Levi's Vintage Clothing

[dr.house]

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:

Wow, what a thing of beauty. Thanks man!

[Stratos]

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.

Hi there, long time lurker, first time poster. I totally agree, I myself have collected almost all LVC 501 vintage "milestones", except the really really old ones and the post '60's and I really don't give a rat's ass what season LVC produced these. I have just always loved vintage jeans and I love the look and feel and how they stand out from modern mass produced 501's. Actually, if you don't care too much about what season they are and keep your eye open, you can find LVC for less than current new 501's.. .

My favourites are the '33's (veeeery comfy) and the 1966's (almost like modern ones, but just that different enough to be euhrm 'different :-) ). I'll post some pics later on.

[scout233]

Thought I would post a pic of my 1983's. I started wearing them in mid Feb. (2010}. These were my first pair of "real" jeans. I need to take a couple close ups of these. The roping at the hem really turned out nice on these.

[SLAB]

welcome to sufu Stratos & goddamn those 'sanshin' 55's are amazing

[Paul T]

Yup, those Sanshin are lovely. Must be the Japanese version (offset belt loop). Most of them up to 2005 or so used Cone, I wonder what that one is.

WHen I snapped my LVC just now, in preparation for putting them away for the ROY comp, I was struck by how very different all the denim is. As they get older, the 47 and 55 look even more different. THe 47 is a very intense blue; the 55 inkier. You can see the 47 is a looser weave, you can see more of the weft thread. And because the 55 is denser, you get more of that micro-fade.

55s. Not sure how old, around 9 months.

And bonus photos... these both got more wear time this year, but will go back in the box for the upcoming Roy Year.

1947:

1901. Definitely a bit dirtier than the last time I posted them - all authentic 1900s soot and mud...

[Maynard Friedman]

Nice 83's Scout233.

On the subject of 83's, I'd like to get a pair at some stage (no rush) as my very first pair of raw denims was an original pair of mid-80's redline Levi's and I'm probably feeling nostalgic.

Anyway, I've heard that in the 70's and 80's, Levi's started using bulkier, OE denim and additional sulphur dye.

Could the Levi's experts here confirm whether this is the case and if so, is it replicated by LVC for the later models? Will this mean the denim is nothing special and likely to fade quickly?

I thank you.

[Paul T]

It's on the Cone FAQ on my site, I believe. Cone added sulphur to the dye, late 70s; and in the early 80s, the denim changed to ring/OE - meaning the fill yarn was open end. THis shouldn't really affect the fading, is the fill is the white/ecru thread that you can only really see from the inside. But it will have some effect... changing the internal tensions of the jeans etc. Also, these jeans don't have leg twist.. Still, I reckon if you wear them hard, you'll get a decent fade.

THe sulphur might mean the jeans fade more quickly, it's hard to say. But I note that the SelfEdge x SuFu x Styleforum jeans have a sulphur top, too.

[dr.house]

Both pairs look awesome, Paul. And I agree totally, the 55's got a lot more 'ink' in their indigo!

[Maynard Friedman]

Thanks Paul, so LVC will remake the denim as per the original spec then.

I do seem to recall that my original 80's Levi's had leg twist - I thought there was something wrong with them at the time!

[ranonranonarat]

paul, i love those 55s and the 47s. haven't had experience with either of them yet (a pair was sent out 7 weeks ago but never got to me via canada sea mail, dont know if they ever will but another story for another time ). the whiskering on yours looks really nice. quick question, does the tightness of the jean affect the shape of the whiskers? i do realise that yours are slightly wavy-er and are closer to the bottom of the crotch. has it always been like that with every pair of jeans that you wear?

[Stratos]

Those 83's look fabulous, what's the difference with the 66's? I mean fit-wise they look the same?

