Levi's Vintage Clothing

[redragon]

Dat triple pleat is something else, definitely perk my interest.

[lance]

An article in Levi's "Unzipped" from May 20, 2015, shows an interview with Tracy Panek in which she states that the New Nevada jeans were made of 9 oz denim from the Amoskeg plant and are indeed dyed with plant indigo dye as Paul stated. I wonder if the repros will be dyed using plant indigo? Sorry, can't seem to copy and paste the link; I found the article through Google.

Edited December 23, 2016 by lance

[nycsurfer530]

I was at a vintage store in Brooklyn and came across a 1950s type 2. Patina was absolutely beautiful and it fit me like a glove all for the price of--- 900$. Never took a fit pic as the associate of the store was watching me closely but I did get a quick snap of the jacket on the hanger, I'll post it later tonight.

[aho]

^Not worth it! You can get nicely faded type 2's on the bay for around $400-$500 fairly frequently. I even picked up one for $275 in LA a few years back at a pretty popular vintage spot, so deals can def. be had. If you're hitting the $900+ range, it'd better be a type 1, honestly (though $1200 is usually average)!

 

EDIT: I should clarify, I'm talking well faded type 2's for that price range. If it's dark or closer to raw, $900+ makes sense

Edited December 25, 2016 by aho

[nycsurfer530]

^completely agree! This jacket is also no where near dark or close to raw and is missing the leather patch but its still a beautiful jacket. Super worn and marbly

 

Photo isn't the best as i was trying to be covert 

 

[aho]

^Classic 50's texture! 

 

Speaking of which, there was a 1950s pair of 501's I just lost out on on the bay. It had a leather patch, arcs and tab intact and I knew they'd go for around $1200 but I couldn't bring myself to bid that much. Just venting, but maybe it's best I stop spending for a while anyway 

 

So...No more vintage until I can get myself a cinchback once and for all! 

[orchestrion]

Looks like Mr Porter is having a sale on what I'm assuming is the one wash version of the 1947 501 for $120 with free shipping. Handful of sizes still available. https://www.mrporter.com/en-us/mens/levis_vintage_clothing/1947-501-regular-fit-rinsed-selvedge-denim-jeans/379246

[aho]

^Not that I'm buying, but is the one wash 47 still made in Turkey, etc?

[Paul T]

only guessing but I think so. At one point the Turkey production used Italian denim but I think it's now Cone.

[xchen]

i have 2 pairs of the 1947 501xx rough rinse (made in Turkey of cone denim) - one 30x34, one 30x32 hemmed by BiG and worn a couple times, want to find them a good home to someone who can fit them. if anyone has interest please PM me

[setterman]

Looking at the measurements at unionmade, they've tweaked the 70s fit to have a higher rise.

https://www.heddels.com/2016/12/levis-vintage-clothing-releases-a-new-year-of-501s/

[Big_Hoss_Butt_Floss]

Looking at the measurements at unionmade, they've tweaked the 70s fit to have a higher rise.

https://www.heddels.com/2016/12/levis-vintage-clothing-releases-a-new-year-of-501s/

 

I have a pair a deadstock early '70s 501s BNWT at home so I can measure mine later tonight and compare sizes.

 

On that note, has anyone had any success emailing the Levis archivists for information?  My 501s are single-stitch, "6" stamp, selvedge, small-"e", WITH pocket-printed washing instructions.  All other pocket-print 501s I've seen are big-"E" models, mine is the only one I've ever seen with this combination.  One possibility is that they're fake, but seeing them in the flesh you'd never think so as all other details are correct;  the other possibility is that they are a rare transitional model when one factory ran out of big-E tags and started up the little-Es.

[setterman]

I think the rise is still a little short compared to vintage jeans, but closer to the real thing than the '78s were. Overall proportions look good. Though that $285 price tag.... that's a no go, especially when a lot of Japanese brands can now be picked up for $160 to $230.

Edited December 30, 2016 by setterman

[bod]

Just looked at the measurements on unionmade, thighs a bit fuller than the 66, I'm interested!

[aho]

 

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

so nice,

how is the leatherlike? crispy or soft as new?

are you going to where these?

