Jump to content

Levi's Vintage Clothing


Recommended Posts

Some measurements from my brand new LVC 1976's:

Size: 36/36

Waist (pulled straight): 37.5"

Front rise: 13.0"

Hips (at halfway point of front rise): 43.5"

Thigh at crotch: 27.5"

Thigh 2" down from crotch: 26.0"

Knee (13" down from crotch): 20.75"

Hem: 17.5"

Inseam: 35.75"

 

Here are the raw measurements I took from my '66's, which I got last November:

Size: 36/34

waist: 36.5"

rise: 12.5"

inseam: 33.0"

thigh: 27" at crotch, 26" two inches down

20" at actual knee.

hem: 17.5"

And I took a hip measurement of 46" after two weeks of dry wear. I should have taken that when they were brand new, but I forgot. I'd say that the hips of these didn't stretch much vs. new, though, because this is a relaxed fit on me. That said, the waist stretched 1.5" in those two weeks. So maybe we can assume the hips of the '66's were originally 45" to 46".

My verdict: The '76's have a wider waist (by 1") and narrower hips (by about 2") than the '66's. When new, the '66's profile came out about 9" from waist to hips, while the '76's profile came out only 6" from waist to hips. Thus the two pairs have a pretty dramatically different waist to hip ratio. I.e. the '76's have a straighter profile in the upper block, while the '66's have a more relaxed-hips-and-drawn-in-waist profile. Even though it might be easy to think that these are basically the same cut, in fact, the '66 is a notably more old-fashioned cut than the '76. '66's are gonna be a better fit if you are thick-athletic, hourglass shaped, or otherwise bottom heavy, while '76's will better suit those with skinnier legs and butts, thin-athletic builds, and less of an hourglass shape. I have always had a much thicker lower body than upper body, and more of an hourglass shape rather than straight, so the '66's are a more natural fit on me. But I ordered the '76's big enough, so they'll be fine. Just a different look.

I haven't done any shrinking of the pants yet, and I won't for a while, so we'll have to wait to see where these settle in over the years.

Edited by 428CJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My LVC Leather Jacket. My question is an good suggestions on fixing lining with a more durable one. I've worn the crap out of it an would love replace with a more durable one and also reinforce the middle back stiching. Ideas?IMG_6173.thumb.jpg.8ddc77b4002f13bde093fe4022c0574e.jpgIMG_6174.thumb.jpg.27cf3f92bf571b76d85afaf21d203d13.jpgIMG_6175.thumb.jpg.c7bd186c9cbe773d2e6c4e7a1a0ae6a8.jpgIMG_6172.thumb.jpg.d564710f1006a6060468dce9647d6623.jpgIMG_6169.thumb.jpg.df9c1b9bc41f31ffb1f422ce25a026f8.jpgIMG_6170.thumb.jpg.4e0096dc8407bdfd20a72d7ea2fc62e2.jpgIMG_6171.thumb.jpg.2775bda9b35eebc4a640f711eecb3517.jpgIMG_6168.thumb.jpg.4b98627ef6eccde2b5e3df340320c661.jpg

 

 

Edited by VDC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/21/2018 at 1:00 AM, VDC said:

My LVC duck. Worn 15 times, no washes

 

speaking of ducks

worn a lot (really hard to say how much as most of the wearings took place years ago), washed also a lot

photos don't do them justice, but they've pretty much faded and color variation is more visible in person. don't wear them much this days.

YR5efl9.jpg?1

vvsYtCP.jpg?1

H8CVicT.jpg?1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ulu said:

Hey guys, these are 76s pre soak, u think the inseams will be long enough for me post soak???

I think you'd be better off going up a size in inseam, just to play it safe.

But if you like a breakless inseam, you'll probably be fine. Just wash infrequently, wash cold, and always air dry.

Edited by 428CJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello folks, I was wondering if any of the knowledgeable people here would be able to help me with an ID of these please.

I came across what looks to be a more recent run of the 505-0217 (has a Levi's engraving on a YKK zipper), but can't put a finger on the date of manufacture, whether it's from the LVC line (it features the big 'E' on the red tag with a registered symbol), and what sort of selvedge fabric it uses. The back paper/cardboard tag has an "XX" on it, but presume it's sanforized given the use of a zipper fly. The single bronze popper button has no factory code behind it, but the tag suggests manufacture in USA. The pocket bags do not feature the "Levi's" print, which seems to indicate it's not from the current LVC line. The selvedge line features red threading. And the 36" inseam does look longer than the usual 32-34" inseams that I see.

Would shrinkage be expected to be 3% at the very most on the first wash? Does anyone have broken-in, faded in examples of this fabric?

Hope the photos are enough, and would be glad to hear information from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SFTD is right, it's Kaihara Sanforized, the same fabric essentially that's traditionally used for the 557 jacket. My experience of this fabric is that you won't get significant shrinking in the waist, although they might shrink by an inch in length over a couple of years. That feature gives a good idea of the fades, although I wouldn't bother followng Jonas's tactic of adding vinegar to the wash as it's based on a misunderstanding of chemistry.

