Jump to content
prince_boys18

Levi's Vintage Clothing

Recommended Posts

 

Just got my latest White Oak stockpiler from Cultizm, a ‘55 rigid, which brings me full circle.   My first LVCs were a rinsed ‘55 from 2005 that the one knowledgeable salesman at the SF flagship dug out from a sale pile (there was literally no other selvage in store at that time, hard as that is to believe).  They were, and are still, a marvel.  A 501, but with beautiful, subtle differences that set it it apart.

That put me down the rabbit hole and I have since spent way too much time and money on LVC and denim.

Have to say though, the LVCs this year and last resemble each other more than their analogues from previous years.  The 2019 55s have totally different details, even basic selvedge line and thread color, from the 2005 version.

The 2009 47s, which are still my fave (Paul T’s admonishment of the denim notwithstanding), look nothing like the 2018’s.  Pockets have doubled in size and threads again are totally different colors.

TBH, in raw form, the current slate of 20th century rigid models look very similar to each other -from rivets, thread color, pocket size, patches, to even the basic cast of the denim- aside from the macro cut variations and major defining details of the those model years.  It’s a far cry from years past, for certain.  The MiUSA 501 is basically an amalgam of all recent decades but with raised belt loops and better stitching. 

I’ll miss the old bird after they run out of Cone, but LVC needs to add some value to their premier value-added denim line before I would buy again...

That said, I also don’t need to!

Thanks to the board for the heads up on the 40% off sale.  I hadn’t checked my email yet, and was able to get ‘back-ups’ for the last few pairs I already own, including the 1890, ‘37, and ‘47.   I’m swimming in denim right now and it’s no stretch to say I probably have enough for the next 20 years!

Interested to hear others’ thoughts on year-to year variations.  In the past, I had mostly sampled one new model or so a year, so maybe it’s always been the case that LVCs in a particular collection share similar characteristics.

Getting my shipment on Mon, so will post photos and comparisons then...

Edited by cjfergs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They’ve landed

1955 in 32x34 raw measurements

W 16.75

Th 12.5

In 33.75

Kn 9.5

Hm 8.25

Fr 12.75

Br 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Propeller beanie is a fantastic username. I don't know how to tag people on mobile otherwise I would. 

I didn't fully realize how large the back pockets on the 1966 were. I think the post shrink fit will be good and will be a great warm weather/work jean, but the back pockets are big. Just something I'll deal with and get over. 

I'm a Flat Head fan boy and I can see where the inspiration for both the 3005/3009 comes from with this pair, so I'm happy none the less. They are both a very loose interpretation of the 1966 but the comparisons are there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello--

Has anyone tried on one of these Type III Mash Up Corduroy Truckers? Accounting for the apparent slim fit I sized up from my usual when buying one, and while mine fits better in the sleeves than nearly every photo I find online of store models who look to be wearing skimpy jackets, I still have the sense that it's too snug. I don't own any Type III or slim-fitting trucker jackets, so maybe I'm just not accustomed to the fit.

Returning mine for yet another size up would not be an option as these are sold out, and I won't pay the ridiculous triple retail they're commanding on the popular auction site. That said, I do love the colors. Trying to determine if it's just a question of getting used to a slim fit that is foreign to me.

Each one of these guys looks like his cuffs would go half-way to the elbows if he were to reach straight out or up, but maybe that's the intended fit. I have to figure that stylists know the best fit for jackets they're trying to sell. May I know your thoughts?

colorblocklvc.jpg

internet_levi.jpg

scst.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A vintage cut type 3 is gonna have a shorter body and shorter arms than a modern jacket. I’d say if it fits you in the shoulders and body then keep it. I feel like the first pic posted is how the jacket should fit. The other two are on the small side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello erk--

Thanks for opining. When these were semi-available a few weeks back, I contacted a bunch of LVC stores to inquire about the fit; about a half dozen who'd actually tried them on all reported true-to-size. If I were to go up one size (again, not an option at this late stage) that would make it the only garment in my closet in that size.

