Levi's Vintage Clothing

[erk]

Hey Beautifull freak,

Dont despair, he has another pair 34/34 in blue (+ a pair of 32/34) -

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Sugar-Cane-1947-Vintage-Jeans-34-34-Selvage-Denim-NEW_W0QQitemZ130354412359QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_CSA_MC_Jeans?hash=item1e59ba7b47

.

I bought a pair from him a few weeks ago. They are great and arrived very quickly

[beautiful_FrEaK]

thx man!

maybe I'm dropping some more funds and buying the SC Okinawas

[Christmas In A Submarine.]

does anyone have any experience with those black or brown SC 47s that seller has up? both look tempting, esp the brown.

[mjknight]

got a pair of size 28 1947's for sale. if anyone is interested hit me up

[beautiful_FrEaK]

does anyone have any experience with those black or brown SC 47s that seller has up? both look tempting, esp the brown.

IIRC Atzec (youll find him here and on mynudies) bought the black one several weeks ago. I suggest that you pm him

[airfrogusmc]

Santa left a lil sump'm for the watch pocket.

[Happy Hooligan]

Santa left a lil sump'm for the watch pocket.

very nice! what year is that one from?

[airfrogusmc]

Thanks HH 1932.

[zissou]

I got a little Christmas money and was thinking about picking up these 201s. What do you guys think? (10)

[ADDIC]

do it. i mean you do get $200 ebay bucks. $200 man.

[RRLselvageDenim]

I got a little Christmas money and was thinking about picking up these 201s. What do you guys think? (10)

That's been on ebay for a while, I guess no one is about to drop $35,000 for a pair of jeans in the economy. I guess Levis must have it in their archives otherwise they would have bought it. Levis scans ebay for old vintage items.

[Paul T]

Levi's have a mint pair of 201 from this era, the Dead Man Pants. They would only pay out this amount of money for the best, earliest pants, from the 1880s or so; which would fetch around $40-45,000.

Being 10 years later, when Levi's was well-established, these jeans aren't particularly rare. There was a much better pair sold for around $30k on eBay, but neither buyer nor seller left feedback - either it was a dead-beat buyer or they sold off-ebay to save fees. THere are these photos and more of that pair on the 201 thread:

[Bijan]

Are the 66 501 similar to the 78s, cut-wise, for indentical sizes? I want a high rise with a traditional top block and tapered legs. It seems like the 66 and 78 cuts are pretty similar. Help a brother out!

[Bijan]

Never mind- found the answer in the 501 guide by Paul T.

[BAerts]

Wow, that Hamilton is friggin' awesome. I've got a 1957 Ventura. Hamilton makes amazing watches.......okay, sooo, back to jeans....

[Happy Hooligan]

Wow, that Hamilton is friggin' awesome. I've got a 1957 Ventura. Hamilton makes amazing watches.......okay, sooo, back to jeans....

is your Ventura the rare gold one?

[Shorty Long]

Anyone know 0f ANY stores that might still have the 1966 646s in rigid/deadstock? I seem to recall a few people mention a US shop here and there having a "secret stash" of old LVC. Since this particular model appears to have been more of a US-only release, I'm guessing this is where I'll be able to find them.

Thanks in advance

[airfrogusmc]

Wow, that Hamilton is friggin' awesome. I've got a 1957 Ventura. Hamilton makes amazing watches.......okay, sooo, back to jeans....

Thanks. The Hamilton was set Christmas morning and hasn't lost even a couple of seconds in two days. I'm a big fan of watches you wind everyday. I also have a 1945 A-11 Waltham and a repro d-day 50th anniversary Benrus and a 1890 Elgin pocket watch.

[airfrogusmc]

Levi's have a mint pair of 201 from this era, the Dead Man Pants. They would only pay out this amount of money for the best, earliest pants, from the 1880s or so; which would fetch around $40-45,000.

Being 10 years later, when Levi's was well-established, these jeans aren't particularly rare. There was a much better pair sold for around $30k on eBay, but neither buyer nor seller left feedback - either it was a dead-beat buyer or they sold off-ebay to save fees. THere are these photos and more of that pair on the 201 thread:

Thanks for posting that, tried to rep but I gotta spread some around. Those are amazing. I love those buttons.

[kit99bar]

do the 1915s do the usual 2 inch waist, 3 inch inseam shrinkage?

[crownzip]

Hey Allen, Sweet looking pocket watch! What is the diameter of the watch? I've been looking for a small pocket watch that'd fit in the front pocket my overalls.

