Jump to content
prince_boys18

Levi's Vintage Clothing

Recommended Posts

I  guess it would shrink more waist wise than length wise, since the denim is used in a horizontal way. The denim should not became much darker, since the weft is not dyed very deep, it could keep it´s beautiful light blue... but that´s just guessing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as promised: a triple pleat texture / fabric condition / image dump [having had the two soaks - one hot, one mild]

& in relation to arms: a comparison to my lvc type I [both size: xl]: definitely more tapered towards wrist... (but strangely same armpit size, but definitely feels slimmer overall)

 

IMG_7612.JPG

IMG_7613.JPG

IMG_7615.JPG

IMG_7620.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

&

completing cone aquistions

after being smitten by the type I ’36 fabric…

lvc ‘37 is got

1x hot-hot-soak and 40c wash, line dried

quite the shedder of blue

blurry soak pic and dried pic back in bath for silhouette comparisons

and then fabric, blue hues, some pockets stitching, leg twist, a tts ankle swinging fit achieved… 

[60s meets 30s? depression era meets ivy league? ...meets hipster french workwear uniform...]

has similar ‘clenched’ tension and flecks of the jacket, but smaller weight fabric, forgiving in stretching back to orig. waist size

and surprises await: pocket bag is decent size!

results…

001.JPG

002.JPG

003.JPG

003a.JPG

003b.JPG

003c.JPG

006.JPG

007.JPG

008.png

008a.png

009.JPG

010.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

assuredly:

'37

w.36, l.32 / hot soak and washed / a day of wear / in cm / all errors are mine... / fabric is definitely pretty mobile: if adding tension, one can add a good cm

waist (lain flat, waist band aligned): 47

front rise: 32.5 [edit - measured with tension]

back rise: 43 [edit - measured with tension]

thigh: 34

knee: 24

leg opening / hem: 23

inseam: 76

weight: c.700g

Spoiler

 

IMG_7650.JPG

IMG_7652.JPG

 

IMG_7655.JPG

IMG_7656.JPG

IMG_7657.JPG

IMG_7658.JPG

 

 

 

Edited by bartlebyyphonics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sympathy-For-The-Denim said:

But why don´t you just dry clean it? is there any bad side effect from it?

I have done that on a couple of occasions, when I wanted work jeans to stay dark, and it still gives some fades. Plus the chemicals are nasty.

Mandel, I haven't particularly noticed a tightness around the armpits but there is probably less spare around the upper arms than elsewhere.

So, having been shamed for my lack of cleanliness by erk and mandel I will simply stop over-thinking and hand-wash when the sun comes out, then probably follow up with a machine wash in the summer. Thanks for all your thoughts, folks!

Edited by Paul T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mandel9000 said:

Looks great, @bartlebyyphonics! How (much) would you say the fit differs from our TCB 20s?

thanx!

measuring against my damp bigger tcb20s which have just come out of a 40c wash; measure up very similar in some areas like front rise, but the 20s bigger in back rise, and most areas of leg

(not-very scientific comparison tho: as tcbs w.38 so bigger all round anyway, but wet just out of wash; that should have given them a momentary shrink making them >vaguely< comparable to the stretched out '37)

fit-wise the '37 - & this could be mostly because it is being worn tts not over-size - feels a lot neater than the '20s - and is considerably lighter: 10oz denim weight raw...

tbh it is what i imagine wearing the 20s tts is like, but even 'cleaner' - with slimmer legs and mildly higher rise but much lighter feel (the lvc fit-guide call the '37 a 'rounded top block straight leg')

because of this neatness and lighter weight, a better companion for the triple pleat and french workwear more than the heavy chunky type I (so dreams of a 30s lvc tux on hold)

 some pix to compare (wet tcb comp. to dry / stretched out lvc)

and both have three fly buttons only...

001.png

Spoiler

 

IMG_7726.JPG

IMG_7727.JPG

IMG_7730.JPG

IMG_7731.JPG

003.png

 

 

Edited by bartlebyyphonics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Received a pair of ‘44s today from the Valencia st factory. They’re from 1999. Thought I share.

 

49F1C14F-8997-4E10-B174-BE5FC800501B.jpeg

C8E4ADB1-8D9B-4A25-9E37-A126E9E821CB.jpeg

E6A01397-15BD-4CED-9563-D6878488FD36.jpeg

Closeup of fabric and comparison to my ‘37s from ‘07.

