Levi's Vintage Clothing

[rnrswitch]

From my point of view they are on the good list.

[randomkoreandude]

good im glad. i got a pair for $80 ... and didnt want it to be a waste for my first lvc purchase.

[fads]

which season is the 47 on cultizm?

im looking for not s/s 09, 32 waist (for true 31)...

maybe some other places??

[randomkoreandude]

i got the 1947 501 for 80 from UBIQ but it doenst say what season they are from.

how can you tell and whats the difference between seasons? is it a huge difference?

[Dr_Heech]

For me, you can also add the 551z, 33's(555) and the 44's (2005) to the list.

[Dr_Heech]

Can anyone out there help me check if this LVC Denim Jacket is fake or legit? It's supposed to be a 1967 Type III. Didn't come with a LVC booklet, the pricetag looks off, the capital E red tab has "LEVI'S" again on the back of the tab such that it shows the right way when the left chest pocket is up. I don't know enough about this to know if it's real or not. Here's some pictures:

Jacket

Label (Cardstock)

Pricetag

Tab

Back of Tab

Button

Hangtag

Hangtag Back

Thanks in advance!

I would say it's legit, judging by the photos. Great jacket.

[jstavrin]

How can you tell where your LVCs were made? I bought 47s from Cultizm in march-ish of this year.

[mistahmoogle]

Thanks Dr_Heech! Much appreciated!

[horriblyjollyjinx]

Salaami, I'm starting to think your obsession for Fullcount and Warehouse is blinding you a bit when it comes to LVC (I'm only half-joking). Why would they use Okayama denim or any of the techniques the Japanese use? They already have all this knowledge, and it's a known fact that most of those companies DON'T make accurate reproduction of the original denim used by Levi's (which, as I see it, is still the main reason to be for LVC). Cone made this denim, and it seems they are working hard to make something as close as possible to the original. As far as I understand this, not even Warehouse seems to make repros as accurate as some of the recent LVC reissues.

Hell, I doubt the 47's ever used Zimbabwe cotton or the 66 had slubby denim. I don't care for Cone and don't like most of the denim they make (mostly because I like my denim to have this extra twist), but you can't deny them that they are good enough at this job that they don't need any help from the Chinese workers employed to make the romanticized (because that's really what they are) versions of vintage jeans the Japanese, you and me enjoy wearing.

LVC and all those Japanese makers (call them artisans if you like, but to me that term is a bunch of bullshit in this context) have totally different objectives: reproduction vs. reinterpretation. You have to give credit to Levi's for what they're doing these days. Take a look at the non-denim LVC collection (the only part of LVC's collection I personnaly would buy are their tops, which are amazing), it's as good, if not better than what Japanese brands are offering, because they have the heritage, the techniques and some guys just as passionate as the Warehouse bros about their jobs to back them up.

I don't agree with salaami much at all but I also don't agree with you. First of all bunching all Japanese brands together and than using one or a few brands' product to describe all of the other ones' too isn't fair.

Second, I don't see why you would use the 'Cone' name as an argument for the quality of LVC. There certainly isn't anyone working in Cone today that did in the 40s, it's an all together different company, just operating under the same name.

Rather than using oversimplified symbols to judge something I would look at the product directly.

I have said many times that the last two seasons LVC collections have been very very good, in many ways as good as that of Japanese brands(to me, this mostly means 'Warehouse' right now).

However, the weak point with LVC as I see it is the denim, Cone's denim to be specific. Chronologically, it starts with the 1927 which is also the first model where Cone denim is used. Some years with Cone denim are fine, but some are off in my opinion. The 27, 37, 44 and perhaps 47 I don't like much at all. I would rather get the Japanese LVC versions because I do think the denim is significantly better as a reproduction.

And on the note of Japanese brands. I would say Warehouse is the number one brand for reproductions, without a doubt. Their scope is much larger than just jeans though and quality without fail topnotch across the range. Sure, they don't do replicas of exact Levi's models anymore, but their other jeans that arent original designs I hold as better reproductions than LVC.