Santa left a lil sump'm for the watch pocket.

[RRLselvageDenim]

Why are people still asking questions about Sizing and Shrinking when all the info about Sizing and Shrinking is all here and available on the Garment itself?

[airfrogusmc]

Hey Allen, Sweet looking pocket watch! What is the diameter of the watch? I've been looking for a small pocket watch that'd fit in the front pocket my overalls.

Thanks Grant. Its a size 16, 21 jewel, double roller, 922E from 1932 I believe. It measures across at the 9-3 2 inches including the case. It fits very nicely in watch pockets. It fits really nice in all of my watch pockets on my LVCs and also very nicely in the chest pocket on my 1905 209 coveralls.

[airfrogusmc]

do the 1915s do the usual 2 inch waist, 3 inch inseam shrinkage?

The last year LVCs start out bit larger in the waist than previous LVCs. I got my waist size and they are baggy now but cinch up nicely but they haven't been soaked yet. There about 4 1/2 months into it and I will soak in another month or two.

[electrum]

Why are people still asking questions about Sizing and Shrinking when all the info about Sizing and Shrinking is all here and available on the Garment itself?

Because the sizing and shrinking info listed on the garment is usually BS and means nothing. I bought a pair of '44 lvcJP raw, the dude that sold them to me assured me they would shrink 2 inches in waist, well they didn't and I got stuck w/ a pair of baggy clown pants that cost me $285 -- ended up selling on ebay for $56. I 've been through a bunch of '47s that were anywhere from1-3 inches larger or smaller than listed W tag size, sent them all back costing me over $100 in postage. I wanted a pair of the '15s, but found out that the listed 30W tag actual measurement runs anywhere from 2-4 inches larger -WTF!!! There are some sufu raw fit pics I've seen that are way too baggy and look like crap with some post wash that are still visibly too baggy. Just take a look on Ebay, there's always someone selling new lvc saying something like '...brand new $200 lvc, but waist still way too big after wash, my loss your gain...' You never see that w/ other high-end brands -- NEVER.

All I can say is that if you're going to dish out $200-$300 for raw lvc be sure you have the vendor you're getting them from measure them. Otherwise you WILL get stuck with the wrong size. Then you'll think, hmmm well they'll fit fine after they shrink a couple of inches after wash like the lable says they will, but they don't and you're out a bunch a $. The "they will shrink approx. 2 inches in waist" bit is a load of crap, I've never had a pair of Levi's STF jeans LVC or otherwise shrink more than 1/2 inch in waist under normal washing conditions. Until LS&CO figures out how to manufacture jeans that actually measure out to what the tag says they are suppose to be, I guess people will continue to come here and ask questions about sizing.

[RRLselvageDenim]

touche electrum. I hear ya.

[zissou]

For the life of me, I can't figure out why it is so hard for LVC to get the sizing right. At the current sizing scheme, I need something like a 30x36, which I don't even think they make. It's so retarded that I can't even wear them, which is a shame. That's probably the only brand of jeans I can say that about.

[Paul T]

The sizing issue is pathetic; before it was at least consistent, but the ones from the new factory are worse. I did mention this to someone I know whho recently joined the xx group; as well as other issues. I think it will take a season or two to sort out. But they need to, especially now other players like warehouse etc are extending & improving their offering.

[Doug C]

For the life of me, I can't figure out why it is so hard for LVC to get the sizing right. At the current sizing scheme, I need something like a 30x36, which I don't even think they make. It's so retarded that I can't even wear them, which is a shame. That's probably the only brand of jeans I can say that about.

I'd bet the reason the 2" waist shrinkage (well, lack of it) hasn't been addressed is because it's never been a problem before... I mean it probably was always the same for all these years BUT times were different, people didn't complain (publicly) about these thing, the jeans were hugely popular and selling well anyway, there wasn't an internet with discussion groups, and like Paul said not as much competetion in STF denim. The issues of waist sizes being way different than what they're tagged is another thing altogether, a quality controll thing - the shrinkage more of a safe marketing thing... after all they do shrink some so that had to be accounted for.

[Dr_Heech]

Electrum

Mate - I would +Rep you but cant. Your mini-rants about Lvc summise what lurks in the back of my mind everytime I think : I'll buy that 19__ 501, maybe lvc have got it right this time (?)

...knowing full well they haven't

( Looking forward to getting my SC 47's)

.