[keybladehero]

What do you think of japanese repro brands like resolute/denime/warehouse/full count/ooe yofukuten? Do they make better repros than LVC?

[Flash]

What do you think of japanese repro brands like resolute/denime/warehouse/full count/ooe yofukuten? Do they make better repros than LVC?

but the real question is ....... What do you think of japanese repro brands like resolute/denime/warehouse/full count/ooe yofukuten? Do they make better repros than LVC?

[keybladehero]

I think japanese mills make better fabrics than cone mills so yes I think Japanese repro are better. Yes I am biased but I would like to learn more about LVC fan opinions. 

[Fooleo]

Sounds like the age old question here.... I think the fair argument can be made that Japanese repros are most pleasing to a purist, who wants exact spec details, since it appears LVC makes theirs with exact specs just considered, also aiming to make a jean that an average consumer might be interested in. I feel like Japanese repro brands are pretty aware they make an obscure (to avg consumer) product, but would rather make fewer of the best possible, rather than just sell more. Not knocking LVC in any way, just a thought

[Paul T]

I think japanese mills make better fabrics than cone mills so yes I think Japanese repro are better. Yes I am biased but I would like to learn more about LVC fan opinions. 

Which Japanese fabrics have you worn in? And which Cone fabrics have you compared them to?

i've worn in the TCB 50s, which have to be among the best Japanese 50s repros. It's a close call between that fabric and the LVC. They're both different interpretations of a 50s look, and there are definitely respects in which the Cone fabric is better (TCB construction is better, but there are errors there too). They're both great jeans and I think it would be shallow to say either one is hands-down better. If anything is consistently better for repros, it's the cotton rather than cotton-poly stitching (plus rayon tabs). But that comes at a price, as you'll see from my year-old TCB pix.

I've worn in fabrics from Nihon Menpu, Studio Artisan, Full Count, Samurai and others, plus original Levi's, and some of them are definitely better than some LVC. Yet I'd say the Cone loomstate from the Roy contest is equal to or perhaps better than any of the above. It's the only fabric I can think of that looks great after a few weeks, and after a year or two. It's essentially the same as the LVC 1915 fabric.

 

So I'm suspicious of potted opinions, I'd rather see specific ones.

 

Edited January 1, 2017 by Paul T

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

long time i also thought that japenese denim is better(and still is for certain denim), but last year cone started to produce new vintage denims(1890, 1915) that are really worth a look, also the first collection of LVC from the late 90s had very nice denims.(anyone know if this was cone denim?).

japenese brands are very interesting when it comes to repros from the 1940s-1950s, but for all other decades LVC is more interesting, since only LVC does so many variations in styles, beginning from the ,pantalloons, knappave...

but this only my humble opinion.

Edited January 1, 2017 by Sympathy-For-The-Denim

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

haha, Paul T, we both wrote the nearly the same about cone, just saw it when i finished my text.

[Paul T]

I'd also add that having been through three pairs, I've never really liked the LVC 1947 denim. But I agree with Sympathy's point - LVC offer fantastic variety, right down to one-pocket pairs, duck pullovers, three-pleat jackets. That's where much of the charm is.

I will have to check on that new 1915 denim to see if it's a different yarn etc.

For newbies, a potted Cone fabric review.

* 1880s: looks really promising, for Cone loomstate, altho we've yet to see examples fully worn in.
1890s: (Kurabo) good.

1901 (Kurabo) good. With this and the 1890 they're both really hard to wear-in for various reasons and you have to wear them reall hard
1922 201 (Kurabo, only rarely available) fantastic texture but hard to make look good, as it wears so slowly.
* 1915 (Cone) fantastic. Slightly greencast, looks great hardly worn, and knackered.
1933 (Cone) OK. Very blue and hard to wear in with much contrast.
1937 (Cone) better than 1933 but not earth-shattering
* 1944 (Cone) lovely, slightly greencast, looks great hardly worn and fantastic fully-worn

1947 (cone). I think this is poor. Looks ok only, with no mid tones or microcontrast.

