Levi's Vintage Clothing

[devilish]

+1 on the 'no' vote. Weirdness is what makes life interesting.

As for the 'loons, I'm thinking they might be good for riding my bike in. The cut and reinforcing might be just the thing. I'll give 'em a whirl and see what happens.

[Stratos]

+1 no vote

[cloudshift]

How much did the leg shrink up? I got a pair of 36 * 36 today but yet to soak. I could have done with a 34 waist but think (hoped) they'd shrink to a 35 post soak

I'll post the measurement later tonight. If I'm not mistaken the waist measured just over 19" flat when raw, and they shrank about an inch. They stretched back out just shy of raw measurement pretty quickly.

I find the waist/waistband to be about what I would expect, but starting at the yoke, and the bum/hips, they get quite a bit roomier.

[colgems1966]

Rather than releasing expensive flops like these LVC should focus on '44, '47 and '55s in sizes people want Longer inseams and perhaps varying the orange /lemon stitching. Anybody??

they should make up the core offering; but things would get boring and stale pretty quick if that's all they offered. personally i'd like to see 33 thru 55 as the core offering with different and interesting pieces rotated in and out of the line season to season. Levis is among a very few with a very rich and interesting history to draw from. i welcome the different offerings and would like to see them from the whole spectrum from 1873 up to about 1983. some will be more popular than others, but all the pieces will find homes where they're appreciated.

[colgems1966]

i would add i'd like to see consistent sizing applied to all the years. where every waist/inseam measures roughly the same. this is one issue i fault Levis for and there's no excuse for it. your size in a 1955 should be your size in a 1915.

[Stratos]

i would add i'd like to see consistent sizing applied to all the years. where every waist/inseam measures roughly the same. this is one issue i fault Levis for and there's no excuse for it. your size in a 1955 should be your size in a 1915.

Well, not necessarily; pre war ('grandfather') pants are simply sized differently because they're meant to be worn differently...

[emperor501xx]

Rather than releasing expensive flops like these LVC should focus on '44, '47 and '55s in sizes people want Longer inseams and perhaps varying the orange /lemon stitching. Anybody??

definatley longer inseams,,, 40 inch would be nice to see again on the 47,55 and 66's,,, there must be lots of people wanting and needing 40 inch ineams ???

[smittybat]

Most of the sizing issues could be solved by online retailers posting the measurements. It only takes a minute to measure a pair of jeans. While Cultizm doesn't post the measurements they're always very good about emailing them when requested. I also wonder if retailers just aren't requesting the longer inseams or are they just taking what LVC ships to them.

[colgems1966]

Well, not necessarily; pre war ('grandfather') pants are simply sized differently because they're meant to be worn differently...

i disagree. i know the cuts are different, some trim some looser but a 34 waist in 1915 was a 34 waist in 1955. and more importantly it creates all kinds of problems. the are pages and pages on here of i bought x and it didn't shrink enough/ too much etc... now on supermarket cheap. or if i buy x what size do i need i wear this size in y. i mean come on, these are headaches easily avoided with standardized sizing.

[smittybat]

definatley longer inseams,,, 40 inch would be nice to see again on the 47,55 and 66's,,, there must be lots of people wanting and needing 40 inch ineams ???

lots? really? How tall do you need to be to need a 40" inseam?

[colgems1966]

here's what i think LVC should do: standardize sizes! offer continously a core of classics roughly 33-55. rotate in season to season a few early and later models from the classic era to give some flavor. all models made in USA all models raw. lower prices a little to approx 2007-08 msrp. i don't see the need for the washed models. they are more expensive and don't seem to be as popular. they take up resources better applied elsewhere.

[killer b]

the washed models may not be as popular here...

[setterman]

lots? really? How tall do you need to be to need a 40" inseam?

It's going to shrink down to 37", so depending on how big a cuff you'd want, you'd need to be at least a 34 or 35" inseam.

[setterman]

OK, great, thanks man, that's a relief. I'll try hot soaking then! Also thx Setterman, owe you some rep!

Here's some measurements.....

Size XL 506XX

Front length, buttoned up, laid flat: 22 1/2" or 57cm

Sleeve, buttoned, laid flat, measured along the top of the sleeve 25" or 63 cm

This jacket had two ten minute soaks in pretty cold water (right outta the well), then hung to dry.

[Guest rusholmeruffian]

The pantaloons came today.

Paul is right, they are beautifully made, denim is gorgeous.

I've got to admit, I'm a 555 man but these are as good as anything from back then.

BUT, I think maybe they are too similar to my 1873 1st blue jeans to justify them in my wardrobe.

Sorry for the shit quality phone pics

[setterman]

here's what i think LVC should do: standardize sizes! offer continously a core of classics roughly 33-55. rotate in season to season a few early and later models from the classic era to give some flavor. all models made in USA all models raw. lower prices a little to approx 2007-08 msrp. i don't see the need for the washed models. they are more expensive and don't seem to be as popular. they take up resources better applied elsewhere.

I think focusing on a few core models, making them as accurate as possible (I agree with the recent comments that some of the current LVC needs to be darker and heavier), and trying to lower the price to the $180 range would be good for the brand. If they want to make an odd ball model, do one or two a year as limited editions in the $250 to $300 range.

[Stratos]

Here's some measurements.....

Size XL 506XX

Front length, buttoned up, laid flat: 22 1/2" or 57cm

Sleeve, buttoned, laid flat, measured along the top of the sleeve 25" or 63 cm

This jacket had two ten minute soaks in pretty cold water (right outta the well), then hung to dry.

