Jump to content

Levi's Vintage Clothing


Recommended Posts

(Cone) triple pleat owners - have you noticed much shrinkage from a 30C wash? I bought mine a few years ago (size M) but haven’t worn it due to an opportune purchase of a TCB 30s jacket. I tried it on today and fear it may be too small If it shrinks much. 
I understand it should shrink in the body width rather than the length due to the way it is constructed with the warp running across rather than down. I can handle a bit of shrinkage there but not much in the body or sleeves.

I may be better off seeking a swap with a size L - long shot, I know...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Paul, do you think I’ll be safe if I just stick to handwash only?

Also, is it dyed with natural indigo? The label doesn’t mention it but the colour is so vivid and vibrant, it certainly looks to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. I am not sure how much mine shrank from raw to soak. But it was from soak to machine wash that there seemed to be a big change. It was dirty and folks on here told me off and to wash it properly. I don't like it quite as much now, although the fade is good. It's synthetic indigo. If you do decide to keep I reckon cold handwash only is the way.

The natural indigo 1880s are actually quite dark and purple in comparison. They're showing a bit of crocking already after only a couple of months.

Edited by Paul T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks chapsters , I think I’ll accept the cold wash challenge. It’ll be new territory for me as a 40C machine wash is de rigeur for my denim togs. Won’t be for a good while though as my TCB 30s still needs a lot of breaking in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel very lucky to have got a rigid one and a pre-washed one, both in XL. The pre-washed one is for dyeing, and I'm hoping the rigid one fits OK being washed cold throughout its life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Maynard Friedman I recently sold my Triple Pleat because it became too small after washing. My M size after hot soak/hot machine wash, then subsequent cold machine washes ended up with the following measurements. I believe this was just the flat measurements, i.e., I didn't stretch out the pleats.

Pit-to-pit: 51.25cm (20.2")
Shoulder-to-shoulder: 45.25cm (17.8")
Sleeve: 60.25cm (23.7")
Back length: 54cm (21.3")

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks @propellerbeanie - this looks like it may be lower rise and slimmer than the (imho excellent) 1976 model. Interestingly, LVC produced the short-lived 1983 model about 10 years ago but I don’t think it proved to be popular. I’ve no idea how accurate the 1984 model is or what the denim will be like but the cynic in me thinks it might simply be a way for LVC to produce a new, slimmer cut in a modern style (no hidden rivets) to fill a gap in the market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Paul T said:

yay, great jeans, as we recently discussed, nice catch! Are they NWT and were therefore rinsed?

My recollection is that all the repros were, but could be wrong.

Yea. They are NWT. Tagged as “Broken Raw”. Some whiskering on the hip and knee areas, however they do seem that they might still have some more shrinkage left in them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I’ve posted this already over at denimbro, but hoping some of the resident LVC historians can weigh in on these: 

Factory codes date these March 2007. Everything about them are like my other early pairs of LVC 47’s, I can not find any errors or irregularities other than the selvedge line. Discuss:

 

 

E69785A3-BAF4-4B80-9559-9CEC7EA0F3A9.jpeg

8B4B1921-CF67-4B85-BF93-697CFC1C5011.jpeg

EB19741A-33F8-4FF6-B88C-B63FED7ECD53.jpeg

262E2827-5531-4A40-81E8-90EDBEC8764B.jpeg

B4ED60F8-BE83-4997-9831-6DFD3D89C07C.jpeg

1B6AEE63-DD30-4BBE-8DE8-79A07900B8BA.jpeg

413984E3-D922-4E86-9802-1692806D83F7.jpeg

067532D5-5708-4731-816C-A830748D0BE8.jpeg

84EBE296-7822-40D7-9820-FD9A709749BB.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An oddity/rarity/production error or even a sample? Perhaps the good folk at Cone threaded an indigo warp thread at the end of the loom (to mark the selvedge ID) instead of a red one. Could have been accidental or a practical joke. Does the denim itself seem similar to your other pairs of 47s)?

Edited by Maynard Friedman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maynard - I own two other pairs bookending these. One from fall of 06, one fall of 07. Every other detail is identical. Including the denim recipe. 
 

at first I thought they were fakes, but there’s nothing to indicate they’re anything (minus the blue line) but genuine. Then my thoughts turned towards samples, but again I’ve come across LVC samples they’re stamped as such. 
a total mystery to me. 

Edited by Robroy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Robroy maybe my mind is playing tricks on me but do the usual LVC models always this kind of code on the care tags: 1947 501 Jean ?

B4ED60F8-BE83-4997-9831-6DFD3D89C07C.thu

 

That looks odd to me. Maybe those weren't part of the LVC line but one of those special releases for the 1947 model they did some times?! When they are made in 2007, this could be some Levi's 60th annoversary 1947 stuff thing. Just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking along similar lines b_F, there’s no mention of Levi Strauss Europe, which you usually find on LVC labels. Here’s the label of my 55s from S3 2007. I’ve not seen that R button back before - is that common for LVC?

C4997547-944C-40F6-A51E-F4AA181D048E.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My initial thought was not fake, as fakes tend to be super-garish with dodgy bits of selvedge in odd places. Many years ago Urban Outfitters were selling the stereotypical fake LVC for c£200. I wrote to them but they didn’t do ‘owt about it - dirty ba*tards  

However @Robroy there’s an article on Loomstate about Thai fakes, which regrettably discusses a very similar pair. 

http://loomstate.blogspot.com/2012/06/fake-how-to-spot-counterfeit-vintage.html?m=1

I’d have to defer to the author of said blog for the final word here as he knows his stuff!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@beautiful_FrEaK here are my two other pairs from the same years span of each other. 
 

@unders I’ve read that blogpost before and have been hoping paulT would chime in. 
 I go back and forth on fakes or not. The problem I have with the fake theory is that every other detail is spot on. Why would you go through the hassle of getting EVERY other detail correct and then let that blue line slide. I’ve owned the offending pair, not since raw but maybe a cold soak. They’ve shrank to the exact same dimensions as the other two. Not only that but the way the waist band shrinks, stretches back out and hangs is the same (which is different than all my post 2007 Levis). 

9D40D0EF-002D-441D-8F86-E978E8932905.jpeg

13F06541-4009-4CEF-943D-55910F6CA16D.jpeg

88D362F9-CCA5-431F-A13D-7ED3C35FE523.jpeg

36EEA2C2-739B-4A7F-A815-34B1C814F067.jpeg

47128CFE-97FE-4464-8890-CF91389850DF.jpeg

E77407A3-9E3F-402D-AE49-F0DED459F7B6.jpeg

Edited by Robroy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maynard Friedman said:

The label reads 0913, which I think is September 2013, or possibly week 9 of 2013, ie early March.

Sept 13 sounds right to me

@robroy I'm certain your jeans [with the mis-mismatched salvage] are legit. R code is normal from 2004 or so. I think it's a simple operator error at Cone, dropping the wrong spool in (perhaps it's possible they used a wrong bit of fabric at the factory in which case you'd see different textures from each side of the leg). THey don't have any of the normal fake tell-tales.

@andyrcii sorry if it looked as if my post was directed at you. Nice jeans. All 505 fabric (sanforized) is Kaihara.

Edited by Paul T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah yeah, missed that. 
I don’t think I will be keeping them as they are too tight and I don’t really like the fit. 
 

I paid £95 + £9 postage and am currently trying to decide whether I should return them or sell them on.

Edited by andyrcii
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...