Levi's Vintage Clothing

[blm14]

Sugarcane hawaiis. Come in two versions - natural indigo and a 50/50 synthetic natural mix. I have this one which is the all natural:

[prochek]

Any word on the upcoming Spring collection? I mean, anything new from what we heard this past summer?

S/S 2010: Ozarks

"the purist" selection:

- 501: 1890, 1901, 1915, 1933, 1944, 1947, 1954, 1955(!), 1966

- 505

- Duck: jacket + 1873 pant

- Bib

- Jacket: Type 1 & 3 (shrink to fit)

- t-shirts: 30-50´s

- sunset shirts

Sneakpeak: mindenim.blogspot.com/2009/11/lvc-ss10-ozarks.html

[Dr_Heech]

Thanks Prochek

Nice selection - be interesting to see the duck re-issues.

What's the talon-zipped leather jacket?

.

[prochek]

Thanks Prochek

Nice selection - be interesting to see the duck re-issues.

What's the talon-zipped leather jacket?

.

A prewashed leather-jacket from Levi´s archive. A masterpiece I must say!

There will also be a prewashed duck..1902 I think (two pockets). I will post more product-pictures later.

from a denimnerd night. Victor Sandberg showing a Sunset shirt from 1917. Lock at the red color!!!

We will find this shirt in LVC s/s-2010.

[electrum]

Pics of another pair of '20s 201 555 Valencia being offered by a Japanese seller. The eagle arch (what little can be seen) appears different than other 201s I've seen, it's broader -- not as arched, plus thread colour looks to be yellow. Note too that the "t" in "garment" on patch is offset standing alone. Just wondering if these might be from the '20s 201 run that has the wrong double stitch arch. I can't determine from tag code what run these are from? Anyone have comments to share about these oddities? Thanks...

[electrum]

S/S 2010: Ozarks

"the purist" selection:

- 501: 1890, 1901, 1915, 1933, 1944, 1947, 1954, 1955(!), 1966

- 505

- Duck: jacket + 1873 pant

- Bib

- Jacket: Type 1 & 3 (shrink to fit)

- t-shirts: 30-50´s

- sunset shirts

Sneakpeak: mindenim.blogspot.com/2009/11/lvc-ss10-ozarks.html

Decent collection Prochek, I like the 1915 -- maybe they'll offer a better selection of sizes this time. Would like to have seen a rigid 333 and rigid 201 varient not issued before instead of the '33 and '44.

It'll be interesting to see if LVC offers the collection here in the states, After all, that is one of the much hyped goals set by the new LVC XX Global division announced in a press release back in August. One can only hope -- w/the USD getting slammed those LVC's from across the pond are getting pretty damn pricey.

[Shorty Long]

Thanks! I think maybe a repro of that red sunset shirt is part of the Spring '10 collection.

[airfrogusmc]

Pics of another pair of '20s 201 555 Valencia being offered by a Japanese seller. The eagle arch (what little can be seen) appears different than other 201s I've seen, it's broader -- not as arched, plus thread colour looks to be yellow. Note too that the "t" in "garment" on patch is offset standing alone. Just wondering if these might be from the '20s 201 run that has the wrong double stitch arch. I can't determine from tag code what run these are from? Anyone have comments to share about these oddities? Thanks...

I've had both pairs of 20s 201s and still have the 555 201.The ones with the double needle arcuate where not 555.

[Dr_Heech]

Those 201's look fake IMO - The arcs look like they've been lifted from a pair of 555 1955's and the pocket flasher wasn't even introduced until 1937 !

(glad I've kept my 555 201's - just wish they were a 34" waist, rather than 36".)

The leather jacket reminds me of the Lvc Aero 'ruff'n'ready' from 2002.

Really wish I'd bought one, but the £500+ price tag put me off.

.

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

those 201 are fake for sure, they came across to me in berlin thrift shop, they even had diamond arcuates and a red tab, too much detail for on pair i´d say

a few more evidence: why do these have a 1937 paper tag but still show backpocket rivets!? why are these called just 201 instead of 201xx!?

