Levi's Vintage Clothing

[Dr_Heech]

^God soo close. Shame but l guess it just wasn't ment to be 

Thanks Mike, really appreciate it.

[Dry]

I had to wash my 1967 505s after wearing them since November. They are looking good.

[bod]

A description of the 1837 first jean re 822 / 555 I came across..

 

[Maynard Friedman]

^ I think there’s an echo in here! 

[bod]

Well duh me how did I miss that 

[Dry]

21 hours ago, Sansome1877 said:

I’m sort of doing the same thing in a way, only I’m buying vintage 501’s from the 70’s thru 90’s...I’m looking at it, like a stock share and I always try to get a pair for under $20

@Dry impressive collection, my hoard is a retirement plan...you doing the same?

hope your picking these up at a discount?

I am not doing it for financial gain but they could be a useful nest egg if I can bear ever to part with any. I have bought at discounted prices in the past and have bought some in sales. On the other hand I paid a lot for a pair of deadstock 501s from 1975 (factory 16) in my size 2 or 3 years ago.

[Dry]

On 12/02/2021 at 4:10 PM, Dr_Heech said:

@unders really spectacular wear on those, maybe you should have had 20 backup pairs (of varying sizes obviously) so your waistline challenges would have been met and you now wouldn't be crying into your pint in the corner.

Joshing aside, just ribbing you @Dry - you buy as many pairs as you want if you feel you haven't enough in reserve.

I myself did the same back in the earlier 2000's, although l probably had 2 or 3 raw pairs in various sizes and an example or 2 of each 555 piece, including duck stuff and all the jackets. I moved on since then to the likes of CSF, FW and more recently WH.

Hey what size are you (raw)? Maybe we could do a Nos/tagless trade? I have a pair of 1937s sz 34x32 l'd be willing to swap for something similar in a similar size (obvs )  - got a 1901 in a 34?

 

I've got a range of sizes. Leg with shrink to fit can be no less than 36. Not into trading I'm afraid. I tend to go for pairs which take my fancy for whatever reason but not into wide fits at present. Raw I go for W32 which is a snug fit on me but 34 is the smallest I have in 1947s. I have W34, W36 and W38s  (I have trimmed off a bit) with L36 or 38. I tamed a pair of W31 L38 1955s about 10 years ago - that was a struggle, and more recently a pair of W30 L34 1967 505s. 

[Dr_Heech]

No problem @Dry and you did well to avoid the (imo) dreadful 1927 and the less than spectacular 1915/17 range.

I think if l could go back in time and pick up a couple of pairs of nos Lvc again, it would be a pair of 555 33's in a 34x38 or a pair of 643M 1901's in a 34x34. But they would have to also be back in time prices too, which ain't ever gonna happen for me.

Tbh l have about 20ish pairs altogether in total, which under the watchful eye of the Mrs, is enough.

So l salute you and just want to add can you post some worn worn pairs too?

[Maynard Friedman]

I think the 1915s were great Charlie. What did you not like about them?

[Dr_Heech]

12 hours ago, Maynard Friedman said:

I think the 1915s were great Charlie. What did you not like about them?

Oh sorry Martin, l wasn't aware you had a pair. Sure we all discussed this before? The denim was great but the repro was sorta based on the homer variation.  The homer/celebration jean was a distressed pair lovingly repaired and altered.  Some of the little alterations were copied directly as a consequence to the raw versions of 1915/17. Crappy slim cinch back and suspender button sets far too close together. I had both raw 1915 and 1917 and the cuts were too slim and not true to era. The sizing/quality was all over the place (my sz 36 waist measured 39" in both so swapped for sz 32). The patch on my 15's was coming off as the stitching was amateurish and the 17's had a Jcrew rivet in the front pocket ffs. Sent them both back again for refunds. 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Dr_Heech
Usual reason

[andyrcii]

1954 501's 20% off on levis UK.. 

only the "new rinse" and "fidget" pre washes though. WHY is it more expensive for jeans which have had literally nothing done to them as opposed ones which haven't? can somebody explain this... I mean I know the prewashed ones are made in Turkey or somewhere but they all start out from raw denim.... how can it be profitable to put more effort and resources into prewashed jeans which nobody wants, look fake and awful, and are always the ones in the sale or the cheap sellers on ebay? why not just sell raw?

Edited February 16, 2021 by andyrcii

[JMS]

Because they're valuing the jeans via the 'sign-value', where the sign, in this case, is the 'raw-ness' of the denim which is a 'premium' feature - it's desirable to have that 'old-style' denim and so forth. Nevermind the extra labor involved in producing a washed product. Exchange-value is on the whole gone from most commodities, especially commodities that are heavily associated with a sign (ever more so is denim associated with its sign and not its exchange or use value). Unfortunately, we've been bamboozled

[silencejoe]

LVC 66s VS 70s small e

[dotcomzzz]

On 1/17/2021 at 1:30 PM, Heavy_blue said:

Thanks mate! Levi’s said on this particular model to go TTS in waist and take a larger inseam. But i went with a 34/32 cause 34/34 was sold out and ik could just pick this up for around €110,- so i just took the shot. 
 

gave these bad boys a hot-soak, let them dry for around 2 hours and start wearing them these day, damn tight in the waist but after a few hours they already are a little looser. 
 

overall fit is great i guess, normally i wear slimmer jeans but as a started collector (again) a lieve of LVC can’t miss.. see the fit for now 

Just curious how much these ended up stretching in the waist for you.

