Jump to content

Levi's Vintage Clothing


Recommended Posts

LVC's rarely shrink a full 2" in the waist (and stay that way)...that's probably a rare maximum, but they will more than likely stretch back out close to pre-soak dimensions with a couple wears.

I would measure the waist to get a true size before deciding to return them though. It's likely (especially with '47s) that they'll come in under 34".

Can anyone confirm if the more/most recent batches of '47s are still shrinking a full 2" in the waist over a few soaks (I know they tend to shrink more over multiple soaks)? I picked up with a pair of 34x34s that I would really need to come down to a tue 32" in the waist.

Would rather not soak (and just return) if I can't be sure to get them down that much...

Thanks in advance...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Picked up a spare 506XX I found on ebay nwt for half the current asking price of US stores. Came in the mail today and took some quick pix with my phone. Differences between the older jacket (i believe from 2007) and the newer one.... Newer jacket is darker (old one was very turquoise when raw), Made in Turkey label at neck, different font for the lot # and size on the newer jacket, no circled R on the red tab. Not sure the age of the new one, I'd guess post 2009.

img1291f.jpg

By setterman at 2012-03-22

img1290pg.jpg

By setterman at 2012-03-22

img1289oj.jpg

By setterman at 2012-03-22

img1288jf.jpg

By setterman at 2012-03-22

img1287q.jpg

By setterman at 2012-03-22

img1286z.jpg

By setterman at 2012-03-22

img1285iv.jpg

By setterman at 2012-03-22

If I'm reading the tag right 09. Nice jacket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats your take on the 1967 505 and the 1954z 501. Im looking to cop a pair from the supermarket. Both are 34x34.

Im rather fat (34" waist, 12.5 thigh), 5'10" and 190#.

I have a pair of nfxmomo collab 2 weird guys in 32 and thry fit me great (especially the thighs).

Im looking for more of a loose look with my new pair, but those collabs fit like skinny jeans.

1) Whats the difference between '67 505s and regular 505s? I have a pair of reg. 505 in size 33 and i like the fit. However i saw that the '67 505 have an 11.5" thigh, which is way too tight for me, wtf?

2) Difference between the 54z 501s and yhe regular 505s, fitwise? Also between 54z and nfxmomo collab 2? Looking for loose fit.

3) finally, difference between 67 505 and 54z 501?

Thanks im just gettin into lvcs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats your take on the 1967 505 and the 1954z 501. Im looking to cop a pair from the supermarket. Both are 34x34.

Im rather fat (34" waist, 12.5 thigh), 5'10" and 190#.

I have a pair of nfxmomo collab 2 weird guys in 32 and thry fit me great (especially the thighs).

Im looking for more of a loose look with my new pair, but those collabs fit like skinny jeans.

1) Whats the difference between '67 505s and regular 505s? I have a pair of reg. 505 in size 33 and i like the fit. However i saw that the '67 505 have an 11.5" thigh, which is way too tight for me, wtf?

2) Difference between the 54z 501s and yhe regular 505s, fitwise? Also between 54z and nfxmomo collab 2? Looking for loose fit.

3) finally, difference between 67 505 and 54z 501?

Thanks im just gettin into lvcs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone confirm if the more/most recent batches of '47s are still shrinking a full 2" in the waist over a few soaks (I know they tend to shrink more over multiple soaks)? I picked up with a pair of 34x34s that I would really need to come down to a tue 32" in the waist.

Would rather not soak (and just return) if I can't be sure to get them down that much...

Thanks in advance...

My 55s and '22s shrank a full 3" in the waist, but like shortylong pointed out, they don't stay that way for long. TTS or sized up 1" is the way to go with LVC. Depending on your build and how you want them to fit, a size 33 might be your best bet with the '47.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats your take on the 1967 505 and the 1954z 501. Im looking to cop a pair from the supermarket. Both are 34x34.

Im rather fat (34" waist, 12.5 thigh), 5'10" and 190#.

I have a pair of nfxmomo collab 2 weird guys in 32 and thry fit me great (especially the thighs).