[Paul T]

paul, i love those 55s and the 47s. haven't had experience with either of them yet (a pair was sent out 7 weeks ago but never got to me via canada sea mail, dont know if they ever will but another story for another time ). the whiskering on yours looks really nice. quick question, does the tightness of the jean affect the shape of the whiskers? i do realise that yours are slightly wavy-er and are closer to the bottom of the crotch. has it always been like that with every pair of jeans that you wear?

hmmm, never compared my whiskers with others, not really sure. My jeans aren't particularly tight, always an inch or two of slack around the thighs. THere always seem to be two thinner, wavy lines, which run in into a Y shape or almost antler shape, below the pockets, my jeans seem to crease that way when I sit down, probably because of the crap I have in my pockets.

[Joseph Hill]

I would definitely go for those pantaloons. Pouring through Sansomes book just feeds the fire. I'd be afraid they won't be around for more than a season though, and after the ROYs I really don't think I could slip more pants into the house. Maybe stash a pair to 'discover' in a couple of years...

So I've heard the term sulpher top and sulpher bottom, are they different, or the same thing and sloppily referenced? I can find lots of info on indigo dyeing in the basic method, but when it comes to some of the added variations, I come up empty.

[cash]

Sulphur bottom = added before the indigo

Sulphur top = added after the indigo

Darkening agent, right?

[colgems1966]

Those 83's look fabulous, what's the difference with the 66's? I mean fit-wise they look the same?

the 83's &66 are very similar in fit although the 66 is an all around nicer jean.

Paul the 83's do have leg twist frankly more than my 47's or 55's.

[rayw44]

Paul T, when you were given a chance to see the 1878 Pantaloons, were you able to find out when they will be released and where? I assumed Cultizm would have had them, but I asked and they said they will not be stocking them.

[stresMaldo]

Paul T - my bad, I actually meant I'd love to purchase the 1944 in the new LVC line. All the 47 talk had me typing the wrong year too quickly!

And trust me, I completely agree with you. They're meant to be worn. I didn't mean to come off as I apparently did. I'm with you on this one. I just know that you ,amongst other people here, really know your Levi's and with that, I just wanted your quick opinion on the quality differences. Plus, I've spent countless hours reading hundreds of pages on this thread where you discussed this very thing. .

Regardless, I am now, and will continue to wear them all the same. It was just to satisfy my curiosity, the answer wouldnt have changed a thing, other than me being more informed.

Thanks for replying to my earlier post. I promise I won't clutter up the thread with any more inquiries.

[scout233]

"the 83's &66 are very similar in fit although the 66 is an all around nicer jean."

I don't have a pair of 66's, so I can't directly compare. But, I think the 66's have a bit more tapered leg(?) I think the 83's have some nice denim imo.. which is why I chose them.

[rnrswitch]

Don't worry about Paul T. He is mostly harmless. He acts like he wrote the book on jeans.

[stresMaldo]

^ LOL Its actually a great book.

my wife thought I was insane for staying up until 2 am this morning reading and checking it out when I had to be up at 6 for work...

I mostly just meant, that I agree with his assessment. no harm, no foul.

[GregoryH]

I've been wearing my 47's non stop pretty much since I acquired them...I've noticed that they are wearing faster than any pair of jeans I have owned in the past. Is this normal for certain years? I'm not digging ditches in them (although I certainly would if I could haha) I am however a rather active barista..on my feet all day long, running around, bending, tamping etc.

Just wanted to see if anyone else found their 4'7's to be super quick to show wear

[blm14]

Just wanted to say that while my Mij no2 evisus are getting repaired I am back to my 555 55's (from pomata, thanks once again!) and they are are just too awesome for words but MAN do they fade slowly! In the time that I've worn the 55s, the same amount of wear resulted in my evisus having two crotch blowouts, needed repairs due to where I cuffed them, and holes in the back pocket from the wallet. Wallet has barely made a dent in the levis and I haven't seen anything remotely like fraying where I cuff them.

I really wish they could source that original 1996-98 era denim again...

[josh mullen]

I've been wearing my 47's non stop pretty much since I acquired them...I've noticed that they are wearing faster than any pair of jeans I have owned in the past. Is this normal for certain years? I'm not digging ditches in them (although I certainly would if I could haha) I am however a rather active barista..on my feet all day long, running around, bending, tamping etc.

