Levi's Vintage Clothing

[partytaco]

bravo!!!!!! was starting to feel like everyone checking this thread is on Levi's payroll.

I agree with partytaco about the LVC denim. Especially the 47 is odd because it is like mentioned too shiny, almost like the cotton was mercerised. The 55 is better but I don't think Cone does a good job of replicating Levi denim at ALL.

[airfrogusmc]

I've seen the LVC 55s NWTs next to original NWT 55s and I beg to differ but I think Cone is not real consistant with their denim. Some years seam to have better denim than others. My 55s are really nice while I'm not crazy about my 47s. The 333s and the 209 coveralls as well as my 20s 201s all have incredible denim. My 1917s are Japanese denim and are very nice also. My 1933s (555) have really cool denim also. I had a pair of 33s form a few years later and the denim wasn't near as nice.

[airfrogusmc]

Not all Fullcounts are good though. A lot of their stuff is very modernised too.

I agree with partytaco about the LVC denim. Especially the 47 is odd because it is like mentioned too shiny, almost like the cotton was mercerised. The 55 is better but I don't think Cone does a good job of replicating Levi denim at ALL.

I've written about JP LVC before and I think in a very sensible way, making sure not to hype it, but I would like to say that some of their denim has exactly the grainy but not slubby texture of originals.

I have a 506 jacket by LVC JP and the denim is great even though the details are off.

But my problem with LVC JP as well as EU is the shape of the backpockets. The EU 47 seems to be exaggerated to stand out. I've never seen that shape on originals. And the 55 isn't great either.

Look at these original 47s

My 55s when they were raw.

[Paul T]

btw, Mccoys are not good replicas. They have a strong dye and nice details but the denim looks nothing like Levi's.

Warehouse is the best, together with some denims from FOB, Fullcount.

Absolutely agreed - i was talking more about their Lee repros, which are terrific, but the point stands, which is that many of their models are more expensive.

bravo!!!!!! was starting to feel like everyone checking this thread is on Levi's payroll.

WE can have loyalty to someone without being paid by them (although in the interests of full disclosure I have done work for Levi's and they have done me many favours, as have a couple of their rivals). I should also point out that in the mid 90s I went into the Valencia St factory, wearing Lee repros, and had an argument head-to-head with the manager, and told them their then replicas (the Capital E) were shit compared to Evis and Levi's Japan and they were losing the European market hands down, so I'm not starry-eyed about the company. (I should also point out that the fabric on some of those very early examples, like the 201, looks spookily like deadstock after 17 years of ageing).

Some of this argument might be moot - Cone have closed some of their dyeing plant, for all i know their future productoin might be terrlble (but Lord, I bet that earlier LVC will become collectable).

HJJ is right, Cone fabric is variable; I've only seen a few Levi's Japan relpicas and more importantly haven't worn them in but can believe they're better. The 47 Coneis also a funny fabric; some examples look great, some look crummy, and the variables include both how they were made - and how the user has treated them.

But Cone, AFAIK, are the only people to attempt to really register the difference between the eras of fabric - and I've seen their samples, washed, against the examples they are trying to replicate. Of all the examples, I really disagree wtih hjj about the 55 - i think they are really capable of getting very close indeed to the original - and I did own a pair of mid 50s jeans for many years. My LVC however, does have different-pockets than the old ones (whcih varied, as discussed earlier, but still looked wider than the repros).

I'm absolutely not arguing that LVC are perfect. But I absolutely disagree with the premise that Japanese companies in general do a better job. I think that's bullshit, just like the lies about Evisu looms which helped give birth to this story. Smaller companies are just as capable of BS as bigger ones, like crap about 47 jeans being 14.5 oz and that Levi's use lighter fabric. Why do you think so many Japanese companies have a 44 repro, or a 55 repro, rather than a 43 or a 46? they mostly even base their model years on LVC versions!