[Dry]

Here are some nice new Levis 125 first 1873 jeans with 822 on the button:

https://shop-list.com/men/birigo/levis-125-0024/

[JMS]

Won some deadstock s702's overnight. 

Slowing adding to my MiJ Levi's family. 

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by JMS

[Dr_Heech]

Wow, nice find.  I really wanted a pair of those when they were first rumoured to be available (1992ish?) .

Only ever saw the 1937 version MiJ (guy in Kensington market at the time was importing them) but wasn't happy with the buckle on the 37's. 

I think that those 1922 s702's were, in many ways, ahead of there time repro wise.

[JMS]

This particular pair was produced in 96. 

I agree, these have all the fixings! 

Every detail really works for this model. 

[JMS]

https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/522963527

Beyond cool... 

[Dry]

Does anybody know anything about the rigid Valencia Street 551BZXXs? 

https://shop-list.com/men/birigo/levis-0551z-0006/

As I understand it "B" denotes Boy ie the smaller sizes. Does that mean that if I can wear non B  rigid 1967 505s in size 30 and 1955s in sizes 31 and 32, I will fit B 551ZXX in size 31 or are there other differences in the sizing of the B versions which might mean they would not fit?

They look nice.

Edited February 25, 2021 by Dry
Add pics

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

sorry but where is the "B"?  i had several Valencia street 551zzx´s and they all came around true to size, but fit different to the 1967s 505s. actually wider at the legs and hips (attention hipflare, either you have a big bum or you have to size down to fill in), just like a 501 of that period. i didn't´t like the relatively short front rise though.

[Dry]

22 minutes ago, Sympathy-For-The-Denim said:

sorry but where is the "B"?  i had several Valencia street 551zzx´s and they all came around true to size, but fit different to the 1967s 505s. actually wider at the legs and hips (attention hipflare, either you have a big bum or you have to size down to fill in), just like a 501 of that period. i didn't´t like the relatively short front rise though.

Thank you. The B is in the product code.

[FAB FOUR]

I think that's just a typo in the listing. A youth version wasn't to my knowledge made, and the patch clearly doesn't have an extra letter to the Lot number, The 36 inch leg would also indicate an adult model.

Edited March 5, 2021 by FAB FOUR
typo

[Dr_Heech]

I have a love/hate relationship with my 551zxx. Love the heavyweight 14oz sanforized Cone denim, the patch, the stitching and the arcs are amazing, at least on the 1996 produced model. Hate the cut/fit on me, tbh l think they are a size too big, and the zipper pull is a tad small/fiddly. They don't get much use.

[Dry]

12 hours ago, Dr_Heech said:

I have a love/hate relationship with my 551zxx. Love the heavyweight 14oz sanforized Cone denim, the patch, the stitching and the arcs are amazing, at least on the 1996 produced model. Hate the cut/fit on me, tbh l think they are a size too big, and the zipper pull is a tad small/fiddly. They don't get much use.

I too love the soft denim, patch, arcs and stitching (apart from the closeness of the stitching to the fly edge - I prefer it further away). I also love the large close together rear pockets. Not fussed about the offset rear belt loop and would prefer the loops at the side to be stitched to the seam and a wider coin pocket. Not sure if the black stitch bar tack at the bottom of the fly is right either.

I got a pair of size 34s very early on from the flagship store. They had 2 pairs in my size. I bought 1 pair and decided to return a few minutes later to grab the 2nd pair but they had gone! Somebody must have been watching me! I kicked myself afterwards. They are comfy and fit OK even now I am slimmer, though might loosen up. I probably didn't wear them much as I had no spare pair to replace them if I wore them out.

Edited February 26, 2021 by Dry
Omission

[H...crimper]

2 hours ago, Dry said:

I too love the soft denim, patch and stitching (apart from the closeness of the stitching to the fly edge - I prefer it further away). I also love the large close together rear pockets. Not fussed about the offset rear belt loop and would prefer the loops at the side to be stitched to the seam and a wider coin pocket. Not sure if the black stitch bar tack at the bottom of the fly is right either.

I got a pair of size 34s very early on from the flagship store. They had 2 pairs in my size. I bought 1 pair and decided to return a few minutes later to grab the 2nd pair but they had gone! Somebody must have been watching me! I kicked myself afterwards. They are comfy and fit OK even now I am slimmer, though might loosen up. I probably didn't wear them much as I had no spare pair to replace them if I wore them out.

I have 2 pair of these from 96, they do have a bit of hip flare but I do love the fit.

[Dr_Heech]

Forgot to add - love the nice deep pocket bags! 

Still hate them 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Dr_Heech

[JMS]

These just arrived, FedEx international is fast. 

Just gave them their first soak, s702's

 

[dotcomzzz]

Guys, what's going to be the most tapered between the 66, 78 and 84 501. Info online is scarce on these versions and how they compare, particularly the last two years. Thanks!

[Maynard Friedman]

84 will be the slimmest with narrowest leg opening but I’m not sure about which tapers most from thigh or knee to hem. I have both the 76 and 66 in raw and I think the 76 tapers more than the 66. No idea bout the 78 though.