Thanks a lot man, I'll soak 'm next week, not @home right now. Remind me to rep you when I can.

[colgems1966]

I think focusing on a few core models, making them as accurate as possible (I agree with the recent comments that some of the current LVC needs to be darker and heavier), and trying to lower the price to the $180 range would be good for the brand. If they want to make an odd ball model, do one or two a year as limited editions in the $250 to $300 range.

exactly. accurate & around $180. i might add i have bought a great deal of LVC in the past. i still have 18 prs and i've sold some off, but i have not bought ANY new ones since they went over $200 and i won't.

[erk]

I don't think we're going to see a reduction to 2007/8 prices any time soon.

I think $200 is fair. I've bought a few from cultizm on sale for 200+20 for shipping, and I definitely think the 1915s were a fair buy for that price. I think they're the best made LVC I've owned. the 1955s however, I disagree with. I think the fabric is pretty awesome, but that silk screened pocket thing is really stupid and I dont know about the quality of the hardware.

I also really like the weird stuff and the early models. I hope they don't quit on those. the pantaloons aren't really my thing, but I'm glad they made them.

I think someone mentioned cultizm not stocking the older models anymore? maybe I made that up.

as for the washes: I really think they should give up on those. I have seen a few that looked pretty realistic and cool, but I think that the mediocrity and downright garbage that makes up the majority of the washed clothing outweighs the good ones.

most of the washed jeans end up on ebay or on sale for years on the cultizm website or blackbird or whatever.

[colgems1966]

erk, i agree they should give up on the washed models and for the reasons stated. it takes up a lot of production and resources better applied elsewhere. if they stopped the washed models they could redirect it to more raw jeans, shirts, jackets etc...i think most would prefer NOS condition and wear them in themselves. also on the washed the fit is all over the place even more so than raw.

[tropicalbird]

I have yet to see anybody whine about retail prices of Japanese denim.

[Stratos]

I think someone mentioned cultizm not stocking the older models anymore? maybe I made that up.

I got a mail from Cultizm a few months back that they will not stock up on the old bucklebacks like the 1890 and 1901 anymore indeed...

[colgems1966]

I have yet to see anybody whine about retail prices of Japanese denim.

being conscious of price and value is smart esp in this economy. it is not whining.

[smittybat]

I got a mail from Cultizm a few months back that they will not stock up on the old bucklebacks like the 1890 and 1901 anymore indeed...

I think they had a hard time selling those models.

[jewellben]

I think they had a hard time selling those models.

Or they are not in the latest season releases like the 1937

[ranonranonarat]

here are some measurements off a pair of 501xx 1947's tagged 32 x 32 that i got off LN-CC a couple of days back. received a few PMs for measurements so i thought it would be good to throw this out here. measurements are taken presoak.

waist: 32 inches

inseam: 32 inches

front rise: 12 inches

back rise: 14 inches

upper thigh: 11 inches

knee: 8.75 inches

hem: 8.5 inches

just throwing this out here. i had a pair of 47's earlier in the year as well and they were tagged a 33 x 34 and heres what they measured:

waist: 32 inches

inseam: 34 inches

front rise: 11.5 inches

back rise: 14.5 inches

upper thigh: 11.5 inches

knee: 9 inches

hem: 8.5 inches

there is a pretty noticeable difference between the previous batch compared to these that i have in hand. the hardware on these feel pretty cheap and the buttons on the fly feel flimsier compared to the previous ones i owned. also, the denim is significantly more blue in the older versions as the ones on hand look a little greycast, as with the backpocket arcs on these are green instead of the lemon-yellow ones previously. backpockets are also longer and wider now and the outseam selvage are narrower in the newer versions.

[mikedbt5]

I have boght 47s for a number of years . I can only speak for myself but the current models , I have a 2011 pair from Cultizm , in terms of quality of of materials and finish thay are as good as anything i , personaly ,have purchased , Materials are top , as usual , design has been positively , periodically , modified . Really dont know what te fuck everyone is getting excited about . if you dont like them them - buy somethin cool . No offence intended to anyone btw .

[Joseph Hill]

You've always got to have flashier stuff on the floor. Most people buying a Chevy are getting a Malibu or Blazer. But it's the Vettes and Camaros that get them in the showroom to gawk. Levis may not move nearly so many units of the old-timey models as the standards, but they sure generate interest in the brand. I myself am only on this board because I was looking for old-time clothing and was trying to find out more about this LVC thing I had just 'discovered'. So they should not be considered a loss, but advertising that they may be able to recoup some of the expenditure on. Rent a billboard, and you don't get anything back.

[srgprod]

Picked up an LVC Sac Coat Lot 67 from the Gilt sale last week. $159 plus shipping.

Anyone have any info on this Jacket? I don’t remember ever seeing one in person.

[devilish]

1878 Pantaloons arrived from ln-cc today. Three days from purchase to door, from England to California. That's pretty amazing. Came in an awesome box with the canvas LVC bag. I hope I get chance to buy some more items from them, could not be happier.

As for the pants, they are definitely the skinniest LVC I own (on par with my 47's in the leg, maybe slightly smaller at the ankle). The top block is roomy but not ridiculous and has a very high waist but I like that. I can't see my ass that well in my mirror but doesn't look too diapery.

The quality of the tailoring is very nice and the details are really well done. The front pocket shape is especially nice and feels good to put ones hands in. Much better than your average 5 pocket.

I'll get fit pics when I can persuade my poor gf to indulge her weirdo bf. Here are some detail ones in the meantime.