Jump to content
prince_boys18

Levi's Vintage Clothing

Recommended Posts

On 2/17/2018 at 11:19 AM, poonsc said:

hi all, considering to order my first LVC on site and looking for some size advice on 55 501 NEW RINSE version.
should i get the normal size as japanese jeans or needa size up on top for comfort fit? 
i normally wear a 33 in warehouse, 34 in tcb 50s and 20s, thank you!

my LVC were true to size, and I bought my actual waist size. The TCB are tagged with their post-shrink size, which allows for circa one inch of shrink. if tjey were raw Levi's and you fancied a slightly trimmer fit I would recommend 34 tag size. But unfortunately that doesn't help with the New Rinse pairs, as we don't really know how they're sized or cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dumb question but how does LVC compare to all the Japanese denim? Is LVC the real thing and the Japanese the repros?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DSC04506.thumb.jpg.50821a1ab36e6475da71747fef79d2b7.jpgDSC04505.thumb.jpg.d9728fc1e695d3cd6a287f5b79190a22.jpg

Not a dumb question at all.

One of the best Japanese Levi's repros is TCB - check out this page for a comparison of their 55 vs the Levi's one:

 Short answer: LVC fabric by Cone is truer to the original, plus the construction is more accurate. Often you find Japanese repros have better hardware and that's the case here - TCB has, for instance, much nicer thread, and the little red tag scrunches up much more like the original, and it has nicer puckering on the seams.

People often talk about the difference in the denim - and Japanese denim is mostly different from Cone, as most brands dial in far more imperfections (and many are designed to show wear more quickly). Not all do  - SDA for instance have fabric that's not over-slubby and wears more slowly, exactly like Cone. The Japanese, slubbier approach is a kind of idealised take on the fabric, which is valid in itself as it looks good. If you compare to the originals, the Levi's denim made by Cone is more accurate. But Cone's mill in Greensboro has just closed down, sadly. 

From memory, LVC's next run of repros will have Cone denim - then who knows what the next batch will look like? It's likely they'll use fabric by Kaihara, which is good, but some of the made-in-the-USA magic will undoubtedly be gone.

 

Edited by Paul T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Maynard Friedman My immediate response is to say the 1966 jeans. I think the denim is more comfortable to wear when the weather is hot, and I like the lighter colour. The fact that I haven't worn my 1976 jeans in a while may have also influenced this decision haha!

@bod So far, they feel the same fit-wise. They're a little bit tight, but they don't feel any tighter than after its previous wash (machine with no dryer). I might measure the inseam later to see if it has gotten shorter, but what I have noticed is that the left leg has twisted a bit more; at times, the outseam is very close to the centre of my knee!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Paul T said:

DSC04506.thumb.jpg.50821a1ab36e6475da71747fef79d2b7.jpgDSC04505.thumb.jpg.d9728fc1e695d3cd6a287f5b79190a22.jpg

Not a dumb question at all.

One of the best Japanese Levi's repros is TCB - check out this page for a comparison of their 55 vs the Levi's one:

 

Thanks. So the order of best possible jeans would be Vintage>LVC>TCB>Japanese Repros? At least, for the people who prefer vintage denim.

I guess, the actual Levi's Vintage jeans would be very very hard to find and very expensive. Logically, LVC would be in a position to create the best/most authentic repros. But I guess Japanese brands have raced ahead as LVC isn't able to deliver true vintage repros?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you've mentioned, actual vintage can be hard to find and quite expensive. If you're looking for the next best thing I'd advise you to just spend a while looking through different evo pics between the LVCs on this thread and those on the other threads dedicated to Japanese brands. Personally my own taste in what looks good has changed quite a bit so maybe right now you most prefer the 'authenticity' of LVC (stitching, Cone denim, arcuates, name). Maybe in a few weeks you'll decide you instead prefer the crinkly/marbled/slubby texture Japanese denim can provide. 

I used to turn up a nose at LVC but after panic-snagging a pair after the Cone mills news broke I'm glad I tried them out. I think I love both my Japanese denim and my LVC denim more because they have their differences. It would be boring if both sought only to copy vintage denim.

