Levi's Vintage Clothing

[Dr_Heech]

Great pants, doc H

Anyone no where I can score one of those duck jackets in XL Do they run large?

Af, I have a duck jacket in a 44 (I usually take a 44, and it fits a little bit larger than tagged), so I would say YES. And I've seen a 48 before, but not for ages. They're a bit scarce in the larger sizes - try ebay I suppose. Funny thing is, I bought my duck jacket years ago from Dejan, when He only had the Ebay shop! Cost me £35.00 !!

[Dr_Heech]

I have the 27s and I would HIGHLY recommend the 1917s over the 27s. These are all 10 oz though.

Yeah but if you prefer the 27's, look at the 33's as an alternative, cut-wise, as they're similar.

[Happy Hooligan]

just ordered a pair of '33...

working my way down.. 55', 47' 37'..

[Paul T]

Man I really got to start buying more LVC jeans. I started with LVC and migrated to Japanese brands, now I think I am gonna make a slight u turn and dabble a bit in the LVC arena. I really like some of the LVC shirts. I have a wool "pendleton" type LVC 50s shirt and the raw bunkhouse chambray shirt, which I love.

My next pair I think will be a 27, 33 or 37 LVC. I am digging the fuller cuts these days. Denim-wise which are the most interesting. I also like heavier denim.

Like Airfrog, I would say 1917 over 1927, 1937 rather than 1933. If you search thru these pages, you will find some terrific wear pix of the 37; some peopl here have sized down, which makes them loo like a more conventional jean, and gives more whiskers etc. THe 37 will be slightly heavier in wieght (I think, haven't checked) vs the 1917, 12 oz rather than 10z. I'm not knocking 10oz, though, my 1901s are some of my favrouite jeans, can't wait to crack them out in the summer. More info on the 501 visual guide thread

Airfrog and other rate the 37 denim over the 33; it seems to keep its colour better. My 1933 came out a bit bland (my nipper was young at the time & I had to wash them too fequently due to baby puke etc), but The Clerk's pair

show how good they can look if you put the time in:

THe other option, of course, is the 1920s 201, one of the jewels in LVC's crown; this is a very wide cut - personally I love it, it's really different.

[Rivet Head]

Why? What's the reasoning?

I have the 27s and I would HIGHLY recommend the 1917s over the 27s. These are all 10 oz though.

[airfrogusmc]

Like Airfrog, I would say 1917 over 1927, 1937 rather than 1933. If you search thru these pages, you will find some terrific wear pix of the 37; some peopl here have sized down, which makes them loo like a more conventional jean, and gives more whiskers etc. THe 37 will be slightly heavier in wieght (I think, haven't checked) vs the 1917, 12 oz rather than 10z. I'm not knocking 10oz, though, my 1901s are some of my favrouite jeans, can't wait to crack them out in the summer. More info on the 501 visual guide thread

Airfrog and other rate the 37 denim over the 33; it seems to keep its colour better. My 1933 came out a bit bland (my nipper was young at the time & I had to wash them too fequently due to baby puke etc), but The Clerk's pair

show how good they can look if you put the time in:

THe other option, of course, is the 1920s 201, one of the jewels in LVC's crown; this is a very wide cut - personally I love it, it's really different.

I agree Paul and like you've already mentioned the 20 201s are outstanding. The denim is so cool...

[airfrogusmc]

Why? What's the reasoning?

They just seem to have as Dr H pointed out more of the details right and I really really like the denim.

[airfrogusmc]

Yeah but if you prefer the 27's, look at the 33's as an alternative, cut-wise, as they're similar.

I love my 33s and my 37s. The 33s have lighter color denim anyway the 555s do so they start out not as dark but mine (33s) are really look good...

I'll try a get some photos of how the look now later.

[JacoBlue]

These are my 37

im really liking the fit

took some pictures today .

more pictures when i decide to wash them.

still not sure when to wash....