I think the best LVC - like the Nevada jeans, the older and some of the newer 55 repros, the 66, the 333 and the 201 - are absolutely amazing, especially when you factor in price.

FInally, I should say I love this subject, it's intriguing and raises many great points (I might post it to a few insiders, it would be great if ti helped Levi's raise their game.). I would lvoe to hear what people like ringring think. this is a matter I've discussed with senior people in the industry privately: and I have heard opinions that some Cone produciton is poor - and that some production is really under-rated.

[erk]

Some of this argument might be moot - Cone have closed some of their dyeing plant, for all i know their future productoin might be terrlble (but Lord, I bet that earlier LVC will become collectable).

can you elaborate on that? it sounds bad...

[Paul T]

Cone, and other US denim and apparel manufacturers, are going through hard times - when I was there they had just laid off a lot of employees and announced they were closing some of their dyeing works. I don't know how this will affect production, obviously it doesn't sound good. But it wasn't one fo the questions I asked, as I was so short of time. The selvage production is really just a labor of love for them as far as I can tell.

By the way, it's worth clicking on the Cone story on my sig - it covers some of the points in this discussion. People wouldn't be saying that Cone started using sulphur in the dye by 67, when it's on the record that it was introduced in 1975, if they'd read it!

[erk]

thanks. hopefully we won't see a drop in quality.

[blm14]

I'm thinking of grabbing another pair from cultizm. Choices are:

37

17

27

1890

Or wait for the 1915? I may still buy a 1915 so consider just the four above. Which would you kop?

[Shorty Long]

I really like my 37s...I'm holding out for the 15s too

[lenn]

^1917's the most appealing to me. also, one of my grandfathers is born in that year, making it more special. i'm planning on copping all 501's from the birth years of my parents + grandparents. don't know why.

[Shorty Long]

Here's a fit pic of my '44s. Started raw, and I've worn them on and off for 3+ years.

[rnrswitch]

bravo!!!!!! was starting to feel like everyone checking this thread is on Levi's payroll.

This does happen to be an LVC thread, so I would assume mostly people who are into LVC would frequent this thread, similarly, if you look at the Samurai thread, from the posts, you could also assume that they are all on Samurai's payroll.

Although, I don't feel like this comment is pointed towards all people posting in this thread, but maybe just towards one prominent poster. A poster who has consistently called out levis and their LVC production. A subtle cheap shot.

[airfrogusmc]

rnrswitch, WELL SAID!!!!

[airfrogusmc]

I'm thinking of grabbing another pair from cultizm. Choices are:

37

17

27

1890

Or wait for the 1915? I may still buy a 1915 so consider just the four above. Which would you kop?

I would take the 1917s over the 27 & 37s. I have the 1917s, 37s & 27s and between them the 17s are my favorites. Waiting to see the the 15s as well but you wouldn't go wrong with the 17s.

[cash]

I think that it gets really easy to call out Levis for a myriad of reasons – one being the lawsuits. But when talking about LVC, some of the posters tend to forget that we live in a post-modern world and one thing that demonstrates this post-modern paradigm is reproduction jeans. It’s sort of like bitching about a hip-hop artist that samples a song you like because he didn’t play the whole riff or the rap wasn’t in keeping with the original intent of the song. True, Levis has chosen to meticulously reproduce some models and only chosen to capture the essence of other (’47). It’s a fashion line. No one at Levis has ever claimed that the line was designed to be a museum-quality reproduction (no one I know of).

(In all fairness, I understand comparing and contrasting one brand to another and the fact that one might prefer certain qualities of say the Levis JP over the domestic line – I’m not calling out any particular poster)

The same goes for people that bitch about people wearing work wear, but not doing manual labor. It’s a post-modern world. You get to write all the rules.

As Paul T has pointed out, LVC is really a labor of love for everyone involved – from Cone to corporate. LVC offers, IMO, the most bang for the buck in the repro game.