Edited by LQW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, i_denim said:

Thanks. So the order of best possible jeans would be Vintage>LVC>TCB>Japanese Repros? At least, for the people who prefer vintage denim.

I guess, the actual Levi's Vintage jeans would be very very hard to find and very expensive. Logically, LVC would be in a position to create the best/most authentic repros. But I guess Japanese brands have raced ahead as LVC isn't able to deliver true vintage repros?

A lot depends on which era of Levi's you fancy wearing; different brands have different takes on different eras, some of which are better than others.

I came to repro jeans from originals; I used to easily find late 60s, and in some case 50s jeans, for not much money. But I actually prefer repros, because you can size them correctly and I like wearing them in from new. Nearly all decent repro jeans (LVC, Warehouse, TCB, Ooe) are capable of looking great, in some ways better than the originals.

AS mentioned before, Japanese jeans often have better buttons and thread, and some of them have better attention to detail for the stitching etc (although that's a generalisation - for instance, TCB, who I love, get a nicer, scrunchier stitching on the back yoke, but actually get the construction wrong). Levi's have tended to have more generic details (a nylon rather than rayon red tag) because they figure the heritage of the denim and made in USA, plus of course Levi's arcuates, is a vital factor. But way more important than that is how they actually fit! All of them have taken one or two original jeans, extrapolated from those details, and in most cases adjusted the fit. And - to me - it's the fit that's the crucial aspect, as long as the overall details are at a certain level. So it's worth looking at what kind (or era) of fit you fancy, before focusing on brands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mandel9000 @bartlebyyphonics  thanks for the useful information! but i just can't hold my hand before the replies :D
 received the package 36x34 yesterday, waist is fine after 60 degree hot wash but the lower legs seems much fatty than my 20s, will try another hot wash tonight to get the max shrinkage 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Paul T said:

A lot depends on which era of Levi's you fancy wearing; different brands have different takes on different eras, some of which are better than others.

I came to repro jeans from originals; I used to easily find late 60s, and in some case 50s jeans, for not much money. But I actually prefer repros, because you can size them correctly and I like wearing them in from new. Nearly all decent repro jeans (LVC, Warehouse, TCB, Ooe) are capable of looking great, in some ways better than the originals.

AS mentioned before, Japanese jeans often have better buttons and thread, and some of them have better attention to detail for the stitching etc (although that's a generalisation - for instance, TCB, who I love, get a nicer, scrunchier stitching on the back yoke, but actually get the construction wrong). Levi's have tended to have more generic details (a nylon rather than rayon red tag) because they figure the heritage of the denim and made in USA, plus of course Levi's arcuates, is a vital factor. But way more important than that is how they actually fit! All of them have taken one or two original jeans, extrapolated from those details, and in most cases adjusted the fit. And - to me - it's the fit that's the crucial aspect, as long as the overall details are at a certain level. So it's worth looking at what kind (or era) of fit you fancy, before focusing on brands.

Let me ask this now before I acquire further denim wisdom.

If Levi's 501 from the past is THE pair of jeans that everybody wants and everybody is reproducing, then what exactly is wrong with the Levi's 501 currently being produced by Levi's?

Newbie here, don't kill me for asking this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, i_denim said:

Let me ask this now before I acquire further denim wisdom.

If Levi's 501 from the past is THE pair of jeans that everybody wants and everybody is reproducing, then what exactly is wrong with the Levi's 501 currently being produced by Levi's?

Newbie here, don't kill me for asking this.

It's a modern cut for one thing. The 501 has always varied in shape over the years.

