Levi's Vintage Clothing

[airfrogusmc]

But aren't the Homer jeans specifically dated to 1917?

You're ahead of me on the 'dropped off' stitching; I see it on the 1901 and 1917 originals, with a chainstitched waistband arriving, when it also appears on the hems etc, by 1927. Do you have any links to pics of the originals?

I know that cone put a lot of work into that 1915 fabric; as far as the jeans, I'm not sure who's responsible. I honestly don't know about the profusion of other models between 1901 and 1927; it's obvious that for some models, notably the '1876' jeans (two horse patch, placed centrally), they've just taken a guess, and morphed different features.

It's a shame, obviously, they let such details go, when there are so many areas in which they take a great deal of care. Someone commented earlier how the earlier, 555 fabric was 'more accurate' than the later denim. That's simply not true; I'm really impressed by the work they put into the denim on the 333 range, the original Nevada, the 1901, the Kurabo fabric 201, the 47, the 55 and the 66, all of which are quite distinct (the others might be just as good, I just don't know then so well). But to spend so much time on the fabric, and then mess up the rivets or leather patch is a simple misallocation of resources. If they can't get those details right, maybe they should make the jeans in Japan, with cone fabric where relevant.

Now theres an idea.

[Dr_Heech]

But aren't the Homer jeans specifically dated to 1917?

You're ahead of me on the 'dropped off' stitching; I see it on the 1901 and 1917 originals, with a chainstitched waistband arriving, when it also appears on the hems etc, by 1927. Do you have any links to pics of the originals?

I know that cone put a lot of work into that 1915 fabric; as far as the jeans, I'm not sure who's responsible. I honestly don't know about the profusion of other models between 1901 and 1927; it's obvious that for some models, notably the '1876' jeans (two horse patch, placed centrally), they've just taken a guess, and morphed different features.

It's a shame, obviously, they let such details go, when there are so many areas in which they take a great deal of care. Someone commented earlier how the earlier, 555 fabric was 'more accurate' than the later denim. That's simply not true; I'm really impressed by the work they put into the denim on the 333 range, the original Nevada, the 1901, the Kurabo fabric 201, the 47, the 55 and the 66, all of which are quite distinct (the others might be just as good, I just don't know then so well). But to spend so much time on the fabric, and then mess up the rivets or leather patch is a simple misallocation of resources. If they can't get those details right, maybe they should make the jeans in Japan, with cone fabric where relevant.

Yes the Homer jeans date to 1917, but they are so 'customized' as to the point where details may be blurred, for example: the braces buttons on the Lvc models are close together - look at the original, it seems Lvc has put the buttons on where the replacement ones were stitched on, not the positions (marked by small holes) where the originals were. As for the chainstitched/single stitched waistband, I'm afraid you've got me there, as I cannot find any pics of that area. I'm just saying it would be a good idea to have another pair of similar date to compare to before manufacturing them, rather than guestimating details.

Sorry, no links to pics, as most of it is from memory (of pics or originals).

But you're right about the 555 denim, as good as some of it is (1873 duck pants, 1873 natural indigo,201, 33's, 37 201xx, 47's,55's, 551z's... etc ), the denim on the 1880, 1886, 1890(2005), 1901(1st version-643M), 1915, 1917, 1927,1937,1944(2005) are really good, if not exceptional.

But it is the details, constuction and sizing issues which really drive me mad. Let's hope this XX team are the boys to get Lvc into shape (?)

[entertainment!]

The other thing it seems to me that lvc gets wrong is the buckle on the cinch. I would class these into two types. Type A seems to be the earlier type where the sharp points rest on a loop that is not wrapped by the denim strap and type B where the points rest on a loop that is wrapped by the denim strap. Type A is used on the earlier repros and Type B is used on later ones. The new 1915s have the Type A buckle, but from looking at the Lyn Downey Evolution of the 501 book, it looks like the Type B buckle was already used on the 1901 501. I looked at the vintage jeans on marvins-jp.com and it seemed that after 1900 or so, the Type A buckle was only used on the 201 series. Of course, buckles could have been replaced on the vintage jeans.

[Maynard Friedman]

I think the 201s from 05 have the wrong arcuate. Its double needle.

That's correct. I bought them in the days when I was less informed about such matters!

[LFC4ever]

I'm hoping someone can help me identify the finish on these 1933 Valencia Street 501's manufactured in Feb 2001. I've lost the tags and can't remember what the finish was called or what they were based on. Thanks in advance for your help!