[Happy Hooligan]

if anyone is interested, I'm selling a pair of 1955's (555) in a big 38x40

http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showthread.php?t=178427

and a pair of Levi premium redlines 501 36x32...

http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showthread.php?t=178430

[RRLselvageDenim]

If anyone is interested : http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showthread.php?t=178322

[electrum]

I know I'm new here and this is going to be going against the collective grain but - I highly doubt that those 201s that were pictured are fakes. As a matter of fact, I pretty much think that any jeans with that much residual and extra detail being fake is a myth. I could be wrong but, come on... consider how much it would cost to come up with (produce) the exact inside leg tag with all that text in the exact font, etc. Plus all the attached paper products that are included, I bet the card stock is identical to what comes with "true" LVC jeans. That stuff looks professionally printed to me. Rivets inside the jeans don't look strange either (from what we can see). I can understand a pair of jeans being faked but to go to all the effort to duplicate the extras too, seems a bit far fetched for the possible payoff (no more than $200 usd) IMHO. Especially if the donut buttons and rear buckle are accurate looking (if we could see them) (ask for more pics), think about what it would take to produce those accuarely - the hassle and cost. I don't think any of the 201 say xx, because it was supposed to be a lower quality denim to begin with. A few years back I received a brand new raw pair of 201 from an ebay seller and when they arrived they were complete in all details including tags, paperwork and small 201 booklet - except they were missing the 4 rivets on the back pockets! At first I was furios, thought that I had been sold a fake. The thing is though, that the rivets on the rest of the jeans were exactly as they were supposed to be... which is a bronze coated copper with the levis text of course. So it became apparent to me that these were just factory mistakes where the back pocket rivets had been inadvertantly omitted. I am even starting to detect the "turquois" color that 201s are known to fade to. I believe that the pair in question are factory mistakes, I wouldn't even doubt that '55 pockets were used, but then again we need to seen more pictures. I wouldn't be afraid of them for the right price, but that's just me. Get some more pics and let us know what you decide. Sorry, to be so long winded!

Doug C

What's up DougC,

I don't know if they're fake or not, but I'd bank on Doc Heech and Sympathy's opinion that they are. The dude I'm dealing with is legit seller, but that's not to say he might not get duped by a good knock off. Paul T's 501 Visual Guide mentions that there are convincing Thai 201 '555' fakes, so apparently there is a market for quality fakes. Anyway, I turned down the dude's offer. Since I'm not going to buy them, I didn't bother asking for more pics. The pics he sent are pretty vague, but do clearly show the yellow stitch broad arch that is totally different from the orange/bronze stitch stylized gothic-like arch that I dig so much on the '555' 201's. The 201 search goes on......

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

@doug c,

please think of how many good and well made fakes of high fashion accecoirs are out there, rolex, vuitton, diesel etc. i guess these thai fakes

aren´t produced for the western market, but in asia there was a market for

quality repros started years ago with evis etc. ...

[Paul T]

I know I'm new here and this is going to be going against the collective grain but - I highly doubt that those 201s that were pictured are fakes. As a matter of fact, I pretty much think that any jeans with that much residual and extra detail being fake is a myth. I could be wrong but, come on... consider how much it would cost to come up with (produce) the exact inside leg tag with all that text in the exact font, etc. Plus all the attached paper products that are included, I bet the card stock is identical to what comes with "true" LVC jeans. That stuff looks professionally printed to me. Rivets inside the jeans don't look strange either (from what we can see). I can understand a pair of jeans being faked but to go to all the effort to duplicate the extras too, seems a bit far fetched for the possible payoff (no more than $200 usd) IMHO..d!

Doug C

Good, reasonable points all. But that's what the fakers rely on - they expect people to think there's been some fabulous, rare run for some far Eastern market... when the reality is that the genuine jeans are very well documented; there is a 201 issued every couple of years, sometimes with their own little quirks and yes, even errors - but those will be established ones.

Things like the pocklet flashers are ridiculously easy to fake now - with digital printing you could run up a couple of hundred with no origination costs whatsoever.

I've looked at these for around 30 seconds and they are definitely fake; the most immediate tell-tale is the fabric, which simply looks different and the stitching - wrong colour and more important, the wrong type - oin the real jeans the stitch length is really short. Then even the quickest look at the back pocket arcuate tells you it has the characteristic look of Thai fakes, and the linen patch is the wrong fabric. Again, as pointed out, it has the wrong pocket flasher. The 201 seems to be a favourite of the counterfeiters.

What is worrying about these is that they have the new-ish style internal tag more or less right.

We haven't seen any for some time, but I do recall fakes around that are even more convincing than these. Usually, people's urge to bag a bargain overcomes their well-founded sense of suspicion - that is what eBay presumably relies upon, as they make life more difficult for buyers (anonymous bidding so you can't detect shills, nor warn bidders an item is fake).

HEre for reference, is the real thing; the 555 pair from 2000 is below, a recent pair from, I think, 2007 on top. Notice the patch is a completely different design, while the stitching is very distinctive - and all one colour. 201 never had the multi-colored stitching.

Correct 555 tag:

The fakes:

Note, as pointed out on the fake, the back pocket flasher points out there are still "concealed" rivets on the back pocket. THis flasher was introduced around 1937, with the covered rivets, and would of course never be seen on jeans with exposed rivets.