Secondly, the mass-market model is made more cheaply, sewn overseas with indifferent fabric. That's what happens with a race to the bottom. NAFTA maybe had a lot to do with it, then there was the influence of Gap, a key all-American clothing brand.... with no US factories. levi's shuttered a lot of their plants to compete with them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018/2/21 at 10:13 PM, Paul T said:

my LVC were true to size, and I bought my actual waist size. The TCB are tagged with their post-shrink size, which allows for circa one inch of shrink. if tjey were raw Levi's and you fancied a slightly trimmer fit I would recommend 34 tag size. But unfortunately that doesn't help with the New Rinse pairs, as we don't really know how they're sized or cut.

thanks Paul! i wish could see your message earlier!
i will try another hot wash on the 36 tonight and re-order the 34 if nothing change on the fatty legs.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Paul T said:

 NAFTA maybe had a lot to do with it, then there was the influence of Gap, a key all-American clothing brand.... with no US factories. levi's shuttered a lot of their plants to compete with them.

 

Guhhhhhhhh

giphy.gif

Edited by erk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Paul T said:

It's a modern cut for one thing. The 501 has always varied in shape over the years.

Secondly, the mass-market model is made more cheaply, sewn overseas with indifferent fabric. That's what happens with a race to the bottom. NAFTA maybe had a lot to do with it, then there was the influence of Gap, a key all-American clothing brand.... with no US factories. levi's shuttered a lot of their plants to compete with them.

 

I am surprised to find made in the USA and that too cone mill selvedge, sold by levi’s.

 

 

 

Edited by i_denim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have had Cone raw 501 in the standard range on and off under various names. You'll find plenty of examples in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Paul T said:

They have had Cone raw 501 in the standard range on and off under various names. You'll find plenty of examples in this thread.

What I was really trying to say was maybe the real thing is still alive? 

I may pickup a pair of LVC just so I can compare to other denim I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, i_denim said:

What I was really trying to say was maybe the real thing is still alive? 

I may pickup a pair of LVC just so I can compare to other denim I have.

Getting the basic STF  501 used to be a great option, $30 from Canal Jeans.

My last pair of STF were great. Faded really well. I gave them away to a charity shop. Or thought I did. After I'd been to Levi's and saw how much 50s examples fetched, I went to my denim stash to look for my lovely pair, which were still lovely and dark but had a split in the knee. THey were missing. The STF were still there.

I guess someone got a good charity shop find!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s rough Paul. 

giphy.gif

thats my last sopranos gif 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s rough Paul. 

giphy.gif

thats my last sopranos gif 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erk, like you I am sure, I have a box of 20 beautiful jeans, I have to be philosophical about the ones that got away. And my own imcompetence.

Sopranos gifs always appreciated though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 1955 36x34 is still baggy after two 60 degrees wash
so i ordered the 34x32 for comparison and it fits like my tcb50s size 34 after one 60 degrees wash, can't bear another hot wash tho
in result, @Paul T has very accurate advice :D

here's the post wash measurement in cm
1955      34x32     36x34
waist:       40            44
raise         31            33
thigh         32            33
L.O           22            22

it's hard to decide either keep or selling the 36x34 after the cone is gone

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

keep... who knows, maybe the 36 will fit one day. hopefully not though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What''s everyone's thoughts on Levi's announcing that it will begin to laser-finish jeans instead of using workers?
They said it will take 90 seconds instead of the 2-3 hours used in the finishing process and the new techniques are going to reduce the amount of chemicals that are used


http://www.bbc.com/news/business-43217596

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they insist on selling pre-faded jeans then this is a much better solution to what is otherwise a very dirty process; this technology has been around for a little while now though:

 

 

 

Edited by Iron Horse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1937 now available to purchase on the UK Levis site and Stylecreep - only up to a 34 inside leg atm which is only measuring 33" so a bit short for me.

Measurements in a 34 x 34 from Stylecreep

Waist laid flat is 17”, Inside Leg is 33”, Thigh is approx 11”, Hem is approx 9” front rise is approx 12.5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d ignore that thigh measurement. I have some 1937s in size 32 from a few years back which have some decent wear and a few washes. The thigh is probably 12.5-13” straight out of the wash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are definitely not 1937s in the website photos - no cinch, wrong back pocket shape, wrong arcs, no crotch rivet, rise is too low, legs are too narrow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ushokmwn said:

At levis.com they are pictured without a cinch back but do have one at stylecreep.

Looks like product shots of the 1947 new rinse instead of a rigid 37.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Luisa via Roma (US)
    Privilege Program