[ndgo-dnm]

Hey Paul T and Dr Heech,

You obviously know your stuff about old Levi's and old denim! Thanks for all the good work.

Sizing on shrink to fit rigid LVC is a very difficult issue to deal with because all the fabrics don't shrink the same. Also, we don't like to wash them until they are worn in and really in need of some cleaning.

There is a way to deal with this issue, but it is hard to accept for the true denim head. You have to wet them out and let them shrink before the wear in process begins. They are supposed to shrink to the size on the garment if LVC did their job correctly. Again, upon purchasing them, you won't be able to judge where the fabric is going because the shrinkage allowance is not the same for every fabric.

Soaking (preferably while wearing) in warm water works great. Then air dry. Then, the most important step, turn them inside out and spray them heavily with spray starch. The more coats the better. You can spray some on the outside too if you like. It is a laborious process, but it will keep the fades in the right place as they start to develop. You should repeat that process every time you soak. And whatever you do never put them in a tumble dryer. OK, never is a long time, maybe after 3 years the dryer is OK for an emergency.

Just some ideas from an old dude that has tried this a few times.

[airfrogusmc]

Hey Paul T and Dr Heech,

You obviously know your stuff about old Levi's and old denim! Thanks for all the good work.

Sizing on shrink to fit rigid LVC is a very difficult issue to deal with because all the fabrics don't shrink the same. Also, we don't like to wash them until they are worn in and really in need of some cleaning.

There is a way to deal with this issue, but it is hard to accept for the true denim head. You have to wet them out and let them shrink before the wear in process begins. They are supposed to shrink to the size on the garment if LVC did their job correctly. Again, upon purchasing them, you won't be able to judge where the fabric is going because the shrinkage allowance is not the same for every fabric.

Soaking (preferably while wearing) in warm water works great. Then air dry. Then, the most important step, turn them inside out and spray them heavily with spray starch. The more coats the better. You can spray some on the outside too if you like. It is a laborious process, but it will keep the fades in the right place as they start to develop. You should repeat that process every time you soak. And whatever you do never put them in a tumble dryer. OK, never is a long time, maybe after 3 years the dryer is OK for an emergency.

Just some ideas from an old dude that has tried this a few times.

The problem with your process is it really take 4 to 5 wet to dry cycles how ever you do them to get most of the shrinkage out of the way and 10 or so time to get it 99% of the way done. After the fades are fully set a year or maybe a bit more into it I will wash them in a washer no detergent and air dry.

[ndgo-dnm]

you are correct!

[airfrogusmc]

The other thing it seems to me that lvc gets wrong is the buckle on the cinch. I would class these into two types. Type A seems to be the earlier type where the sharp points rest on a loop that is not wrapped by the denim strap and type B where the points rest on a loop that is wrapped by the denim strap. Type A is used on the earlier repros and Type B is used on later ones. The new 1915s have the Type A buckle, but from looking at the Lyn Downey Evolution of the 501 book, it looks like the Type B buckle was already used on the 1901 501. I looked at the vintage jeans on marvins-jp.com and it seemed that after 1900 or so, the Type A buckle was only used on the 201 series. Of course, buckles could have been replaced on the vintage jeans.

The buckles SUCK on LVC. The got REAL close with the 1915s but they screwed up in the fact that under the fabric on what should be the solid straight bar it has a split so that when you clip them they now no longer function. I have a replaced mine with other buckles. I have some original turn of the 20th century original buckles that I have on some of my buckle backs and have found a couple of places that supply much better repro buckles.

Heres a turn of the century original.

[airfrogusmc]

you are correct!

I wear'm raw as long as I can stand'm which is can be as much as 6 months before they hit water.

[Rob]

I'm hoping someone can help me identify the finish on these 1933 Valencia Street 501's manufactured in Feb 2001. I've lost the tags and can't remember what the finish was called or what they were based on. Thanks in advance for your help!

They were called "Rosebowl"

[LFC4ever]

Brilliant - that's what I'd thought but couldn't be sure. Thanks for your help.

nb don't actually like them very much, not a very sensible purchase.

[entertainment!]

The buckles SUCK on LVC. The got REAL close with the 1915s but they screwed up in the fact that under the fabric on what should be the solid straight bar it has a split so that when you clip them they now no longer function. I have a replaced mine with other buckles. I have some original turn of the 20th century original buckles that I have on some of my buckle backs and have found a couple of places that supply much better repro buckles.

Heres a turn of the century original.