I presume Kaihara will be making much more Levi's fabric from next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/07/2018 at 5:37 PM, Sympathy-For-The-Denim said:

Hi there, the tag tells us that these werde made for the spring/summer season 2008 of LVC.

The zipper is irregular though. The denim of japenese production (kaihara), barely shrinks at all, and is able to achieve sick fades.

https://www.ropedye.com/2012/12/1967-505/

 

On 07/07/2018 at 9:56 PM, Paul T said:

SFTD is right, it's Kaihara Sanforized, the same fabric essentially that's traditionally used for the 557 jacket. My experience of this fabric is that you won't get significant shrinking in the waist, although they might shrink by an inch in length over a couple of years. That feature gives a good idea of the fades, although I wouldn't bother followng Jonas's tactic of adding vinegar to the wash as it's based on a misunderstanding of chemistry.

I presume Kaihara will be making much more Levi's fabric from next year.

Thanks so much for both of your responses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mongmeohotdau814 said:

Currently I am having a rigid 501STF pair that is bought on the levis homepage, should I know, in the LVC collection, 
which pair looks the same as my 501 STF pair?


 

I have several recent 501 STFs, and my LVCs are 1880, 1915, 1933, 1944, 1955, 1966, and 1976. Based on my actual measurements from these pairs, I'd say the 1966 is the closest cut to the current run-of-the-mill 501 STFs. The cuts are, in fact, near identical on my pairs.

Edited by 428CJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10.7.2018 at 5:47 AM, kicks79 said:

Some evolution pics of my 76s shot on iphone.

The denim seems slow to fade. This is around five months worth of wear and two washes, one soak.

 

LVC 1976 1.jpg

LVC 1976 2.jpg

I find them to fade medium fast. My oldest 1976 is from last November and gets worn about every second day (office job) for the entire day. In the current summer heat I wash them after 8 or 9 wears. They have developed a nice bright blue base color with contrast fades on higher friction points like the front pockets, some belt loops, crutch and the fly. The hems are beginning to become slightly threadbare in the back. I'll wear them cuffed when that effect becomes stronger in two months or so. These trousers seem to be good for almost another year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/7/2018 at 01:06, 428CJ said:

Tôi có một số STF gần đây, và LVC của tôi là 1880, 1915, 1933, 1944, 1955, 1966 và 1976. Dựa trên số đo thực tế của tôi từ các cặp này, tôi cho rằng năm 1966 là sự cắt giảm gần nhất với dòng chảy hiện tại STFs 501 của các nhà máy. Các vết cắt, trên thực tế, gần giống hệt nhau trên cặp của tôi.

 

thank you very much, i will try a pair of 66 ', can i ask some sizing questions ?

My true waist when measured on a worn pair (BIG flat method) is 33 inches

What size i can go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Paul T said:

Tôi đã đi kích thước thực tế cho tôi, mà sẽ là 33, nhưng nếu bạn chỉ có thể nhận được 32 hoặc 34, đi cho sau này. Mảnh gỗ ở thắt lưng khi chúng khô ráo sau lần xả đầu tiên trong máy. Ghế ngồi và đùi đủ rộng để làm cho TTS hoạt động.

Your actual waist is measured in any way bro, I'm measuring the flatness of an older pair, 
the result is 33 inches, measured according to the body's levis (where the minimum waist) is 32.5 inches.
Still confused about the way Levis VC measured the waist, they are not very clear

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mongmeohotdau814 said:

 

thank you very much, i will try a pair of 66 ', can i ask some sizing questions ?

My true waist when measured on a worn pair (BIG flat method) is 33 inches

What size i can go?

I don't have any experience with size 33, but I can tell you the following about size 36:

When new: 36.5" waist, measured with front and rear of waistband held together flatly (no dip in waistband), then doubled.

After 2 weeks of dry wear: 38", measured the same way.

I have worn them past the two week mark, but the waistband has not stretched any farther than 38".

I have not shrunk them yet, hot or cold; they are still raw. I assume the waistband will shrink a bit when washed, but will end up stretching back out to 37" or 38" in the end.

They are a roomy cut, so you can afford to size down, even accounting for shrinkage.

Given all this, I would size down 2 inches for the snug end of a regular fit, size down 1 inch for the relaxed end of a regular fit, and buy true to size for a relaxed fit.

I have a 36"–37" actual measured waist, depending on the day (not the high hips – the actual waist, as in at the belly button). I also have relatively large thighs and butt (26.5" and 44", respectively). I bought mine in size 36 to be worn with a relaxed fit. Pre shrinking, they are relaxed. Post shrinking, they will be a little bit more snug, but still a relaxed feeling fit. I I had wanted a regular fit, I would have bought a size 34 instead.