I agree with you that the last two pictures look smaller than the first. (The last guy looks like he's wearing his little brother's jacket--who decided that's the correct size to be demonstrating to prospective buyers?)

At any rate, I would say mine fits me similar to the first guy, only my sleeves look to be @1 inch longer. Understanding that it's a shorter body as you point out, my main concern is across the shoulder blades. I took a few pictures of the back and here below is the most unflattering: I'm a little bit leaning forward, and for whatever reason the sides are flapping open slightly. The shoulders feel ok at rest like this, but if I were driving or folding my arms in front, I would feel the "pull" across the shoulders. It isn't to the point of restricting movement, but I wouldn't want it to be any tighter...

Thus to my main question: is this slimness I'm describing the intended fit of the Type III cut? If I were to size up there would be an extra 1" across the shoulders, but an extra inch in the sleeves as well that I don't feel I need.

If I do stick with this, it seems it would be a situational jacket to be worn only with a t-shirt or a light, collarless long sleeve tee. Any collar-type shirt with cuffs would be too bulky. Again, is that standard with the Type III?

Thanks again to you (and anyone else) for reading through and weighing in.

31f3-8fad-f806e76dd676.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that looks fine. I would not try for a larger size. Keep it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

initial feelings after returning to LVC. 

1. It kinda makes a difference when the back pockets have the arcs and the tab says Levi's - even if the tab wont shrivel up and fray like on the TCB. 

2. much stronger taper on the LVC, rise is higher. Probably a more flattering silhouette. 

3. The fabric is awesome. Really drives home how much of a loss it is to be without cone mills. 

4. $285 is way too much for a pair of jeans. $170ish is just fine. Makes me wonder if they'd do better to sell them for the old $170 of yesteryear and just sell more jeans. Are there really enough suckers out there to pay the $285 full retail?

5. I shoulda bought a 1947 too. 

6. The buttons still look bad. But I think thats an environmental regulatory issue though...if I remember correctly. 

Edited by erk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, erk said:

But I think thats an environmental regulatory issue though...if I remember correctly. 

What do you mean by this? I agree that the buttons are notified fantastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like there was something about a California regulation about zinc or something. Maybe Paul t can shed some light. Also could have dreamt the whole thing. 

Share this post


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

initial feelings after returning to LVC. 

1. It kinda makes a difference when the back pockets have the arcs...

3. The fabric is awesome. Really drives home how much of a loss it is to be without cone mills. 

4. $285 is way too much for a pair of jeans. $170ish is just fine. Makes me wonder if they'd do better to sell them for the old $170 of yesteryear and just sell more jeans. Are there really enough suckers out there to pay the $285 full retail?

 

I have similar sentiments as yourself.

$285 is crazy high. The value is just not there when my pocket bags look like this compared to SC at $160. (Levis on left. SC41947 on right.)

I too wonder how a post-Cone Mills denim world will be to live in. Sort of like “The Road” by Cormac McCarthy is my fear.

Lastly, I am ready to be stoned by this community for what I am about to say but I am going to freehand sew some Levi-esque arcuates on my newly acquired as-yet-unworn Sugar Cane 1947’s. As previously mentioned, I have worn STF since atleast 1970 and a pair of jeans just look so wrong without the back pockets arcuate. 

I love what the Levi brand and arcuate symbolizes. The historic origins of American ingenuity, textile inventiveness, and the fact those denim dungarees made the harsh work environments safer for labor. I love all these things every time I see that arcuate but Levi’s has lost the script IMO and companies like SC are honoring the traditions Levi has lost.

0581E553-11FD-45B8-956E-399F402C42ED.jpeg

Edited by Pedro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it seems that I didn't have the whole picture and there will be a whole line up of 501s for next season:

1890, 1915, 1933, 1944, 1947, 1954, 1955, 1966 and 1976 :D 

The 1880 triple pleat blouse, Type 1,2 & 3 denim jacket are also back.

