim) are made from the same (cone-) denim like my 47's. Btw, I'm not a friend of real heavy denim, dunno if I keep my new Flatheads (16 oz.), they're pretty heavy and not really comfy.

Thanks to beautiful_Freak for x-posting the buttenheim pics and thx in advance for Pauls promised pics of the old jawnz.

[airfrogusmc]

When it comes to LVC, wouldn't those two things go hand in hand?

As Paul pointed out, there's a lot of different factors that go into how a peice of denim looks and feels. And like Mifune, to me LVC (for the most part) looks and feels too thin and light. Whether it actually is, or it's just my perception, who knows? Is it enough to turn me off from the brand? Obviously not as I'm wearing a pair of '55s four or five times a week for the cultizm contest, and an LVC 506 as much as I can.

Personal taste? Would I like to see a little fluffier, bulkier yarn used for LVC? As long as it's correct, yes!

But you have said that you have never seen or handled an original pair of 55s. I can tell you that the 55s from a few years back and a pair of originals that were new with tags were virtually the same as far as denim weight and cut. You are probably used to looking at denim that is both to heavy and to textured as compared to original weight and texture which is what many do. Cone has the original denim and specs in their archives and they seem to be committed to using that info to create denim on old looms si I doubt you will find more accurate denim for a Levis 1955 repro. I haven't seen one. You Paul?

[airfrogusmc]

Thx airfrogusmc, I know about the 555 specialities. Since cultizm got no 31/36 55's for me I'm so naive and hope to find a 555 55's in my size somewhere in the world

I've got no problem with the lighter cone denim, as said before, I really like it, especially on my 44's which are still my favourites. Interesting thing is, that Paul T. also admits similarities between his SDA and his 47's. Again, I could bet that my 203's (made of US denim) are made from the same (cone-) denim like my 47's. Btw, I'm not a friend of real heavy denim, dunno if I keep my new Flatheads (16 oz.), they're pretty heavy and not really comfy.

Thanks to beautiful_Freak for x-posting the buttenheim pics and thx in advance for Pauls promised pics of the old jawnz.

I don't know if I would go for the 555s 1955s. I really think some of this years or even from several years back are probably more accurate.