Note the yellow-brown stitching, the distorted fonts on the patch showing it was copied (poorly) from another pair, the arcuate too high, wrong shape, wrong 'lemon' colour, the wrong colour denim, the fraying around the patch, which doesn't look like the original linen. In addition, the pockets look too small and tapered, like 55 as Dr Heech points out, as opposed to large and square like the original. I would wager that if you saw a full-length shot the entire shape of the jeans would be wrong, too. The more you look, the more you'll find wrong; I can just about see the back seam, and this seems to have the wrong construction with the left panel stitched over the right panel - this was how postwar Levi's were made, but the prewar jeans were the other way around. I believe these also have the hang-tags from a later year, and the original would have had a different tag on one of the donut buttons, as seen above. In fact, on close examination, only the internal tag bears any resemblance whatsoever to the real thing.

Note that levi's do have experimental models or prototypes but these have hand-written internal tags or codes, not the 'production' internal tags, like this one.

[

[erk]

^ squashed

[Dr_Heech]

The Lvc 201's have a different colour thread (lighter-peach?) around the four sides of the back pockets, although the arc stitching is the same as on the rest of the jean.

This lighter colour thread/comparison is used on the Lvc 213 jacket, which is also done on the (front) pocket.

Paul

Thanks for the info on the Thai fakes.

Gotta love the Arcs on the 555 201 - They are IMHO, the best shaped arcs Lvc have repro'd.

.

[Paul T]

The Lvc 201's have a different colour thread (lighter-peach?) around the four sides of the back pockets, although the arc stitching is the same as on the rest of the jean.

.

Interesting point, good observation; I see no difference on my washed pair, but the 2000 do indeed have a more magenta-y orange around the edge - they look to be a slightly lighter weight thread, too. I'll post photos and look more closely at the 2007 when it's daylight.

Needless to say, there's no resemblance whatsoever to the pair electrum wisely turned down. Who was the seller?

[kit99bar]

disappointed, made a visit to Chicago and the Levi store on Michigan Ave had no LVC.

[airfrogusmc]

disappointed, made a visit to Chicago and the Levi store on Michigan Ave had no LVC.

LVC has never been well stocked at the Levis Mich Ave store. I have only been getting my LVCs from cultizm the past few years and couldn't be more happy. I'll order on a Monday and I'll have the jeans Thursday latest. To the US from Germany. AMAZING.

[Medine]

Is it just me or is LVC hard to find in America?? this seems backwards

[Dr_Heech]

regarding the fakes, still not convinced sorry... why in the world would a faker go to all the trouble to get the details so exact; correct paperwork, tags (I see no obvious bad), linen label, donuts buttons, buckle, rivets.. on and on and on. Then screw up an obvious thing like the rear pockets. Someone with that level of expertease would not miss that item. Is there some rule that says the fake-makers HAVE to mess up something stupid and obvious? We've seen the fakes in the past with the placement of the cinch strap, but never with correct tags, etc.

Doug C

Doug C

They've not necessarily 'screwed up on the pockets' - The average joe may not notice that, and would buy a pair. These pics of the 201 hide all sorts of mistakes that we 'denim-geeks' can pick up on, but the fakers overlook.

Also, Lvc themselves mess up there original repros (pocket arcs, wrong rivets, wrong patches, wrong font on patches..etc) and this thread is full of examples!

As mentioned, these (obvious fakes) may be destined for the eastern market.

Paul's right about that internal tag though, It is the closest copy I've seen yet. The font is slightly high and a bit too even, but a very good attempt.

But for my money there's too many giveaway's to ensure real accuracy.

.

[tigerformula]

Anyone know where I can find measurements for a 1967 505?

[The Clerk]

Morning,

Thought you guts may be interested to see how my 1901's have been getting on over the summer. They have had the bulk of my wear since around May - I guess about two thirds of the time and the rest I was wearing my 47's. I've now put the 01's away until spring and the 47's at getting a bit too frayed.

Anyway here they are after an initial soak:

And this is how they looked yesterday. Same camera, same room, same lights. They seem to have changed hue an awful lot. You can really see the detail of the whiskers etc.

[Paul T]

regarding the fakes, still not convinced sorry...

A tricky one this, as they are indeed fakes. The main point is that the factory errors on 201 are well-documented, and people here have seen the production year on year.

Most important is that, taken individually, none of the details is correct, only the internal tag comes close. Once you've owned a few original pairs, the difference is obvious. THose photos also minimise the differences - more photos would reveal more differences, especially in the overall shape.

... why in the world would a faker go to all the trouble to get the details so exact; correct paperwork, tags (I see no obvious bad), linen label, donuts buttons, buckle, rivets.. on and on and on. Then screw up an obvious thing like the rear pockets.