Just wanted to see if anyone else found their 4'7's to be super quick to show wear

my experiences with '47s have been quite different. i've had three pairs, beginning in 06 or 07, and have never seen really good fades -- certainly not the sort of fades i've seen here in the LVC thread. all of the other LVC stuff i've had has turned out beautifully. honestly, the '66s i've been wearing for three or four weeks are already showing more wear than my last pair of '47s after six months. the 2010 '47s i have now are nice though, regardless of how they fade.

[BAerts]

@GregoryH : '47s are supposedly slower fading than other LVC models. Mine only have about five to six months of wear and they're just now starting to show some fades. Still a great pair. The outcome is phenomenal. If they're fading fast, great, as long as they're not falling apart prematurely.

[ninja07]

Just wanted to say that while my Mij no2 evisus are getting repaired I am back to my 555 55's (from pomata, thanks once again!) and they are are just too awesome for words but MAN do they fade slowly! In the time that I've worn the 55s, the same amount of wear resulted in my evisus having two crotch blowouts, needed repairs due to where I cuffed them, and holes in the back pocket from the wallet. Wallet has barely made a dent in the levis and I haven't seen anything remotely like fraying where I cuff them.

I really wish they could source that original 1996-98 era denim again...

Do post some pics of your 55s. Need to see more 55s around here more. One of the best I've seen are Paul T's. Yep mine are fading slowly too. Will update after a quick wash soon.

[airfrogusmc]

I've been wearing my 47's non stop pretty much since I acquired them...I've noticed that they are wearing faster than any pair of jeans I have owned in the past. Is this normal for certain years? I'm not digging ditches in them (although I certainly would if I could haha) I am however a rather active barista..on my feet all day long, running around, bending, tamping etc.

Just wanted to see if anyone else found their 4'7's to be super quick to show wear

Actually I've found my 1955s and especially my 1915s to wear faster.

[roy6]

^speaking of your 1915's, how about an updated pic?

[erk]

I really wish they could source that original 1996-98 era denim again...

did it look anything like this?

[colgems1966]

"the 83's &66 are very similar in fit although the 66 is an all around nicer jean."

I don't have a pair of 66's, so I can't directly compare. But, I think the 66's have a bit more tapered leg(?) I think the 83's have some nice denim imo.. which is why I chose them.

if the 66's have more taper, i haven't noticed it. they are quite similar in fit. the arcs look better on the 83' but the denim is nicer on the 66's. the 83's are very represenative of the originals and come across somewhat more "modern" although still cool.i am very familiar with the originals. i used to wear these back in the day and would go in a local department store and buy 5 pairs at a time for around $25 a pair. sentimentality is part of why i bought mine. i literally grew up in these and the old 505-0217's.

[Paul T]

Just wanted to say that while my Mij no2 evisus are getting repaired I am back to my 555 55's (from pomata, thanks once again!) and they are are just too awesome for words but MAN do they fade slowly! In the time that I've worn the 55s, the same amount of wear resulted in my evisus having two crotch blowouts, needed repairs due to where I cuffed them, and holes in the back pocket from the wallet. Wallet has barely made a dent in the levis and I haven't seen anything remotely like fraying where I cuff them.

I really wish they could source that original 1996-98 era denim again...

I've had a couple of those jeans with early denim; they are great, although I'm not certain that the new Cone is inferior; I think it's more specific, wheras that fabric was more generic. My 55s from 2007 or so don't seem too different from my 1999 jeans, again courtesy of Pomata. I can't wait to wear mine, altho I plan to take a break from cone after the ROY comp, and maybe try the t Warehouse 1001XX for a year, before getting on to those. That gives me 24 months to pick up another pair of 55, unless I try out the 44.

I agree with you 100% about the slow wearing. In particular, the nipper's late 60s 302 aren't showing any crocking at all, bar the knees, in 3 months. They could still be new jeans. Yet they look lovely, very fuzzy and dark, dark blue.

Most important, though: post your 1955!