All in cone denim.

Including these tributes to cone mills a 1955 501 and Type 2 jacket made from all the different years of cone denim. 

46016817852_90777b21c3_z.jpg

45342374274_0366d4b177_z.jpg

Not sure what i think about the above though? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, kicks79 said:

So it seems that I didn't have the whole picture and there will be a whole line up of 501s for next season:

1890, 1915, 1933, 1944, 1947, 1954, 1955, 1966 and 1976 :D 

All in cone denim.

Including these tributes to cone mills a 1955 501 and Type 2 jacket made from all the different years of cone denim. 

45342374274_0366d4b177_z.jpg

Not sure what i think about the above though? 

I am going to take out a second mortgage on the house to participate in this one.

My 1933’s are all threadbare now.

That 1955 501 is fascinating but only if it comes with a diagram identifying each year denim in the pattern. (What year is the left front leg in that dark ink?)

Thank you very much for communicating this news because I had no interest in the 1947 and 1954 so was giving up on LVC in a post-Cone existence. 

 

Edited by Pedro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean the darker of the two legs? I believe that leg is 60s denim. The other side is 70s denim.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kicks79 said:

You mean the darker of the two legs? I believe that leg is 60s denim. The other side is 70s denim.

 

Yes the side without the watch pocket. 

I agree those pants would be more of a collector's piece. 

What would be more practical is if they created a 6" x 8" fabric sampler book of the various years of denim with a shared binding. Such a book and a magnifying glass would make for some cool evenings.

 

Edited by Pedro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those mix-n-match 55s look gorgeous, kinda reminiscent of the SDA salesman jeans.
Would be interesting seeing all those denims age together side by side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So look what came today... '55s in a 30 and 31 waist. Not as massive as I had thought. Here compared with 1915s well worn, 1947 soaked but unworn then the 31 waist then the 30 waist. Not sure which  will give the best fit.... May have to keep em both....
 

IMG_4025.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually scrub that. I now I'm not quite at my fighting weight at the moment, but the 30" pair are snug in the waist and that's before a soak... They may have to go back 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Better get another 31 to replace them then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, might well do that. Though I'm tempted by a 54 for a slightly narrower fit, if I can put u with the zip....  Is it pretty much the same denim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would think it would (or should) be - the story is that Levi’s only introduced the zip to appease the East coast market - and would the denim have changed between 1954 and 1955? However, you’ll need an expert rather than a Levi’s pettifogger such as myself to confirm. Calling Paul T ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, kicks79 said:

So it seems that I didn't have the whole picture and there will be a whole line up of 501s for next season:

1890, 1915, 1933, 1944, 1947, 1954, 1955, 1966 and 1976 :D 

The 1880 triple pleat blouse, Type 1,2 & 3 denim jacket are also back.

All in cone denim.

Including these tributes to cone mills a 1955 501 and Type 2 jacket made from all the different years of cone denim. 

46016817852_90777b21c3_z.jpg

 

Not sure what i think about the above though? 

The jacket at least looks like something you can wear, the pants are just gimmicky.

I have a pair of '47 incoming, 160€ with the recent 30% site-wide discount is alright. I returned a size 30 around last year because it was too snug before shrinkage, went with a 31 this time and I hope they'll fit...

I already have the 66 and 76, and like most around here I like the 76 the most. Might have to get another pair as long as it's true that the full line up will be available in Cone for the foreseeable future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'll stick with a second pair of '55s and just taper the leg a little. Get a button fly and keep the legendary denim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any thoughts on the made-in-Italy Shorthorn suede sherpa jacket? I picked one up with a 40% off coupon, though I'm over the barrel on keeping it or sending it back. Fits me perfectly in the shoulders & sleeves, and a bit roomy in the body which I prefer for this type of jacket. Still, it's a big chunk of change. (Picture courtesy of Nordstrom's)

 

 

LVCSS.jpg

Edited by NonJazarenko

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