...there's the rub. None of those items is correct. You've imagined the donut buttons and the buckle, because they're not visible. The rivets are wrong, the pocket flyer is wrong, and it doesn't match the pockets either, which are 50s rather than 30s or 20s. The fakers have done what all confidence tricksters do, let you use your imagination to fill in the gaps, or let you feel you've been extra smart by spotting a rare factory reject. Not one of those details is near, bar the aformentioned internal tag.

Good-looking 1901s, Clerk! Quite different from mine, but I didn't give mine a proper wash for maybe nine months; I was surprised how much indigo had gone, but in retrospect it was all abrasion, rather than the indugo washing away.

[Shorty Long]

Levi hasn't made LVC available in the US for the past 2 or 3 seasons. That is supposedly set to change this Jan/Feb however, when the Spring. 10 collection is released.

Is it just me or is LVC hard to find in America?? this seems backwards

[davidschlott]

I heard that Farinelli's will be carrying LVC this spring.

[blm14]

regarding the fakes, still not convinced sorry... why in the world would a faker go to all the trouble to get the details so exact; correct paperwork, tags (I see no obvious bad), linen label, donuts buttons, buckle, rivets.. on and on and on. Then screw up an obvious thing like the rear pockets. Someone with that level of expertease would not miss that item. Is there some rule that says the fake-makers HAVE to mess up something stupid and obvious? We've identified fakes in the past with the placement of the cinch strap, but never with correct tags, etc as far as I can remember... or does someone have a picture of that? Just seems more logical to me that they are factory mistakes, rather than a case of a dumb ass sewed on the wrong fake pocket after going the extra mile on all other details. The "concealed rivets" cardboard flasher corresponds with the wrong year pocket (if that is the case), which makes since - these are related items and the only items that look suspecious IMHO. Again, not trying to step on the toes of you experts, I know their are fakes out there but mistakes do happen too and probably more often than we'd guess, especially with a new factory worker or a model that's new to that worker. Or the normal pocket sewer called in sick, and the fill in screws up the order. It's also not surprising that these seconds would end up on ebay either. Would love to see more pics just for kicks, I rest my cast though..until then.

Doug C

From long and extensive research on documenting fake diesel jeans (when I was into that brand) I can tell you that it's the OBVIOUS stuff that the fakers WILL mess up. They typically scrutinize all the little details to make sure that things like rivets etc are correct but they will make really obvious mistakes like putting a waist size 37 when the company doesn't offer that.

You also have to keep in mind that sometimes the fakes are made in the exact same factories as the real ones, after hours, so getting access to all the trademarked stuff is easy. Similarly frequently the manufacture of the small stuff (flashers, rivets, buttons, etc) is outsourced, and then the fake bits can be re-made by the outsourcing company, which is typically in one of the same (usually) asian countries that also happens to be making all the knock offs

[Paul T]

I'm not getting in an argument with you; I'm simply trying to stop crooks - and there are a lot of them - from palming off dodgy goods on people. I shall repeat for the last time, everything on those jeans is like other counterfeit we've seen here, except for the tag. If we were to see that alone, without checking the orignal shown here, we could mistake it for the real thing. Nothing else bears any real resemblance.

Do some searching on this board and you'll see these fit a common pattern. I've had the same argument with managers from Urban OUtfitters who attempted to argue that similar jeans were rare factory mistakes; in the end, Levi's got them to pull every vintage jean out of their London stores. Levi's, and LVC, fit a standard pattern. Any errors out there are well documented(look at Dr Heech's post) and any factory one-offs do not have the production tag.

I have now repeated myself at least a couple of times, so I shall leave this. Do some searching for fake 201s on this board, or look through all the genuine ones on this thread. All the answers to this conundrum are here.

Picked these up a while back. Don't expect them to be anything spectacular, no hidden rivets, 501 stamped on the back of the top button, no crotch rivet.

I believe the 201 used to be made with green selvage, supposed to be cheaper and lighter. these have kind of a very light pink hue, don't know if thats the green that has faded and morphed into pink, or what.

weird thing, the inside of the buttons on the waist and fly are hollow, which i've never seen before.

the stitching on the back pockets is done with two colours though.

Just trying to date them and get more info on them, assume they're just 201s that were released prior to the switch of looms, but more specifics would be neat to have.

nairb49

[Dr_Heech]

Clerk.

Nice comparison photos - from what year were those made, do you know?

I think that's kurabo denim - really great streaks. How long did it take to change hue?

...On an unrelated note, anyone heard from Busted Seam recently?

He hasnt posted on here for a while.

.