Levi's Vintage Clothing

[dr.house]

Here we go:

Pre soak measurements BiG-Style (tagged 32x34):

Waist: 32"

Upper thigh: 11,5"

Inseam: 33"

Outseam: 44"

Hem: 8"

The denim is a typical, beautiful cone denim-very flat and clean with a greyish tone. Superrr nice. They fit pretty cool presoak (I could easily wear them as they are), snug and slim, but comfy in the thighs. I'll achieve a perfect fit after a cold soak for sure. They're not as stiff as my other LVC's and the denim is completely different. I'm very happy with my purchase. I keep them unsoaked til my Sugar Canes 66 arrive so I'll have a perfect comparison.

[bod]

Nice aren't they Dr. House, I found mine quite rigid after a soak, more so than my '47s, could have done with buying a 36" leg and hemming as they're a bit short now. Canes 66's on my radar too.

[dr.house]

Yeah, they're really nice. I like the cut a lot (got a pair of Denime 66xx too) and I'm waiting for the 66 Canes. From which year is your pair? The measured inseam is pretty short, but they really aren't. And the denim looks really different compared to 47's/55's.

[jewellben]

2010 1944 arrived today

Tagged 34" waist 36" Leg

Measured

34" Waist (shocked!)

12" Thigh

8" Hem

34.5" inseam

Do I soak them or wear them first for the best fades. I've promised myself not to get too excited and rush to the first wash with these, as i always have done with my other LVC! Advice please all.

The arcuates are golden these rather than the purpleish colour of my previous 44.

I also have my eye on a 1890 does the denim give a bit on these as they are measured an inch tighter than I'd normally get?

[bod]

Yeah, they're really nice. I like the cut a lot (got a pair of Denime 66xx too) and I'm waiting for the 66 Canes. From which year is your pair? The measured inseam is pretty short, but they really aren't. And the denim looks really different compared to 47's/55's.

Mine are 2009 sized up one to a 33W.

[stresMaldo]

643 492 606 sounds like 2006 to me. Post the tags to be sure. (and thanks re the book).

thanks, Paul.

I will definitely post pictures in the next couple days.

Sounds like they're the 2006's, and if so, what do you think about them?

I know the quality fluctuated throughout the past 10 years, whats the verdict on the 2006 LVC '47 release?

[Paul T]

Dropped in briefly at the XX showroom. I didn't take decent full-length photos of the 1878 Pantaloons last time around, so I thought I'd try and do better.

AS mentioned, I believe these are based on an obscure Levi's patent, for pants reinforced with (calico?) sections at the knees and crotch. I love them. Like a more wearable Spring Bottom, these are some of the coolest, old-style repros - or recreations, in this case, given there's no proof they made production - that I've seen in years.

Edit: here's one of the earlier photos to give a better idea of the color. THe denim on these has a lovely ecru fill yarn.

[grooveholmes]

Holy awesome! I really like the curvature of the pockets, the reinforced knees, and the taper. Did you get a chance to catch the price?

[Paul T]

I did ask last time, don't quote me but I think these will be pretty much the price of the existing raw models. I suppose with the dreaded price rise. Gotta say these are worth it, though!

[josh mullen]

Nice aren't they Dr. House, I found mine quite rigid after a soak, more so than my '47s, could have done with buying a 36" leg and hemming as they're a bit short now. Canes 66's on my radar too.

yeah, i agree. mine weren't super rigid pre-soak, but very much so after a couple hours in hot water. the 66's are definitely the stiffest LVC i've had -- why does that sound so unsavory?

[grooveholmes]

I'm enamored. I just keep looking at those photos. Hope you don't mind, Paul, but I found your post with more photos of these beauties to share:

http://www.superfuture.com/supertalk/showpost.php?p=2468786&postcount=10804

Also, I found a blog post with reference to the patent (and to Paul T):

http://vintageengineerboots.blogspot.com/2010/11/spring-2011-lvc-1878-pantaloons.html

,,, This sh*t is great.

[Dr_Heech]

Hey Paul, thanks for posting those details of the pantaloons. Quite like what XX is doing with the early repro stuff, although I'd never actually wear 'em.

Ebay's a bargain fest atm. Bought myself some 2010 raw 55's in a 34/34 ( fifty quid inc. postage) and a BNWT duck popover shirt sz Med (Cost only forty quid inc p+p!)

Unfortunately the duck shirt is too small, but I tried the sz Large on in cinch and it was too big. That cut is just not for me unfortunately...

.

[Paul T]

Sorry about that Dr. THhe pullover takes a bit of... compromise. But since you posted about it a week ago, I"ve taken mine out and I wear it every day in the cold weather; it's far better than a wool pullover, as it's loose.. you don't sweat as much. IN the same way, I wear it in the summer evenings. It's baggy, but it's unique.

When I dropped in to Levi's, they had a few faulty items they'd shared out amongst their staff. As with many factory seconds, you can't even see the fault on many of the items.

So, I confess, I scored a freebie. I've always wanted a pair of the Nevadas. And I quite like the distressed finishes on the early jeans, because it takes so long to fade in 1870s repros. Long story short, I got these.

NOt a bad laundry job:

Some of these Irregulars, I dunno, surely they could sell them at full retail. Whaddyareckon?

[grooveholmes]

I knew I'd seen those somewhere before...

Seriously, what happened to those??

[Dr_Heech]

They look like knappave's imo.

Yeah the duck closed front jumper fits on paper (actual measurements) but because of the boxy fit, it's meant to be worn baggy. I had the same problem with the denim version.