Here's how my TTS '66's fit the first day I wore them. They did not hug my thighs in the slightest (and now they are stretched out even more, after being worn for several weeks).

LVC1966-1.thumb.jpg.ae2ea3fb7523a4e8b8c072e345a08e41.jpg.ddf139d366ea0d03f9678a5042d4e37c.jpg

Edited by 428CJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think advising someone on sizing when you haven't washed seems over-optimistic. Jeans shrink - that's a physical reality. the waist will stretch to pre-wash size, but the thighs won't.

32 waist are true to size for current production, I suspect 33 are too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am, of course, aware that jeans shrink. My above judgment of the '66's fit accounts for that, and is based on plenty of pairs of jeans shrunk, stretched, and what have you. My 1966 36's were purchased TTS, and they measured within half an inch of tag size when new. I call that accurate sizing, as half an inch isn't that bad of a deviation from label size.

Point being, I did not say the '66's don't come out of the bag true to size. I was saying it's a relaxed cut, and that the waist has stretched 1.5 inches since new, making it 2" over tag size in the waistband. The '66 cut has a drawn in waistband, so when you get the right waistband diameter, the cut fits more loosely than most other jeans. (Other LVCs have larger waistbands at tag size 36 IME; my '66's are the closest to actual tag size. The other tag size 36's were at least 37" when new, and some were 38" when new. E.g. my size 36 '77's were 37.5 and my size 36 1915's were 38".)

I still have plenty of room in the '66's after wearing dry (as in they're now a bit saggy and the 27" thighs barely even touch my legs). That's with me being bigger thighed and bigger butted than most. I can't imagine these jeans would be anything short of a bit of a baggy fit when sized TTS on anyone with a more typical thigh-to-waist ratio. Of course they shrink pretty permanently in the thighs, etc...but shrinkage from a relaxed thigh/butt fit (as these have) ends up being no tighter than the looser end of a regular fit. And the fact remains that the jeans are now 2 inches over tag size in the waist (38") prior to shrinkage, and they are going to shrink from there (not from the original 36.5"), and then stretch out yet again. There is no way these jeans will ever get tight on me, even washing hot, and no way they will ever end up with the waist settling at original size (36.5") from 38" after shrinking then wearing. They will probably shrink down to about the original waist size, then stretch back out to 38" or so, while the thighs of the jeans might lose an inch or an inch and a half, and end up actually touching just the tops of my thighs just a bit, placing them on the relaxed end of a regular fit.

I know you are extremely knowledgeable, and I don't mean to get into a debate with your, which I will surely "lose." But I do know how to size my pants for my body, unsanforized or otherwise, and that is all I shared – what I would do. If I spend years shrinking these, and they end up too tight for me, I will gladly post my results, and retract these statements. But I can't imagine these jeans will be some crazy wild card or something, that acts much different than most STF denim I have encountered. After years of trial and error, unsanforized denim is pretty predictable to me, and I have never encountered said wild card material that makes the jeans unwearable in the end. I usually account for the worst case scenario when buying and washing it (i.e. lean large when sizing, and lean cold at first when washing).

So, again, I would size down 1 or 2 for a regular fit in the end, and buy TTS for a relaxed (but not baggy) fit in the end. Nothing overly optimistic about that, and, hell, it's not even "advising." It's just "what I would do."

It's also worth noting that there is a range of about 5–6 sizes of 501's that I routinely wear, depending on the fit I want. I have a 36" measured waist, and I wear 501's with actual waist sizes of 34" to 39". Outside of the extremes of off-true sizing, there really isn't a bad fit for a 501, be it tight or loose. So it isn't like it's a bloody disaster if a pair ends up a bit tighter or looser than one might expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

50 minutes ago, 428CJ said:

I am, of course, aware that jeans shrink..

So, again, I would size down 1 or 2 for a regular fit in the end, and buy TTS for a relaxed (but not baggy) fit in the end.'

Sure, all of our experience is different. I don't think there's many people here who recommend actually downsizing from their true waist on the 66 though, I'd be interested to see others' experience. I think it's reasonable that, if someone's intending to do downsize, there should be a health warning. Please do post your fit pics after a couple of washes, will be interesting to see how it turns out.

OP: do check on actual waist size of the pair you're buying, though, there seems to be variation over the last couple years. This pair here is 2016 I think.

My 2016  32 tag '  66 have stretched and are still at around the original waist size, around 32 1/2. The real issue for the OP is the thighs, here's a measurement to give an idea.

DSC05092.thumb.jpg.163d4098be2f18a7e33f8c96053c8f1f.jpgwaist.thumb.jpg.43b602b4afad40a2a2f31c3a047c947e.jpg

 

Edited by Paul T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My experience with the 66s was that although they are larger in most measurements compared to the 76s. The actual waist was slightly smaller than the same size in the 76s. So i could wear 30" in the 76, but then the 30" in the 66 was too tight in the waist. I should have copped a 31" to make them work for me. So personally I could not advise sizing down in the 66s.

 

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...