* 1955 (Cone) for me a real highlight. Subtler with less slub than many Japanese repros which exaggerate the look
1966 (Cone) Reputed to be among the best. See link here. Ask me in a year.
I haven't tried the later ones yet.

Asterisked fabrics, though we have to wait for results for 1880s, and possibly the 66, are great. You can be pretty sure of terrific results (as of course you can with many Japanese repros) .

Edited January 1, 2017 by Paul T

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

in summer i wore in the current 1915 version, this is how they have developed in few month, along with one wash.

but right now it´s too cold to wear em, for the denim is very lightweighted.

 

sorry for the bad pics, they light here is quite gloomy.

 

Edited January 1, 2017 by Sympathy-For-The-Denim

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

Happy NEW YEAR btw.

[xchen]

Year of the cock

[Paul T]

Here's a comparison of one of my faouvrite Japanese 66-influence jeans, the Full Cont 1108, with an original pair of Levi's, the 302 kids' jeans, from 1969 or so. The Levi's were worn in pretty much the same, using modern detergents.

This period of Levi's is the slubbiest they came, due to the Magnadraft effect. Not how the Full Count are distinctly slubbier, and how the slub looks different. Lovely-looking denim, but a reinterpretation of the Cone look rather than a replication.

Take a really good look at the Cone. You'll see there aren't continuous areas of slubbing over an inch or so - the slubs fade in and out. Whereas on the Full Count, the slub is more or less continuous. Full Count are quite smooth for Japanese vintage-style jeans. Overall, it would be fiar to generalise that Japanese repros are slubbier than originals, whereas the LVC repros are more subtle. Which looks nicer is subjective.

I'd be suspicious of anyone making generalisations about which is better than the other, they're both great, and of course the original are the standard by which others tend to be measured.

Edited January 1, 2017 by Paul T

[Paul T]

And here are some quick and dirty shots of some of my fave 50s repros, the TCB50, with another fave, the LVC. TCB are always on the left.
There is slightly more puckering on the TCB yoke, and the train tracks are nicer. Thread is more to my taste, too. The LVC does a better job of the yoke construction - the TCB is missing the 'stagger'. Note the distinct difference in the fabrics. I like both. For the original jeans, there would have been less slub than on the 60s pair above.





This gives a good idea of the difference in fabrics. I should have gone in closer, though. The TCB is a bit gritter and slubbier.



 

[keybladehero]

Hey Paul, thanks for the detailed explanation. Took me quite a while to digest but the knowledge you shared is very interesting. To be honest I have not experience Japanese Repro brands. I am the typical iron heart, pbj, momotaro, oni kind of guy. I always thought why bother reproducing the old levis stuff when we can make higher quality jeans that is more durable and better synthetic indigo dye. Besides better fabric, we can add in additional details such as tucked and raised belt loops like iron heart jeans, lined back pockets, polycore stitching that the original Levis didn't have.

Until 2 days ago in a local raw denim shop, the salesman introduced me to Resolute jeans and told me "purist" prefer this brand more than iron heart and samurai. That thrown me into confusion because it didn't have hidden rivets, just 13oz fabric, very little irregularities and slub compared to Oni, no peek-a-boo selvedge coin pocket....and a cheap paper patch that turned me off! That pair of jeans doesn't seems special at all..... how can purist prefer this brand more than over-engineered typical brands like iron heart jeans.

 

Then later he claimed Resolute makes the most accurate repro ever.....even more accurate than Levis in terms of fabric and stitch by stitch. So this got me into wondering..... not just Resolute, but how did other Japanese repro brands fare with LVC? Are they actually better or worse than LVC? 

 

From the photos you share, in my opinion I think the differences are quite subtle. If I were to get a repro jeans, I would choose LVC even if Japanese repro brands are better; I think at most it would be just a little bit better but in exchange I get a red tab and arcuate. 

 

This is  the densest raw denim yet very interesting topic I ever came across. I'm still wondering why purist prefer repros over modern japanese jeans.... so far the most reasonable answer I gotten from is they like the cut because it's comfortable and the fabric weight is not ridiculously heavy for mobility. But I'm not too satisfied with the answers because modern jeans imo can be pretty comfy too and not all of them are heavy weight.