And their denim is close to perfect.

[Busted Seam]

Is anyone else bored by the LVC vs Japan vs Warehouse vs SC kids' trump card game? It goes on and on.

The SC vs LVC 47 thread is great because it features photos. But this conversation is so repetitive. I appreciate hjj's opinions and knowledge, but how many times can you say "I don't like Cone'. Without new information, or photos, it's just plain tedious. Who is ever gonna prove themselves right? HJJ, you dislike the Levi's 201 fabric. I believe it's some of the best denim around. We could go around in a circle, forever.

It also distracts from the real problems with LVC. Even those who like them are wondering if, given missing rivets and wrong leather tags, whether the quality of produciton is going down the trashcan with the new factory.

[horriblyjollyjinx]

Is anyone else bored by the LVC vs Japan vs Warehouse vs SC kids' trump card game? It goes on and on.

The SC vs LVC 47 thread is great because it features photos. But this conversation is so repetitive. I appreciate hjj's opinions and knowledge, but how many times can you say "I don't like Cone'. Without new information, or photos, it's just plain tedious. Who is ever gonna prove themselves right? HJJ, you dislike the Levi's 201 fabric. I believe it's some of the best denim around. We could go around in a circle, forever.

It also distracts from the real problems with LVC. Even those who like them are wondering if, given missing rivets and wrong leather tags, whether the quality of produciton is going down the trashcan with the new factory.

I like the 201 fabric.

There are many repetitive things in this thread, I'm sure you're responsible for some not so unique posts too. A minute ago it was said to be understandable, but apparently it isn't so when it's me(you did call me out by name and not anyone else).

Don't tell me that I am distracting from anything, not more than you or anyone else at least.

And I missed that there was an agenda for the thread.

[iamstarwars]

I don't agree with salaami much at all but I also don't agree with you. First of all bunching all Japanese brands together and than using one or a few brands' product to describe all of the other ones' too isn't fair.

Second, I don't see why you would use the 'Cone' name as an argument for the quality of LVC. There certainly isn't anyone working in Cone today that did in the 40s, it's an all together different company, just operating under the same name.

Rather than using oversimplified symbols to judge something I would look at the product directly.

I have said many times that the last two seasons LVC collections have been very very good, in many ways as good as that of Japanese brands(to me, this mostly means 'Warehouse' right now).

However, the weak point with LVC as I see it is the denim, Cone's denim to be specific. Chronologically, it starts with the 1927 which is also the first model where Cone denim is used. Some years with Cone denim are fine, but some are off in my opinion. The 27, 37, 44 and perhaps 47 I don't like much at all. I would rather get the Japanese LVC versions because I do think the denim is significantly better as a reproduction.

And on the note of Japanese brands. I would say Warehouse is the number one brand for reproductions, without a doubt. Their scope is much larger than just jeans though and quality without fail topnotch across the range. Sure, they don't do replicas of exact Levi's models anymore, but their other jeans that arent original designs I hold as better reproductions than LVC.

And their denim is close to perfect.

Most of my arguments were direct replies to Salaami's post. I chose this Japanese/LVC distinction because I felt it was the very distinction he was making in his posts, when he was referring to the Japanese mills catering to those brands. Of course, there are variety of brands in Japan, not all having the same intentions to replicate old Levi's garments. I thought that was implicit enough.

I only used Cone to insist on the authencity, which Salaami seems to find so important. Of course, Cone doesn't employ the same people as they did 70 years ago, but they have the technology and were the originators. As I said, I don't care for Cone's denim myself and have absolutely no interest in this whole American heritage thing (which is seriously starting to look like an ugly trend), but I thought that, if blaming Levi's for their lack of quality, or attention to details or whatever you want, it should still be noted that they use the same company they originally relied on for the models they are now replicating. I'm certainly not in any position to judge of the accuracy of the replicas (I've never handled any vintage pair of jeans), it just seemed to me, from what I read here and there, and on your blog among other sources, that Levi's is now sincerely trying to make a better job at reproducing their old stuff. Whether they are succeding or not, I don't know, and don't care, but I do appreciate the attempt. My only intent was to give them some credit for that. Basically, I don't care for the product (unlike you I guess), but for the intent and the process. That's a point I doubt we'll agree on.