[JacoBlue]

Man I really got to start buying more LVC jeans. I started with LVC and migrated to Japanese brands, now I think I am gonna make a slight u turn and dabble a bit in the LVC arena. I really like some of the LVC shirts. I have a wool "pendleton" type LVC 50s shirt and the raw bunkhouse chambray shirt, which I love.

My next pair I think will be a 27, 33 or 37 LVC. I am digging the fuller cuts these days. Denim-wise which are the most interesting. I also like heavier denim.

i can recommend the 37 its really a relaxed cut if you size it properly.

[erk]

jacoblue, those are the 1937 201 right?

[Paul T]

How did you size?

Edit: just remembered, Jacoblue's are the 1937 201, which were a unique one-off, a narrower shape than the 1937 501, I think, and a different fabric, like the first Capital E jeans, that's probably closest in colour to the current 55.

ON current production, a nominal 32W 1937 is 32 1/2 in the waist.

Because I have them, here are measurements for the current production of the prewar jeans, nominal 32W 32L.

W= waist, R=Rise, L=leg length, Lo=leg opening (measured across hem) S=seat (width just below the front pockets), Th=thigh width 7 inches below the crotch.

1901 501 W34, R13, L31.5,Lo8.75, S22.25, TH10.5

1922 201 W34, R11.5, L 32.5, Lo10, S20.5, Th11.25

1927 501 W35, R13, L32.5, Lo9.5, St 21, Th11

1933 501 W33, R12.5, L31 ,Lo 9.25, St 20.5 ,Th 10.75

1937 501 W32.5, R13, L31.75, Lo9, St 20, Th 10.125

And a couple post war

1947 501 W32, R12, L32, Lo8.5, S20.25, Th10

1955 501 W35, R12, L31, Lo8.5, S20.75, Th10.75

I've added this list to the 501 Visual Guide thread for future reference.

[airfrogusmc]

These are my 37

im really liking the fit

took some pictures today .

more pictures when i decide to wash them.

still not sure when to wash....

Hold off as long as possible

[JacoBlue]

yes they are 1937 201

I actually bought them thinking they were one wash and would not shrink much. They shrunk quite alot becouse they ware raw.... so i got a slimmer fit then a thought but all to my benefit.

i got a 32 and i wear 32 in most brands.

think the waist is 41 cm from side to side. lying flat on the ground.

im 84 cm around my waist think thats 33 inches,

well most people thinks that i should wait a few more months.

[airfrogusmc]

My experience is it usually takes about 10 wet to dry cycles to get STFs fully shrunk. Usally 3 or 4 get most of it but there is still some after that.

[JacoBlue]

okay they have been soaked 3 times so hopefully they wont shrink more.

[Dr_Heech]

Nice 1937 201xx's Jacoblue, take AF's advice, leave as long as possible before soaking/washing. I just hung mine up in the shower and cold rinsed them down now and again. Sold them to ebay last year, really miss 'em now looking at yours. May have to break another pair in. they take forever. But they're worth it.

[Dr_Heech]

Ok, I've posted photos of the 1873 duck pant, now here's the 1873 duck waistcoat:

Has leather washers on ALL rivets, unlike the duck pant which only has them on the back pockets and LOWER front pocket rivets.

Leather label:

Inside info tag with date of manufacture:

[Dr_Heech]

And finally, the 1873 duck hunting jacket:

The little booklet as, requested:

And details:

Early label with riveted hanger, and check out the black 'ID' line on the collar:

And the reverse (only one washer though - authentic or what !?!)

And great detailing on the sleeve and pocket edge..(more black 'ID' lining)

[fardin]

man i am repeating myself but your collection is awesome.so thanks for sharing. i love the duck stuff and wish lvc would produce some again.

[Dr_Heech]

More details...

Leather pocket-fastening strap, double riveted (to hold in all those small furry animals. )

And the inside tag for those of us who are obsessed with the 'details'..

Right, that's it for now - off on me hols on Sunday, so you'll have to wait for the other photo requests (Comparisons 55's, 44's, 201's and the 1901/1873's.. etc). And just once more, this one, as it's my favorite:

The duck family

[Paul T]

Agree with fardin. Magnificent.