 

C30F5D79-5785-4785-B58A-685833159210.jpeg

B1D8379D-1AC9-455B-9009-3496482F3E45.jpeg

E6849911-B03B-488D-BD52-65A1630F4664.jpeg

421EF21F-16D9-4D39-BDA2-490BFA400E79.jpeg

Edited by Spiraltoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi bartles, it seems slightly odd but the front & back rises and thigh measurements on your size 36 1937s look comparable to those on my size 32s. I’ll have to double check when I get home. My pair were washed and put away in the autumn and won’t see active service again till the summer - if it ever arrives...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maynard Friedman said:

Hi bartles, it seems slightly odd but the front & back rises and thigh measurements on your size 36 1937s look comparable to those on my size 32s. I’ll have to double check when I get home. My pair were washed and put away in the autumn and won’t see active service again till the summer - if it ever arrives...

good call: rushing never helps

re-measured, with tension...

adjustments made: fr: 32.5, br: 43

[i dont normally measure things... so apologies for this]

but was definitely smaller than i thought it would be, thought tts 30s jean might have more of this spirit:

 

001.png

 

[joking - knew '37 was def. slimmer than '33 from a certain blog - thanks paul T]

Edited by bartlebyyphonics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everybody. Could anyone clarify whether this is correct. The 54 model is exactly like the 55 I’m shape except it has a leather patch instead of paper patch on the 55?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, in addition to the leather patch, the 54 model is much slimmer and has a zip fly. I think the rise is also lower.

Edited by Maynard Friedman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Maynard. Would you say the 55 is the most relax fit with the least tapered leg?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gave the three-pleat a pretty hardcore handwash. Laundry soap and scrub with brush, agitation in hot water.. then short machine rinse and spin (the green laundry soap is great for handwashing, but smells disgusting if not rinsed out, like lard). Really worried I'd ruined it, as it dried, but comes out pretty much as I hoped. Better than any of my other 1900s greencast denim, such as the 1922 201, the (Kurabo) 1890s or my natural indigo SDA. Would prefer if it looked even greener, but note that does usually happen when they get dirtier again. 3/4 off the pit-to-pit measurement (the difference between hot handwash and machine spin, vs initial soak), and the arms feel distinctly shorter. Still wearable, just.

postwash1.jpg

postwash2.jpg

postwash3.jpg

postwash4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ looks great! top fades...

fingers crossed for the continued wearability: sure it will settle...

(remember lots of db chatter about wearing whilst damp to stretch out any shoulder / back issues: but that doesnt really help arm length or wrist / fore-arm tightness - and the wrist on them sure are snug!)

ps. great button replacements also!

Share this post


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

I gave the three-pleat a pretty hardcore handwash. Laundry soap and scrub with brush, agitation in hot water.. then short machine rinse and spin (the green laundry soap is great for handwashing, but smells disgusting if not rinsed out, like lard). Really worried I'd ruined it, as it dried, but comes out pretty much as I hoped. Better than any of my other 1900s greencast denim, such as the 1922 201, the (Kurabo) 1890s or my natural indigo SDA. Would prefer if it looked even greener, but note that does usually happen when they get dirtier again. 3/4 off the pit-to-pit measurement (the difference between hot handwash and machine spin, vs initial soak), and the arms feel distinctly shorter. Still wearable, just.

postwash1.jpg

postwash2.jpg

postwash3.jpg

postwash4.jpg

Can't comment on you wash technique but that is my favorite denim jacket right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, bartlebyyphonics said:

(remember lots of db chatter about wearing whilst damp to stretch out any shoulder / back issues: but that doesnt really help arm length or wrist / fore-arm tightness - and the wrist on them sure are snug!)

ps. great button replacements also!

Normally stretching can help but I can't see how you'd do that with a pleated jacket. I checked and I have a bit of slack in the cinch. It's fine over a thick shirt. If I don't get any fatter I'll be fine.

The buttons on this jacket are a nightmare... one is under the floorboards in a place I could only get to if I rip off the skirting boards. the replacements are from a distressed pair of Nevadas, but I only have two more.

yes, it is a fantastic jacket and the fabric is gorgeous. I'm sure the 1890s pants with the same Cone fabric will be amazing too. So happy i have the 1880s natural indigo... a decade-worth of summer wear I reckon,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maynard Friedman said:

No, in addition to the leather patch, the 54 model is much slimmer and has a zip fly. I think the rise is also lower.

11 & 16 inches on my 54’s...

 

12C1C4BA-1C34-4AAE-94BA-24AF05790179.jpeg

B5B89E79-D4F0-4634-91B4-4C95FF5C6FD5.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all. I’m thinking of splashing out on the 55 rigid from US Levi’s site. I am a 32 on Boncoura. Should I buy 32 for 55 Levi’s rigid?  Many thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My LVC Type 2 507 Valencia St. Never Washed Soaked Once. Haven't worn it in a while. Planning on put it in Supermarket.