And since I’ve taken up so much space, one last thing: $300 worth of 501 STF will last you longer than one single pair of $300 jeans. Stop pretending that we buy this shit because it is of such superior quality. We pay top dollar for this shit because we are collectors looking for the unique and rare – it’s a hobby, like fly fishing or cars or whatever else men of a certain age waste their hard-earned time and money on. In fact, as a fly fisherman, denim sometimes seems like a pretty affordable hobby.

[cash]

oh, those '44s look amazing.

[Paul T]

They do look great - just like vintage ! (Where I do find one of those irritating smileys?).

I hope fre$co won't mind me repoosting his excellent 44s that he let me use on the 501 guide thread. I wonder if he downsized on these? In any case, both jeans show how the '44 is a real highlight in the LVC line with a few years' wear:

[Shorty Long]

Thanks...I have a pair of "retired" 47s around here somewhere (I think my wife's wearing them today), and I'm working on my '37s right now, but they don't have much wear on them yet.

I think one of the things that give my jeans their "authentic" wear is that I do work in them...ie, help my dad with his construction jobs, gardening, etc. This is what people back in the day wore jeans for...just my 2 cents...

oh, those '44s look amazing.

[rnrswitch]

I do work in my jeans too, ya know, designing hi-z low-z wideband high frequency amplifiers. Really good for the ass fades.

[Paul T]

Yup. The well-known secret of vintage jeans is that they're dirty.

this photo sponsored by vf corp...

(Actually, I was real annoyed the g/f washed this pair, I would left them for another year of scrubbing floors and painting ceilings...)

[slowdownarthur]

Those '44s do look amazing.

Just bought a pair myself last week. I'd planned to get some '55s but in the shop the 44s won me over. Hope I can get some fades like Shorty's and fre$co's. +rep.

[partytaco]

i'm happy at least one person besides myself notices the obvious difference in the texture/color between the actual vintage 40 -60's Levi's denim and the LVC line reproductions. it's amusing to me that most are defending the authenticity having never handled and compared side by side an actual pre-60's pair of Levi's vs an LVC repro....they are going to solely on what Paul T who has a possible bridge burning relationship with the two companies (Levi's and now Cone) in question has to say or in one instance what they remember from 40 years ago.

I do appreciate the effort that Levi's puts into the collection and it's a great buy at the price point however until they can fix a few of the details (on the 40's-60's denim....I can't speak for the earlier pieces.) which I doubt they will (see below) my money will keep going to Japan.

***Paul T wrote "But I absolutely disagree with the premise that Japanese companies in general do a better job"

How can you disagree when the Japanese pretty much are solely responsible for inventing and perfecting the reproduction denim (and workwear/military) market and reinvigorated the niche premium denim market. They picked up a craft that we threw away. This is an actual competitive money making industry in Japan that is taking very seriously unlike here where companies like LVC/RRL are hemmoraging money for their parent companies. Levi's has absolutely no incentive for taking the line too serious here (where is the LVC store in the US??? They have no interest in reopening Selvedge... I have already had that conversation.) and they I believe they know the average customer here isn't as focused on the details and can get away with cost cutting on things like sourcing correct red tabs, incorrect leather/denim. America is an impulsive throw it away onto the next culture. I spent many years working high end retail for a company all of you on here know and love and I can tell you it's night and day between American clothing consumers and Japanese. The average Japanese customer would take the time to really get to know a garment and study every detail before purchasing. An average American would look for their favorite color and throw it on the counter and pay for it. enough....i am tired.....

sorry to rock the boat.

[crownzip]

Hey Partytaco,

Couldn't agree with you more.

Anyone who has handled and seen original vintage Levi's from the 30's, 40's and 50's knows that LVC have much of room for improvement. And anyone who has seen LVC Japan knows that they pay far more attention to the details than the stuff that LVC pushes on the west.

Thanks for posting the obvious.

[Paul T]

Ah, this is the "don't go bringing the facts into this argument" response?. Because I've gone through the Levi's archives, and Cone - or, for that matter, gone through the records of people like Evis and Leiv's JP - to find out more about them, that impairs my argument? You'll have to do better than that. I have probably been the person who has called out Levi's errors more than anyone on this thread.