Interesting that, so early in LVC days, they were producing something so esoteric. Obviously a real labour of love - how many people, apart from Dr H, would be discerning enough to appreciate it?

[Dr_Heech]

Dont know if any of you Lvc fans have seen these collectors cards before? They are postcard-size.

There are 15 altogether, held in place by a card belt/cinchstrap.

They are a mixture of early Lvc models and original garments. On the front there is a photo, and on the reverse there is information about the garment in question. Obviously, not all of them are necessarily historically correct (just like some of the early repros) and there is some misinformation. But I like them anyway, and I hope you guys will find them interesting.

[blm14]

I think we need fit pix of the brown duck suit

[airfrogusmc]

I would love to have one of those hunting jackets.

Great photo Dr H thanks for posting that stuff. Hey Paul, next time you talk to Lynn tell her LVC should reissue some of those.

[electrum]

I'm not big on the 47's, but your right on the tight thighs. I had three pairs I bought from Cinch in 1999, every subsequent pair were because of that fact (1st pair = 32/34, 2nd pair = 34/36, and 3rd = 36/36). I couldnt understand why, as all the original pairs I had owned never had that problem. In the end i found the 55's just right. The weird thing was that I was skinnier then, but the 47's were still just too tight around the thigh.

I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only person who had problems with the '47 being too tight in the thighs. I guess not all LVC models are going to be right for everyone.

[electrum]

Hey Electrum the denim on the 333s and everything for that matter is SO different than any other LVC I've seen and it really has a great texture and color thats not coming through in the photos. They're probably the most comfy of all my LVCs. They're just SO different than any of my other LVCs. I just wish I could have got them raw. I also could have scored the 333 shirt but passed on it. I wish now I would have gotten it. I think these are VERY RARE.

I'm beginnig to appreciate how each LVC product has it's own unique characteristics that set them apart from other jeans. And yes, the 333 is yet another example that demonstrates that in a big way. It's obvious that Levi's went to great lengths to achieve such authentic details on those - truly amazing stuff. To the the untrained eye, the 333 could easily be mistaken for the original - invoking images of the agrarian era they represent. Although the pre ditressed finish might appeal to advanced collectors, I prefer rigid/raw from the standpoint of practicality.

[electrum]

Man I really got to start buying more LVC jeans. I started with LVC and migrated to Japanese brands, now I think I am gonna make a slight u turn and dabble a bit in the LVC arena. I really like some of the LVC shirts. I have a wool "pendleton" type LVC 50s shirt and the raw bunkhouse chambray shirt, which I love.

My next pair I think will be a 27, 33 or 37 LVC. I am digging the fuller cuts these days. Denim-wise which are the most interesting. I also like heavier denim.

fwiw, I like the '33 even though I hate loose fitting jeans. They drape wonderfully and the wide 9'' leg opening does not flop around when I'm walking like I've experienced with other wide flare jeans. Super comfortable, and you can't beat the tough - what I descibe as - teflon coated Cone denim. I like my 37s too. Since I'm a bit of a weight whore, the heavier 37 denim appeals to me, and has a fuzzy hand with many imperfections which is pretty cool and vintage looking. They're two totally different animals, but are equally great jeans.

[electrum]

(apologies for constantly clogging up this thread with photos)

Yo Doc Heech, you definitely are NOT clogging up this thread with your pics or anything else -- believe me. Your extensive documentation of such a wide range of fantastic LVC garments coupled with your historic info and commentaries is a real eye opener for me. Many thanks for taking the time to share so much.

[Dr_Heech]

Paul.

- quickfire question, the 1879 1st pleated blouse, does one actually exist in the Levis Strauss archives?

And when did the pleated one pocket 213/506 type blouse come out?

Obviously, we've all seen the ©1910 213 in your book, and Iishii's ©1910 213, from his collection in the Lightining 'denim' #1 book, but I've only seen illustrations via japanese mags or Levi's and yet to see any really early examples. The earliset one I ever saw ,actually in my hands, was a late 20's- early thirties 506 ( + it was tiny!)

Many thanks in advance for your time and effort..