[edit] It states 'Irregular' on the waistband - I wonder if that is anyhting to do with that fkin massive gash down the leg?

.

[dr.house]

2010 1944 arrived today

Tagged 34" waist 36" Leg

Measured

34" Waist (shocked!)

12" Thigh

8" Hem

34.5" inseam

Do I soak them or wear them first for the best fades. I've promised myself not to get too excited and rush to the first wash with these, as i always have done with my other LVC! Advice please all.

The arcuates are golden these rather than the purpleish colour of my previous 44.

I also have my eye on a 1890 does the denim give a bit on these as they are measured an inch tighter than I'd normally get?

Nice. I would soak them. Plz let's see the arcuates in detail and the pocket fbric. From threebyone, right?

[Paul T]

2010 1944 arrived today

T

Do I soak them or wear them first for the best fades?

As Dr House said - soak them. You won't lose any indigo - in fact, they darken up a lot after that first soak. I did mine at 95 degrees, as an exmperiment,.]]

Before:

After that wash, more soaks, and some kayaking. Even overexposed, you can see how black this denim looks. Some of the best recent COne I've seen.

[jewellben]

Nice. I would soak them. Plz let's see the arcuates in detail and the pocket fbric. From threebyone, right?

Will get some Snaps done later. Yes threebyone, couldn't fault that price.

[Maynard Friedman]

Sorry about that Dr. THhe pullover takes a bit of... compromise. But since you posted about it a week ago, I"ve taken mine out and I wear it every day in the cold weather; it's far better than a wool pullover, as it's loose.. you don't sweat as much. IN the same way, I wear it in the summer evenings. It's baggy, but it's unique.

Blimey! Cool in the summer and warm in the winter - those climate technology sports clothing scientists at adidas and Nike should sit up and take note - cotton duck is the way forward...

[stresMaldo]

does anybody have an opinion on the Levi LVC 1947's quality from 2006 versus other pairs from other seasons?

It appears the pair I acquired is from 2006. This is the only pair that I've ever had in my hands, and I dig em, the quality seems pretty good, although I have nothing to compare them to..

any help would be greatly appreciated.

also, where in the states, can I purchase the new '10 LVC line? I know I can go outside and get them from Cultizm.. I'd like to get a paid of 2010 LVC '47's. Im hearing/reading good things about the new Cone denim thats being used...

[fardin]

paul the pantallons looks beautiful. i love all the details. but the leg opening looks tight? or is it just the pic. tho i know the turn of the century pants are kinda slim. did you try em on ? haha

[Paul T]

paul the pantallons looks beautiful. i love all the details. but the leg opening looks tight? or is it just the pic. tho i know the turn of the century pants are kinda slim. did you try em on ? haha

I think it's perspective - I was shooting from waist level. My impression is, very roughly, is that the leg shape is mildly tapered, not too dissimilar from the 1890s pants. But I'll ask for dimensions.

I wish I"d had chance to try them on. I've been told the fit is "really something else." what that means, I don't know! But these, and the Made and Crafted chinos, are some of my favorite denim items for years.

[erbs]

If I wear a 34 in the '66 would I need a 33 in the '55 (assuming both are from the current season)?

[josh mullen]

erbs -- depends on how you'd like those '55 to fit. i have a size 36 '66, and '55 in sizes 34 & 36. you can definitely size down on the '55 though. my size 36 '55 certainly have a more traditional 50's-style fit, but the size 34 are fine as well.

[dr.house]

erbs -- depends on how you'd like those '55 to fit. i have a size 36 '66, and '55 in sizes 34 & 36. you can definitely size down on the '55 though. my size 36 '55 certainly have a more traditional 50's-style fit, but the size 34 are fine as well.

I went TTS (tagged size) with my 55's: snug fit. I love it. They loose a lot length while soaking/ washing (36" turns out to 33.5").

[tropicalbird]

Hot damn, nice shade of blue

[tropicalbird]

@Paul T

Bar tack stitches replaced rivets on the back pockets since 1966 due complaints. But what took them so long? The belt loops on 1922 were bar tacked already. Is it as simple as they underestimated the effectiveness of bar tack stitch?

[Paul T]

does anybody have an opinion on the Levi LVC 1947's quality from 2006 versus other pairs from other seasons?

also, where in the states, can I purchase the new '10 LVC line? I know I can go outside and get them from Cultizm.. I'd like to get a paid of 2010 LVC '47's. Im hearing/reading good things about the new Cone denim thats being used...

I love how SuFU encourages us to have concerns about such minor matters! WHy should they be radically different to other production? And I don't understand why you'd want a pair of 2010 in the same cut, why not try a different one? Sorry if I sound dismissive, but you should wear jeans, not worry about them.

THe 2006 are nice jeans, capable of great fading, as good as anything out there. I wore mine for nine months and sold them for $95 or so, to someone on this board. I don't think the 2010 will be radically different, except that they may be cut an inch larger. Some of the recent Cone fabric is the best I've seen, at least on the 44, so there might be changes in the fabric, but if so it will be subtle.

My old 47 after one wash:

[Paul T]

@Paul T

Bar tack stitches replaced rivets on the back pockets since 1966 due complaints. But what took them so long? The belt loops on 1922 were bar tacked already. Is it as simple as they underestimated the effectiveness of bar tack stitch?

I would guess they removed the back pockets rivets in order to speed up production, not due to complaints. However, they'd covered the rivets, which were originally exposed, back in 1937 because they scratch furniture etc.

[aho]

Not sure if hotlinking will work for this image but here is a nice pair of 55's...From the owner of Sanshin, worn for 2 years: