Levi's Vintage Clothing

[beautiful_FrEaK]

It's all about preference and personal taste...and most of the time it's hard or impossible to explain taste. And there are so many factors which contribute to what jeans we chose. 

 

And also, you don't have to believe every word a salesman tells you I would rather trust Paul T here when he says that the LVC 60s repro is truer to the original than let's say Resolute  (which might be a bit exaggerated in terms of twill pronunciation on the denim).

 

It's perfectly fine that you are an Ironheart, PBJ or Oni guy. Nothing wrong with that.

And people don't necessarily chose repro jeans because they are "better". They just resemble the vintage feeling better because that's what they try to achieve. With all the benefits and disadvantages.

 

And in terms of best Levi's repro out there, you might want to check out Conner's Sewing Factory  

[setterman]

if you don't want to put a pair of jeans on in the morning, doesn't matter how accurate a reproduction they are or the name on the label.

[aho]

Sir Paul dropping bombs...Don't trust everything salesmen tell you but definitely listen to Paul as he quite literally "wrote the book"!

Flattery aside, it's all a matter of personal interest and preference. Everything is objecive and all repros are just different interpretations of subtle details, differences and nuances that some brands prefer to highlight than others. In the end, nothing is more accurate than the originals, which even differ in detail year to yesr, factory to factory, even within the same umbrella Levi's brand.

Each brand seeks to repro based on their own visions: LVC more a blanket reminder of their storied past, errors here and there on certain models, but certainly strong on it's own merits and brand name recognition. I'd also point to Warehouse, Conners Sewing Factory, TCB, Full Count as strong interpretations.

As to why repro over modern? Some prefer vintage styling, others like the historical detailing and evoked link to the past, some may even like the mysticism of it all. But it's really just whatever speaks to you. If it was really all just about durability and toughness, we may as well wear Carharts or basic Lee or Wrangler from the mall or local Walmart. Certainly more cost effective! And of course technology and manufacturing becomes (hopefully) more efficient and better produced as time moves on. For repro heads, the turn to mass production through the 60s and onward is where interpretted quality starts falling, and signifies that era repro brands aim to replicate. Is it any better than modern cuts in more interestig fabrics and reinforcements? Up to you to decide, but at our niche level, all brands will be "better" or at least more interesting than mall brands, as we are the niche demographic.

That said, I love cone and don't get all the hate. Many say their fabric is flat, dull, without character. I'd argue otherwise and argue there's more to "nice" fabric then visual character and slub, but again, all depends on what one is personally looking for!

And finally, the jeans I posted a page back were deadstock from the late 60s (67ish). Incredibly similar to the pair of Resolutes I just purchased. Will have to do a side to side comparison sometime, though I already threw the deadstock into my "Vault"... lol

[edmond]

Paul hwo do i buy your book? We need your signagure innit

[setterman]

 In the end, nothing is more accurate than the originals, which even differ in detail year to yesr, factory to factory, even within the same umbrella Levi's brand.

 

That's the thing to remember, in the end, regardless of who makes them, they're not the real thing.  They're all just an "idea", and they all have some sort of shortcoming.  Some might be a better idea than others, and that may play a role in how you feel about wearing them, but in the end they're never going to be the real thing.  Sufu can go round and round about historical accuracy, but in the end if they aren't flattering, aren't comfortable, don't fit your style or wardrobe, or you aren't enthusiastic about the denim they're made of, their historical accuracy is irrelevant.  If you're hung up on historical accuracy, when it comes to post 1941 Levis style jeans you could probably successfully put the '55 and '66 up against any of the Japanese offerings.  

[Paul T]

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.

 

I've posted before about the accuracy of some repros. One key aspect of the construction is what's known as the "stagger". This is the point on the yoke where the two lines of stitching meet up.

1920s jeans varied quite a lot, but the two lines of stitching would generally meet up at the yoke, whereas on 50s jeans one sits above the other (it's thought to be a more elegant construction as the two halves of the yoke are therefore symmetrical).

LVC nearly always get this more right than Japanese repros. But I just noticed that 1915 LVC is incorrect. It has a 1950s-style construction. (ironically, my 1950s TCB have a more 1920s-style construction!)

Here's inoue-san's 1920s example.

 

 

More pics of Inoue's 501's

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the context of this overall discussion, I think there are so many variables that we all have to choose what we like best. My main point above, though, is that dismissing Cone is shallow, as their fabric is easily on a par with Japanese.

Keybladehero, I'd probably agree with your salesman, though. Resolute are generally higher spec than Samurai. Samurai have nice cuts, but their denim is designed to fade quickly, so it's generally not as subtle or interesting as that from many of their Japanese rivals. SImilarly, Ironheart's success is based on super-heavy fabrics - again, a different aesthetic.

Here's

Edited January 2, 2017 by Paul T

[MileHighEvertonian]

This "stagger" that Paul T is discussing (didn't know that term, thanks!), appears prominently on my SC 47s. Whether it's part of the intended aesthetic or not, I think it plays off and enhances the orange thread/lemon thread combination. Oddly, the stagger isn't there on my Okis, though those certainly aren't really repros.

[orchestrion]

Couple quick questions: Is all LVC denim unsanforized, even the "rinsed" pairs? Anyone with rinsed LVCs experience much shrinkage post-wash?

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

The few pairs that are sanforized are of the orange tab collection, to name 606, 605, 646, 615, 517. The only sanforized Red Tab is the 505.

To me rinsed jeans always look nearly slightly shrunken, but of course one rinse can´t take all shrinkage, so I´d presume that these will shrink further with a couple of washes.

[setterman]

551ZXX is sanforized too.

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

thanks setterman, forgot the 551zxx, as it was the predecessor of the 505 and a neat piece of denim, due to the details.

wasn´t the womens 701 sanforized aswell?

Edited January 3, 2017 by Sympathy-For-The-Denim

[orchestrion]

Would it be wise to size up on the rinsed version of the 1947 501?

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

@Paul T, these 1920s are incredible beautiful, the vertical texture and just a hint of a green cast, or does it come from

the light. but wasn´t cone mills the 1st to use synthetic indigo?

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

saw the current version of the 1947 rinsed, and these seam a little bit on the bigger size. as long as you can try em on, buy em true to size waist like, since it always stretches back.

[Paul T]

@Paul T, these 1920s are incredible beautiful, the vertical texture and just a hint of a green cast, or does it come from

the light. but wasn´t cone mills the 1st to use synthetic indigo?

They do look greencast to me, but my guess is that they're more likely to be synthetic indigo. There was a lot of variation in the dye-jobs at the time, I can't begin to understand it all, and the guru of such matters, Ralph Tharpe, couldn't quite say what process was used when or why one pair looked different to another. Cone had to have used natural indigo at some point but I couldn't say when.

In fact it's hard even now to generalise how natural indigo fades simply because it's so variable; but for the natural indigo Levi's I've seen, I would guess they faded much more slowly, or rather simply crocked less -  hence you get more lap fades, but fewer whiskers. Inoue's pair does have reasonable whiskers, so again I'd guess it's more likely synthetic. I'll get Volvo to ask him what he thinks!

[orchestrion]

saw the current version of the 1947 rinsed, and these seam a little bit on the bigger size. as long as you can try em on, buy em true to size waist like, since it always stretches back.

Excellent, I bought TTS in the waist and they feel pretty good. I use to go TTS with my regular ole 501 STFs and did the same here. Thanks to all for the info! I'll try and get some pics up soon.

[setterman]

thanks setterman, forgot the 551zxx, as it was the predecessor of the 505 and a neat piece of denim, due to the details.

wasn´t the womens 701 sanforized aswell?

 

 

I think the 701 was sanforized too.

 

The 551ZXX is IMO, one of LVC's better recent offerings.  I think they got a little carried away with the back pockets though (too big/tall, and riding too low), but over all a pretty decent take on that jean (at one point I'd considered wearing a pair for the DWC).  Pretty sure the denim is a sanforized version of the denim used in the '54 501ZXX.  Surprising amount of slubbiness and broken yarns.  Shrinks about 1" at the waist and inseam.  

 

I've discovered with my '47s and the 551ZXX, the dryer helps them.  Last wash with the '47s I turned up the heat a little in the washer, and tossed them in the dryer.  Definitely helped the denim bloom, and feel thicker. Still nothing to write home about, but has less of that flat, papery, lifelessness to it.  Love the cut though, so I picked up it's twin the Warehouse 800.         

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

i don´t want to bother you setterman, but some pics of the result from dryer of both pairs would be nice. do you have the current 551zxx or the 1st valencia street edition?

[setterman]

I have both pairs of 551ZXX, though haven't dried the Valencia St pair. Can try photographing, but I'm not sure the change brought about by the dryer is anything the camera can catch. The naked eye sees it, and there's definitely a change in the feel. I'd probably washed the 47s four or five times prior, but the dryer tightened up the weave and lost a little over another 1/4" of inseam. That surprised me because I figured they were done.

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

i just wonder, because to me the denim of the current version looks pretty slick and a bit boring. this is why i refused getting these...

[setterman]

You referring to the 47s? Yeah, just compared them to the newer 551ZXX and a pair of '44s from 2008ish, and the 47s are pretty underwhelming (especially after wearing my new 800s the past week). Dryer improved them (nothing the camera sees) but they're still at the back of the pack, only ahead of the denim used in my '33s. The '44s though... that's the denim they should be using in the '47s. Feels beefier, and the way they're fading, even with lots of washer and dryer time this hunting season (ticks), seems very appropriate for a pair 40s Levi's.

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

i am sorry, for i was referring to the 551zxx, but i see it the way like you with the '47s. if i would want new '47 i would go with the current rinsed version, it´s fury and has a nice feal. the origin wouldn´t bother me.

[mpukas]

derailing current discussion... 

 

LVC now has a 1976 501 cut, offered at Union Made Goods. I'm not at all into historically accurate repro anything, but this cut looks spot on in many regards for what I, and I think many fellas, am/are looking for. Putting aside opinions about the denim, the details and size proportions look great.

 

(I'm going to stop calling the 5th pocket a coin pocket, as it's commonly called these days, and call it a watch pocket, as that is more accurately what it was originally designed and used for. Hence, pocket watches, which was attached on a chain and could be pulled out via that chain. NOBODY EVER put coins in that pocket. It's too small to put anything small in and expect to get it out with your fingers. About the only purpose it serves in today's world is for a folding knife with a clip. Of course, there are some folks out there who do find it useful for some things; I don't.) 

 

What strikes me the most is;

• the width of the waist band - it's wide, which help alleviate the waist band rolling, and just looks better. 
• length of the belt loops - they're tall to accommodate a wide, thick belt (1.75"+). 
• proportions and placement of watch pocket and front pockets - the top of the watch pocket is set at the bottom of the belt loops so that when a wide thick belt is worn, the watch pocket could still be accessed, if desired; the top of the front pockets is cut low enough below the belt loops and top of the watch pocket so they are easily accessible and functional.  
• Assuming normal pocket bag depth (whatever that is), having articles in your pockets will put them lower down the torso onto the upper thigh, and not at the crease in you hips when sitting. 
• The rise looks just right at the high end of medium, with a four button fly and not three; and the bottom button not being at the crotch seam. 
• The proportions of the waist band -to- hip -to- thigh -to- knee -to- hem looks great. The hips don't flare to have saddle bags but aren't too tight, the thighs look roomy without being baggy, the taper is just enough without being carrot-like, and the hem width is just narrow enough to still fit over pull-on boots and not be flapping in the wind. They could be worn cuffed or stacked and look appealing either way. 

 

 

Of course, everything I've just said is pure speculation based on the pic, as I have not tried them on. Although I've never been interested in buying a pair of LVC because of the price and less-than-stellar-feedback I've read, this model is very tempting. If it was a heavy weight, more interesting denim I would be all in. 

 

The things I've highlighted above are what bug me the most about nearly every pair of Japan brand jeans I own/have owned. For the most part, pockets are a big issue. IH's pockets are cut too high and tight, and the pocket bags are are (edit) not deep enough. TFH look to be even worse. Just grab a pic from vendor of the front of TFH jeans, and notice the waist band width, belt loop height, watch pocket and front pocket locations. They're all too small and too tight. I don't get it. 

 

Every Japanese denim brand, as well as their retailers and collaborators, need to take a good look at these jeans and reevaluate some of their own details and proportions. Denim jeans are and have always been the most utilitarian of all garments. Function out of necessity came first. Never was there in the late 1800's a miner, railroad engineer, or ranch hand who was worried that washing his jeans in warm water with detergent would adversely affect his sic fades. Even in this niche SuFu world of denim experts, I fear there is far too much emphasis aesthetics and meaningless minuscule details at the cost of basic functionality being largely lost. And yeah, I'm not throwing stones in glass houses, I know I'm part of that problem too. 

Edited January 4, 2017 by mpukas

[Iron Horse]

and the pocket bags are too low. 

 

Not trying to be a wise guy, but what do you mean by this, for clarification's sake? The bags are too long? Just interested.

[Fooleo]

I am curious if the 76 was brought around specifically for the Beams anniversary last year, or if LVC already had the plan and made it a beneficial coincidence... Seems like they're different enough than the last 70s model. Either way they're definitely on my radar as a potential cop too

Edited January 4, 2017 by Fooleo

[cool_hand]

this may have already been discussed but LVC have a new limited edition jean coming out for SS17. it will be based on a 1976 or 78 model and will be called the Mirrored Jean due to it's unique details, and it will be left hand twill. sorry my details are a little vague but I am sure someone more knowledgeable than me can fill in all the pieces as I'd be interested to have what I've heard confirmed in more detail.

[aho]

mpukas, one thing to keep in mind for Japanese companies is that fortunately/unfortunately they are making jeans for the domestic Japanese market first, so sizing is necessarily smaller and not always a perfect "repro" of sizing specs. In particular, the aforementioned IH and TFH fall under their own umbrellas and are likely less subjugated to reproing, and focus largely on just making jeans how they want (if that's a fair statement). Still, interested to see someone wear/break in the new LVC's; Please volunteer!

[Broark]

I will say the measurements on the 1976 model at Union Made look pretty good.

Here's a link to the aforementioned 1976 Mirror Jeans, I think they look pretty interesting and fun.

And as someone who's left handed I think it'd be cool to have the coin pocket on the left hand side!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/paulandwilliams/29249599133/in/album-72157674273246635/

[aho]

^That denim!

[Broark]

Depending on price I might consider grabbing a pair if I come across one!