Yes, the buckles do suck. I guess it is a moot point what type of buckle lvc used on the 1915s since it was completely non functional. I replaced it with one from River Junction. (Thanks for pointing out that source, airfrog.)

I also flattened the rivets per Paul T's suggestion. They look much better. The rivets were the other thing I didn't like on the 1915s. Many of the washers were cockeyed on my pair. But the denim is so beautiful!

[airfrogusmc]

Yeah I have a couple of those buckles from River Junction to and they work GREAT. Nice job on flattening those rivets.

[Dr_Heech]

Yeah I have a couple of those buckles from River Junction to and they work GREAT. Nice job on flattening those rivets.

Kinda sad that levis customers have to finish the job hardwear-wise.

But yeah entertainment, 100% agree with you about the the beautifull denim.

[robbojnr]

Kinda sad that levis customers have to finish the job hardwear-wise.

But yeah entertainment, 100% agree with you about the the beautifull denim.

hey heech you mentioned in an earlier post you were done with lvc, what denim is next for yuou

[crownzip]

Come to the dark side where quality control and accuracy is something you don't have to worry about - the Real McCoy's Lee's 101B's are the bee's knees.

[Dr_Heech]

hey heech you mentioned in an earlier post you were done with lvc, what denim is next for yuou

I'm a levis fan when it comes to jeans, and a Lee fan when it comes to jackets (I love the mystery and the history of the two companies).

I have enough Lvc to last a lifetime even after recently whittling down from two suitcases of jeans and jackets into one.

I have kept back twelve pairs, all in my size, BNWT - plus four or five current wearers which are in the early stages of evo.

So no more denim for me....

(unless . . .Lvc can do a decent repro of the 1922 model (japan did))

[Dr_Heech]

Come to the dark side where quality control and accuracy is something you don't have to worry about - the Real McCoy's Lee's 101B's are the bee's knees.

Crownzip's right of course. My 1930 Lee's are solid and an accurate repro.

But I think my 551z's are the dog's bollocks!

[ThomasK]

I have kept back twelve pairs, all in my size, BNWT - plus four or five current wearers which are in the early stages of evo.

So no more denim for me....

(unless . . .Lvc can do a decent repro of the 1922 model (japan did))

what models are those 12?

[eyongko]

They were called "Rosebowl"

like the rose bowl flea market?

[Dr_Heech]

what models are those 12?

1873 duck (+vest+coat), 1880 knappave, 1890 (2005), 1901 (2004), 1929 201 (555), 1933 (2004), 2x 1937 201xx, 1944 (2005), 2x 1955 (555) and 1963 551z.

Will be selling 1873 1st natural indigo (555), 1886, 1890 (2005) and 1901 duck when I can get my arse into gear + four nice jackets (555).

[blm14]

photos of that 1929 201?

[nickvs]

I need to the same thing and wondered how you got the pics up because I can't seem to do it

Cheers

Nick

[Paul T]

Check through the FAQs here, Nick. The simplest way is to sign on to photobucket.com (it's free). Edit your photos so they're between 250 and 800 pixels wide, save them as jpegs and upload them onto photobucket.

Once your photo is on photobucket, look at the little list of codes beneath it: the fourth one down is titled img code . Cut and paste that entire line onto your post in superfuture and your photo will appear, as if by magic.

I always use this historically significant denim-related photo to test my photobucket link is working OK:

[entertainment!]

Kinda sad that levis customers have to finish the job hardwear-wise.

But yeah entertainment, 100% agree with you about the the beautifull denim.

This pair was even sadder: 2008 Oldest Oldest. I moved the patch from the center to the side (per Paul T's comments), shortened the cinch strap so it would function, flattened the rivets (no patent date on these), repaired an unraveled side seam and shortened the hem. After one two hour warm soak and a five hour cold soak, the inseam and waist each only shrank less than one inch. The waist stretched back to pre-soak on the first wear. The length was marked as 36 but it was actually 38, so it ended up at 37" before I rehemmed. Now they do look pretty good though.

I must have too much free time.

I think it is time to investigate the Leepros. (Though I have been happy with my 1933 and later lvc, except for some funky pocket construction.)

[airfrogusmc]

I would never alter any LVC until they have full shrunk and that really takes 10 may 12 wet to dry cycles.

[ThomasK]

"wet to try " does mean soaking without any agitation?

[airfrogusmc]

Here are the rivets on my 1886s.

And they have one of my favorite arcuates

[DrMoBueno]

I always use this historically significant denim-related photo to test my photobucket link is working OK:

jane birkin. *sigh*