Once again, I have no interest in reproductions, from Levi's or anyone else, it just annoys me to read this constant discourse blaming Levi's for anything they make while glorifying any pair of jeans coming from a Japanese manufacturer. At this point, I'm sure that even if they somehow managed to come up with a perfect repro, there would still be people on this forum to blame them for it, arguing that, for the sole reason that they are Levi's, the are necessarily inferior to Warehouse (to keep this example).

[rnrswitch]

Also, if we are to talk about the horrible quality standards that American manufacturing has (as mentioned by Salaami about Levis), then we would also have to point out that the fruits of the horrible quality standards are the very details that some Japanese manufacturers are attempting to reproduce. The peeking selvage, the puckering on the pockets, etc. These are "imperfections" enhanced by Japanese artisans as shown in Miz's posts. I don't know if this is the "rule" or the "exception," but it goes without saying that these imperfections added character and humanity to the jeans.

[airfrogusmc]

I don't agree with salaami much at all but I also don't agree with you. First of all bunching all Japanese brands together and than using one or a few brands' product to describe all of the other ones' too isn't fair.

Second, I don't see why you would use the 'Cone' name as an argument for the quality of LVC. There certainly isn't anyone working in Cone today that did in the 40s, it's an all together different company, just operating under the same name.

Rather than using oversimplified symbols to judge something I would look at the product directly.

I have said many times that the last two seasons LVC collections have been very very good, in many ways as good as that of Japanese brands(to me, this mostly means 'Warehouse' right now).

However, the weak point with LVC as I see it is the denim, Cone's denim to be specific. Chronologically, it starts with the 1927 which is also the first model where Cone denim is used. Some years with Cone denim are fine, but some are off in my opinion. The 27, 37, 44 and perhaps 47 I don't like much at all. I would rather get the Japanese LVC versions because I do think the denim is significantly better as a reproduction.

And on the note of Japanese brands. I would say Warehouse is the number one brand for reproductions, without a doubt. Their scope is much larger than just jeans though and quality without fail topnotch across the range. Sure, they don't do replicas of exact Levi's models anymore, but their other jeans that arent original designs I hold as better reproductions than LVC.

And their denim is close to perfect.

1915 was the first year Cone denim was used.. Not exclusively but the first year was 1915.

[airfrogusmc]

Cone today that did in the 40s, it's an all together different company, just operating under the same name.

.

And no one at any of the Japanese companies has the access to both the old records and the sample of old fabric that the folks at Cone do. The link to the article that Paul wrote on Cone seems broken at the moment but its interesting and coming from a more researched point than you get from many others.

[crownzip]

Just because the denim was produced at Cone it doesn't make it more authentic or correct. I've seen LVC Japan denim that is much truer to vintage denim than alot of stuff coming from the US. Sad but true.

For a real eye opener visit the Cone Mills showroom and see all the samples of denim they produce for the contemporary market. Any denim geek would be horrified.

[airfrogusmc]

Well according to Paul the last 2 years or so cone has been nailing the weight and texture from the specific years being produced. I can tell you that the 200 and 300 series are really good and as good as any denim being produced by anyone and the denim on my 17s is AWESOME. Paul also said you'd probably be surprised at some of the Japanese companies using cone denim...

[Dr_Heech]

Well according to Paul the last 2 years or so cone has been nailing the weight and texture from the specific years being produced. I can tell you that the 200 and 300 series are really good and as good as any denim being produced by anyone and the denim on my 17s is AWESOME. Paul also said you'd probably be surprised at some of the Japanese companies using cone denim...

The denim may have improved lately, but as pointed out many times in this thread, the hardware hasn't. Buckles snapping, rivet heads falling off.

- Airfrog, what do you think about the leather patches on the 1917 + 1927's? - they are similar to each other, but different from previous seasons'.

