Levi's Vintage Clothing

[whatuknowaboutthat]

you more than likely saw 501 STF. Def not LVC 1947 501s. Similar but def two different things.

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

Actually the 505s were the first sanforized jeans made by levis. That oipolloi link is wrong, because they say they are preshrunk, but they are just sanforized. They will shrink a bit, but nothing like 10%.

oipolloi is not that wrong, because the tag of the new 505s says that these will shrink aprox. 10% which as much as 1947 shrink, I guess it´s because they are made of kaihara japan denim last year... but when L32s are actually L34 it´s not bad if they shrink, the length is more important, every waistband will stretch back with some wear and

if it doesn´t work that fast, try my stretch method:

http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showthread.php?p=517563#post517563

[m1sterko]

you more than likely saw 501 STF. Def not LVC 1947 501s. Similar but def two different things.

ooh yeah it was the 501 STF.

are those any good or am i better off trying to find LVC 1947 501s

[jaspar]

How is the fit of the '44's compared to the 1947's. Do they have a similarly straight leg and lack of hip flare? I love the painted arcuates on the '44's but I don't know if I'd be comfortable wearing the hip-flaring style of something like the 33's.

[Crackerhead]

oipolloi is not that wrong, because the tag of the new 505s says that these will shrink aprox. 10% which as much as 1947 shrink, I guess it´s because they are made of kaihara japan denim last year... but when L32s are actually L34 it´s not bad if they shrink, the length is more important, every waistband will stretch back with some wear and

if it doesn´t work that fast, try my stretch method:

http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showthread.php?p=517563#post517563

That's definitely a misprint then. Only shrink-to-fit denim would shrink 10%.

Plus, 505's are a zipper fly. The zipper would get messed up if 10% shrinkage were to occur. That's why only 501's are shrink-to-fit (because they're a button fly.) The 505's should shrink no more than 5% total, and mostly in length.

[Shorty Long]

the fit is much baggier than the '47s...still a straight leg, but wider overall...

How is the fit of the '44's compared to the 1947's. Do they have a similarly straight leg and lack of hip flare? I love the painted arcuates on the '44's but I don't know if I'd be comfortable wearing the hip-flaring style of something like the 33's.

[modual]

Can anyone compare the 44's with sugarcane 47's ? I have the canes and find they are quite big through the leg.

[post50modern]

Hello, I am rather new to this board so if I am in the wrong thread, be nice and tell me where I should post. I just bought these jeans with a bunch of other LVC items and am a bit puzzled by them. From the writing on the interior pocket I would guess these came from the Spring 2002 LVC line. There is an interior tag with silver thread running through but it is just the wash tag, not the tag that states the model #. So...was someone in the Levi's factory having fun this day in making a pair of "Frankenstein" pants or were these an actual LVC offering?? Notice the three or four different denims and the gratuitous use of copper rivets....

[Crackerhead]

Hello, I am rather new to this board so if I am in the wrong thread, be nice and tell me where I should post. I just bought these jeans with a bunch of other LVC items and am a bit puzzled by them. From the writing on the interior pocket I would guess these came from the Spring 2002 LVC line. There is an interior tag with silver thread running through but it is just the wash tag, not the tag that states the model #. So...was someone in the Levi's factory having fun this day in making a pair of "Frankenstein" pants or were these an actual LVC offering?? Notice the three or four different denims and the gratuitous use of copper rivets....

I'm pretty sure that was just a factory experiment, because I have never seen these LVC jeans, and don't think they were a production version (and glad for it at that, because those are hideous, hahaha.) You're the guy selling a bunch of prototypes on eBay, right?

[post50modern]

yes, I'm that guy and from handling all that raw denim I have the raw blue fingers to prove it! :-)

I thought this pair was a mistake and quite laughable until I came across this post on a japanese Website, but sadly the photos were "broken".

http://www.jjap.co.kr/board/board.html?code=jjap_board8&page=3&type=v&num1=999914&num2=00000&lock=N

in any case there are pretty hideous but interesting to look at.