Perhaps if you'd visited Cone you would be better informed. It would stop you making fallacious arguments like the one that 60s Levi's - whihc I have posted side by side with the repros on this board - date from when Levi's added sulphur to their dye?

I would be great if you could post some photos to prove your point? I have posted photos on here of close-ups of the 201 and close-ups of vintage items, photos of other repros next to originals; where have you posted anything on here to support your argument? Or to help, or inform people in general?

In the meantime, by the next wash of my 55, I'll probably have time to photograph them next to some NWT and vintage pairs from circa 1953 and post them here.

This is real life, not cowboys vs indians. Simply saying Leiv's bad, Japan good doesn't get us anywhere. The argument is way more complicated than that...if I have a flag to wave here it's for the poeple who've made terrific products at LVC, perhaps despite the fact they work for such a huge organisaiton.

AS to all the other arguments about Levi's being too big a company, making errors with LVC, and stupidly closing down Selvedge in NYC , or that it was Japanese companies (with Levi's Japan THE FIRST among them) largely responsible or reviving denim, look through this thread and you'll see I've made them long before you. Meanwhile, I stand by my point that much of LVC's product, including the 200, 300 repros are terrific, innovative items and that the company doesn't get credit for much of what it does. I shall continue to praise their good stuff, alongside the Japanese and other denim I like!

[Paul T]

I made a couple of calls over the last few days on fabric-related queries. I also wanted to find out more about the 201 fabric.

THis was developed around 2001 by a team including Stefano Aldighieri - this was just at the time LVC was going through a purple patch, with the Nevada replica and others. It was over this period that LVC develped a huge range of different fabrics, several of them natural indigo. The 201, however, is synthetic indigo, produced by Kurabo; what's remarkable about it is how well it mimcs some of the characteristics of the 1920s original, which is from an unknown factory but owuld have almost certainly been natrual indigo too.

This is the 201 from 2005 or so, one wash. THe photo gives a clue but doesn't really depict is how the unworn washed areas are a dark blue; slight wear comes out a very greeny turquoise; very worn is off-white. THe first production of 201 would have looked even better I suspect, as the cotton looked slightly more ecru - that could simply be the effect of the fact they're a few years older, as mentioned on the 201 thread.

Just as a rough comparison, here's the recent eBay 201s, from arund 1890

Sadly for us, Stefano moved on from Levi's, he's the one responsible for a lot of their finest work. (And he is a big fan of Cone!)

[airfrogusmc]

Grant you know with most companys making repros they do some years/contract well and some maybe not so well. I think LVCs best efforts are the 20s 201s. The 55 501s which are really close to origianls in denim and cut (I've seen them next to origianls) the 209 coveralls are really nice, great denim. I think Paul you said its the same denim as the 201s. Looks the about the same to me. The 333s I have the denim is just fantastic and much different than any other denim I've seen on LVCs. I had a pair of 1944s that were decent. I think the problem is with consistancy. Certain years and models have been done fairly accurate while others haven't been. But we've seen that with repro jacket makers too.

Almost forgot my 33 501s. Some of my favorites.

[Shorty Long]

I would assume that consistency was a problem (or maybe an issue is a better way to put it) back in the "old days" too.

[billyk]

Has anyone washed their "Oldest Oldest" yet? My 34 feels like it's actually 36, so I'm tempted to wash (a la Levi's "Creek").

Thanks,

Will

[airfrogusmc]

I say go as long as you can stand them before the first SOAK. 6 months if you can. Then cold soak and air dry...

[Paul T]

Have you soaked them?

I got a fair amount of shrinkae out of my 1890s on first soak - although I bought actual waist size and the ass is still pretty baggy. But my experience, sadly, is that if they're too big after the first soak the wash doesn't make a big difference, on the early jeans at least.