Im looking for more of a loose look with my new pair, but those collabs fit like skinny jeans.

1) Whats the difference between '67 505s and regular 505s? I have a pair of reg. 505 in size 33 and i like the fit. However i saw that the '67 505 have an 11.5" thigh, which is way too tight for me, wtf?

2) Difference between the 54z 501s and yhe regular 505s, fitwise? Also between 54z and nfxmomo collab 2? Looking for loose fit.

3) finally, difference between 67 505 and 54z 501?

Thanks im just gettin into lvcs.

I texted you homie. You should try the strike golds 1109 or 2109. they got a similar rise/cut to the momos. selfedge.com. Holler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Shorty & Setterman. Much appreciated. I did measure them, and they do come out below a true 34" but not by a lot. I may see if I can exchange for a 33 or even a 32. TTS 32 is golden for me.

Would love to try on some '67 505s... Thinking that may be a good combo of medium thigh (not too skinny, not loose), w/ smaller leg opening. Seeking 32" waist, ~12" thigh and ~8" leg opening...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you mind telling us the price? I remember when you used to be able to mail your jeans to the Union Square store and get repairs done for $12. Mind, this was 5 or so years ago.

My 1947 LVC repaired with raw selvedge denim at the Levis Tailor Shop in the ground floor of the San Francisco flagship store.

Patch1.jpg

Patch2.jpg

I especially like how they repaired the pockets.

Levis.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a technical question about the Levi's arcuate. If you can't patent clothing design, why is the arcuate part of Levi's trademark? It was clearly designed to keep the pockets from "puckering" a certain way. The red tab has no function, so I can see that being a part of the trademark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a technical question about the Levi's arcuate. If you can't patent clothing design, why is the arcuate part of Levi's trademark? It was clearly designed to keep the pockets from "puckering" a certain way. The red tab has no function, so I can see that being a part of the trademark.

Ahem, where did you get this from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe the puckering part is true - I've ever heard it before. It seems likely, from Mike Harris's discoveries, that the very first models of some Levi's pants might have had no arcuate at all - I would bet that Jacob Davis's first prototypes didn't. The arcuate was almost certainly added to distinguish Levi's from their competition.

What we really don't know is where the arcuate design came from - it's seen on quite a few pants. Did other companies use it before Levi's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.smithsonianchannel.com/site/sn/show.do?episode=137549

that show said "fluttering wings of a bird" was drawn by by one of his nephews. that's one of those bullshit cutesy things, most likely. it is reminiscent of a bird, though. possibly something akin to a seagull around san fran?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahem, where did you get this from?

I've read that somewhere. I thought it was common historical knowledge. Why else is it shaped that way? I'll have to dig up the reference, but I didn't just make it up. And it's true that the first jeans Levi made did not have arcuates. The arcuates were a solution to a problem. Perhaps because the first pockets were so big and made for mining tools, they often sagged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.smithsoni...?episode=137549

that show said "fluttering wings of a bird" was drawn by by one of his nephews. that's one of those bullshit cutesy things, most likely. it is reminiscent of a bird, though. possibly something akin to a seagull around san fran?

I'm pretty certain it was functional in the very beginning, but to what ends exactly … is anyone's speculation. I can see how it was deemed ornamental later on because no one could remember the original intent and it became synonymous to the branding of the now famous jeans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kinda thought it was both functional and a distinguishing feature. The function being to stitch in a half pocket lining. Then the shape to be different and to brand them as Levis'. I know that they don't have a pocket lining anymore on LVC but I'm pretty sure Mike (Sansome) has found the odd example on his travels. Could be wrong though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kinda thought it was both functional and a distinguishing feature. The function being to stitch in a half pocket lining. Then the shape to be different and to brand them as Levis'. I know that they don't have a pocket lining anymore on LVC but I'm pretty sure Mike (Sansome) has found the odd example on his travels. Could be wrong though.

I remember reading about pocket lining, too … though I never seen an example. That makes even more sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...