[robbie]

I am planning on making a trip to a levi's outlet over in Iowa in a few weeks. I've heard that people have been able to find Levi's Collectible Clothing in some of the outlets, but what chance do I have of finding LVC stuff? If I was unable to find anything there are there any retailers who carry the line within 250 miles of Omaha,NE?

thanks,

robbie

[Rob]

The Sonic Crush 505 did get a release. It wasn't, however, until January 2003. In terms of production versions I think it was the case of no two pairs identical. The store I bought from probably still has a pair as they aren't wearable, much like the Celebration pair in this booklet.

[Paul T]

Ah, I remember the Celebration now. I'd erased it from my memory, it was so hideous. And ludicrously expensive, if I remember right. 2003 was not a good year for LVC...

[Rob]

Ah, I remember the Celebration now. I'd erased it from my memory, it was so hideous. And ludicrously expensive, if I remember right. 2003 was not a good year for LVC...

Dreadful.

Not mine incidentally.

[modual]

Would you guys say this is how a 47 cut should fit typically AFTER shrinkage ? Looks slightly loose to me

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

I would buy em much skinnier unwashed, because all inches that shrunk with a wash will stretch back, only the leg length won´t shrink back, so buy em fitted. but this is my opinion

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

don´t now why but this ugly celebs reminds of the 1980s bon jovi

em Rob could please show us what else came out in 2003, there should be 2 pages more with the booklet, we need for our LVC catalgue thread =)

but that 1911 MC5 waiscoat is really cool!!!

[Rob]

Here's the rest.

[modual]

One more question regarding the 67 505 sizing. Where my jeans sit my waist measures 32" - 32.5". Which size do i need 30, 31 or 32 ?

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

One more question regarding the 67 505 sizing. Where my jeans sit my waist measures 32" - 32.5". Which size do i need 30, 31 or 32 ?

If you usually wear W32 jeans, I´d go for a W32 but only with 505s from the season

2007 because they fit true to size, older 505s fit slimmer in waist, then go for W34 I´d say.

THANKS ROB!!!

[modual]

If you usually wear W32 jeans, I´d go for a W32 but only with 505s from the season

2007 because they fit true to size, older 505s fit slimmer in waist, then go for W34 I´d say.

THANKS ROB!!!

Thanks. Well i wear 29" in apc , 30" in nudie and i have lvc 55 in 32" which fits well after shrinkage

[Biff15]

Thanks. Well i wear 29" in apc , 30" in nudie and i have lvc 55 in 32" which fits well after shrinkage

...then a 32 should be fine. i copped a pair of the 67 505's last year in my true waist size and they're money...

[airfrogusmc]

I would buy em much skinnier unwashed, because all inches that shrunk with a wash will stretch back, only the leg length won´t shrink back, so buy em fitted. but this is my opinion

They don't stretch all the way back and you will loose a bit in the seat and calfs and those areas will not stretch back like the waist.

Another thing about the 47s is the back pockets are smaller than the pockets on the 55s which are pretty much dead on to originals late 40 - 50s 501s. The 47s are really nice but if you want accuracy the 55s are closer to jeans of that era.

[jayrock]

are these legit?

the only thing that threw me was the different color stitching for the arcuates. also, does anyone know what year these are (from the tag)?

[rnrswitch]

Look legit, I think they are 2006.

[jayrock]

thanks, any chance of the repro year?

my first guess was '47 given the stitched arcuates, leather tag, and hidden rivets. the auction doesn't give a year, just the description "50s repro levis", but didn't they switch over from hidden rivets to bar tacks in the 50s?

[Dex_star]

it says 47501 on the tag... last line right side

[jayrock]

d'oh! thanks for pointing that out!

this is a great thread. you levi's guys really know your stuff

+rape

[renski]

They don't stretch all the way back and you will loose a bit in the seat and calfs and those areas will not stretch back like the waist.

i bought my 47s in a 31 from what i normally wear and they do stretch a fair amount. even after washing them, i thought they would of shrank down to a 29 but are still at 30.

how can you tell what year they are made in or is that even possible?

[airfrogusmc]

Theres a tag inside the leg with a date code..

These are 1955s from fall 06.

This is a tag from 1937 501s from 03