[airfrogusmc]

I agree 100% with hardware comment, the buckles SUCK. In fact I have replaced all the buckles on all of my buckle back LVCs. And theres also a real inconsistancy on the leather patches. The one on my 1917 is real nice and the one on my 27 is not. The one on my 1917s is a lot like the one on my 1933 (555s) which is the nicest leather patch of all my LVCs. I've never lost a rivet head.

[Busted Seam]

For a real eye opener visit the Cone Mills showroom and see all the samples of denim they produce for the contemporary market. Any denim geek would be horrified.

True. But Japanses (and CHinese) companies produce plenty of horrible denim - horses for courses.

Cone are like anyone else - some of their denim is terrific, in partiuclar the black seed colleciton, which is some of the best out there, period. I personally like the early 555 fabric, and both the 50s and 60s versions, and their selfedge fabrics, but their looms are so cranky that you are bound to get a lot of variiaiton, as you did in the early days.

I know industry people who love Cone, and say the Kurabo denim for LVC isn't spec'd as consistently. What's for sure is that Cone and Levi's are big companies, LVC is not a prioritiy for them, so it's at the mercy of whoever is handed the project at any time, which varies from eyar to year.

HJJ, sorry, I thought you dissed the 201 a few years back, saying you did't partiuclarly ike the denim and thought the stitching made them look like Nudies. Must have been someone else. IN any case, these things are subjective - Anyone who offers an opinion without wearing in the relevant prodcut can say whatever they want, and it's meaningless. Even denim samples that have been sanded and washed can only tell you so much.

[blacap]

my lvc 47 after 5 months and 2 soaks... bought W33, actual W30. stretches out too much...

[blm14]

looks pinched

[jstavrin]

My LVC 1947s at around 3 months of wear.

I tried searching the thread to find the definition of "hard wash" that I believe I've heard Paul T mention, but couldn't find it. Can anyone help me out? I'm thinking of washing these soon.

[Dr_Heech]

BS .

I too love that early fabric, used in the first 3 years of production for the LEvi's vintage clothing (before it was abreviated to Lvc).

The fabric used for the 551z and 201xx in particuliar -inaccurate as they may be.

I know it's not to every one's vintage tastes, and I'm not ignoring the wonderfull denim on the 201, the 333 or the 1917's, but it's got that convincing quality about it which I always go back to.

[airfrogusmc]

Yeah Doc I now have sold both pairs of my 37 201s and I also liked the denim. I think horrible hated the denim on those.

I have a pair of 55s from a few years back that have awesome denim and a pair of 47s from the same LVC year I think that I really don't like. I had a very early pair of 1947s that had great denim.

[jstavrin]

From PaulT

The Hard Wash (not a technical term) was when my wife bunged them in the washer at 50 degrees with standard detergent (Non biological). And they suddenly looked really good. That really brought out the zing in them - but the dark areas, like the bottom of the legs, are still nice and dark.

At that first wash, I thought this was maybe because the newer 1947 were inferior to the 2006 editions. But now I think this pair look just as good as the last ones - altho I can't compare them side by side as I sold the last pair to Beatle, I think he posted them on the Evo thread fairly recently.

Do feel free to post this if you think it's of any use, hello all, I will be back in September with updates on my 55s, 1901s and - the horror - my SDA 103!

Thanks man.

[rnrswitch]

Uh oh. SDA 103s. Sell out.

[dreamkast]

do all the 47 501 washes run in the same size, I mean i think they would just double checking ,I got a pair of saddlemans that fit just how i like an ima order a pair of the hard up 501 47's and just checking theyll fit the same.

[crownzip]

Sorry to disagree Allen. I really don't care what Paul or anyone else says. I've seen plenty of vintage Levi's myself from collectors in NYC and LA to know what originals look like and to clearly see the difference when comparing it to my LVC denim - 555 or whatever.

On the other hand, if you really want close reproduction denim try a pair of Lee Japan. Some if their stuff is really scary how good it is.

[bunga]

just a heads up, hanon-shop is running a 70% clearance on their LVC, too bad the 44501 is sold out.