IMG_6692.jpg

IMG_6699.jpg

IMG_6698.jpg

IMG_6697.jpg

IMG_6696.jpg

IMG_6694.jpg

IMG_6693.jpg

IMG_6695.jpg

IMG_6700.jpg

Share this post


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

Normally stretching can help but I can't see how you'd do that with a pleated jacket. I checked and I have a bit of slack in the cinch. It's fine over a thick shirt. If I don't get any fatter I'll be fine.

The buttons on this jacket are a nightmare... one is under the floorboards in a place I could only get to if I rip off the skirting boards. the replacements are from a distressed pair of Nevadas, but I only have two more.

yes, it is a fantastic jacket and the fabric is gorgeous. I'm sure the 1890s pants with the same Cone fabric will be amazing too. So happy i have the 1880s natural indigo... a decade-worth of summer wear I reckon,

of course: really only a fix for the shoulders (which is always my biggest area of struggle) - the pleats are there for other 'expansions'

and yes: when the buttons have to accommodate any stress, this particular model does have the capacity to shed!

looking fwd to seeing the natural indigo in action - prob. will take 10 yrs of summer to get the fades? (nice article on natural indigo btw)

what i dream of is the triple pleat to be re-issued in gingham / check (as per lvc c.2013?)... (heller's cafe are doing an interesting riff in hounds-tooth now... but gingham is the hope)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do love that gingham three-pleat too. My notes from the time say they have one in the archive. Would love to see. I'm also fond of the duck one, although I prefer the terracotta version to the mustard.

It was a good year, 2013, headed for Tangiers a week after dropping into the LVC office.

tangier.jpg

duck4.jpg

duck3.jpg

duck2.jpg

duck.jpg

gingham2.jpg

gingham.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys, would you be able to recommend me a US based site that offer the best price for LVC jeans?

many thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an LVC jumper I bought at an outlet in York way back around 2001 when I was a university student.  I think it must have been around 50 pounds.

MITI__MG_6290.thumb.jpg.833ab844007bba94b691437bf8b00387.jpgMITI__MG_6293.thumb.jpg.1518b1530bd9d057cfcd995feeeafea8.jpgMITI__MG_6292.thumb.jpg.2175385b1e13553acb9d8bd5e01004f6.jpgMITI__MG_6291.thumb.jpg.c6b56a505a9fd760198b947618ee6fb9.jpg

MITI__MG_6260.jpg

Edited by vexed_wear
added pic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is a nice pullover; it's been produced by US LVC and at one point there was also a Japan-only version. Does it have a tag with the model and year produced?

I'm not quite certain if there are two variants in the archives - yours has a point at the bottom of the placket plus of course the arcuate etc - but there is a very similar jacket in last autumn's range, made of Cone natural indigo, same fabric as the 1880s jeans, IIRC available washed only, I think it's termed the 211. Lovely but for my money they should have done a raw version.

I love all of these pullovers, my duck version has always been a fave.

pull_over_LVC sm.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/04/2018 at 11:24 AM, bartlebyyphonics said:

assuredly:

'37

w.36, l.32 / hot soak and washed / a day of wear / in cm / all errors are mine... / fabric is definitely pretty mobile: if adding tension, one can add a good cm

waist (lain flat, waist band aligned): 47

front rise: 32.5 [edit - measured with tension]

back rise: 43 [edit - measured with tension]

thigh: 34

knee: 24

leg opening / hem: 23

inseam: 76

weight: c.700g

  Reveal hidden contents

 

IMG_7650.JPG

IMG_7652.JPG

 

IMG_7655.JPG

IMG_7656.JPG

IMG_7657.JPG

IMG_7658.JPG

 

 

 

did you take any pre wash measurements- i'm keen to see how these shrunk in the leg as they only have a 34 inch leg at the moment - your 32" are under 30" in length now. Cheers

Share this post


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

that is a nice pullover; it's been produced by US LVC and at one point there was also a Japan-only version. Does it have a tag with the model and year produced?

I'm not quite certain if there are two variants in the archives - yours has a point at the bottom of the placket plus of course the arcuate etc - but there is a very similar jacket in last autumn's range, made of Cone natural indigo, same fabric as the 1880s jeans, IIRC available washed only, I think it's termed the 211. Lovely but for my money they should have done a raw version.

I love all of these pullovers, my duck version has always been a fave.

pull_over_LVC sm.jpg

I recently just moved flat temporary. Will try and have a look when I have a chance to get back to my old place. The jumper is in the winter clothes box at the moment as the temperature in Bangkok is 30c plus right now! I’ll be interested to know the history of it too. I wore it quite a bit during the uni day. Didn’t really have it much thought and luckily somehow still hung on to it. Sort of appreciated more as I get older. 

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