WW2 repro / detailed jeans

[UkeNo]

20 minutes ago, Broark said:

Anyone have that War Denim ISBN handy? Might need to track down a copy.

@Broark

[Broark]

Thank you both, might pick up a few books from Amazon JP!

[redragon]

On 6/22/2025 at 12:33 AM, Dr_Heech said:

Exactly.  We go from Nine ounce in For over 60 (c.1932) years and then Ten Ounce in the For over 70 years (both types, c.1942) and the For over 80 years tickets(c.1952). Yet in the For over 85 years ticket, Levi's just put in made from 'Top weight denim', no actual weights were specified. 

The book also covers the changes in weight calculation after the war, can get it up here if anyone’s interested… 

[Dr_Heech]

33 minutes ago, redragon said:

The book also covers the changes in weight calculation after the war, can get it up here if anyone’s interested… 

Thanks and why not, it would be good to have some insight if the info is solid.

 

[AnOldFolkSong]

On 7/14/2025 at 3:04 AM, beautiful_FrEaK said:

So, did someone buy the Gardener 1943XX jeans?

https://store.spiraljeans.jp/de-eu/products/gardener_1943xx-コピー

I’m considering these.

Any clue who makes these?

[redragon]

10 hours ago, Dr_Heech said:

Thanks and why not, it would be good to have some insight if the info is solid.

 

Disclaimer: following is google translate from the book, so possibly some thing is lost in translation.

 

This happened after the armistice between the Korean and Japanese wars, so it is outside the scope of this book, but in February 1955, the industry's standards for denim weight suddenly changed.

The specifications of denim haven't changed, the calculation method has changed.

According to Figure C5-1 in the newspaper, the area of denim fabric, "28 inches wide x 36 inches long" (=0.78 x 1.0 yard), was previously used as the standard for weight (ounces), but this was changed to "36 inches wide x 36 inches long" (=1.0 x 1.0 yard). The newspaper emphasized that there was no change in the fabric itself.

It seems that both workwear manufacturers and denim manufacturers responded to this change at the same time. Until then, denim manufacturers had used a 28-inch woven width as the standard, and it seems that they had customarily used the old standard value of "28 x 36 inches" (=0.78 x 1.0 yard) because it was easy to manage on site.

As time passed, the performance of looms improved and wider denim could be woven, so it may have been unified into a new standard value of "36 x 36 inches" (= 1.0 x 1.0 yard) which is easier to convert for denim with different woven widths.

After the Korean War ended in a ceasefire, denim production increased and various types of denim began to circulate, and February 1955 was the time when the industry standardized the labeling system.

Looking at advertisements from workwear manufacturers at the time, we can see that starting in February 1955, denim weights gradually changed from "9-10 ounces" to "13-14 ounces" (Lee, Wrangler, Montgomery Ward, Sreas, J.C. Penney, and others also changed). It seems likely that Levi's 501XX guarantee tickets also changed from "10 ounces" around this time. Also, in "Lee Riders Lot 101 (c.1955)" (see page 29), which is shown at the beginning of this book,

As mentioned above, flashers marked 133/4 ounces were later labeled "SQUARE YARD WEIGHT."

One wonders whether this sudden change caused any confusion in the workwear industry, but it appears that nothing unusual occurred.

For example, in 1951, seven major denim manufacturers gathered under the name of the Denim Advice Committee, again at the urging of the Office of Price Stabilization, a new organization very similar to OPA. Since the heads of each manufacturer had an opportunity to meet, it probably didn't cause any problems for the industry to change the ounce notation for denim all at once.

I had noticed that the weight of postwar denim had increased over time, but I had assumed that denim had become heavier because of more advanced looms. I was surprised to find that it was simply the surface area being measured that had become larger.

Ed Cray's statement on page 134 that "denim weight has increased to 13.5 ounces" is probably referring to the weight after the weight standard changed. I think Cray heard about this in an interview with someone from Levi's, but the person he was interviewing probably didn't know when the weight had increased.

Although this is a double standard, both values were actually listed in the official denim specifications published in 1925.

Table C5-2 is the specification sheet for unshrunk denim and includes weight data, warp and weft thread counts (per inch), and tear strength.

There are two types of ounces for "Weight" in this table. The left side (Per square yard) is the weight in ounces of "1.0 x 1.0 yard", and the right side (Per linear yard, 28 inches wide) is the weight in ounces of "0.78 x 1.0 yard". Incidentally, the number for "Yards per pound, 28 inches wide" is the length in yards per 28 inches of denim x 1 pound (= 16 ounces).

As you can see, even before the war, there were various ways of expressing weight according to the workplaces where denim was made. These official specifications were subsequently revised in 1929, 1931, 1936, 1944, and 1961, but all of them basically contained the same several different ways of expressing weight.

However, despite the existence of these specifications, I have never seen any pre-1955 workwear or denim manufacturer product documentation that explicitly states that the ounce standard is "square yards" (of course, I may just not be able to find it).

And there is one more mystery. In fact, if you convert the numbers in this table of the old and new denim values into the area of the denim, the numbers don't match when the width of the denim is 28 inches. This is true when the width is 28.8 inches. There seems to be an undiscovered truth to this problem. The nominal 28 inches may have actually been 28.8 inches.

 

Snippets & table used in the above column:

 

[beautiful_FrEaK]

4 hours ago, AnOldFolkSong said:

I’m considering these.

Any clue who makes these?

They are made by https://www.shinotex.jp/en/ 

The original maker from 30 years ago. With the help of Ueki-san who was responsible for Gardener back in the day. The denim is from Collect Mills

[indigoeagle]

8 hours ago, redragon said:

Disclaimer: following is google translate from the book, so possibly some thing is lost in translation.

 

This happened after the armistice between the Korean and Japanese wars, so it is outside the scope of this book, but in February 1955, the industry's standards for denim weight suddenly changed.

The specifications of denim haven't changed, the calculation method has changed.

According to Figure C5-1 in the newspaper, the area of denim fabric, "28 inches wide x 36 inches long" (=0.78 x 1.0 yard), was previously used as the standard for weight (ounces), but this was changed to "36 inches wide x 36 inches long" (=1.0 x 1.0 yard). The newspaper emphasized that there was no change in the fabric itself.

It seems that both workwear manufacturers and denim manufacturers responded to this change at the same time. Until then, denim manufacturers had used a 28-inch woven width as the standard, and it seems that they had customarily used the old standard value of "28 x 36 inches" (=0.78 x 1.0 yard) because it was easy to manage on site.

As time passed, the performance of looms improved and wider denim could be woven, so it may have been unified into a new standard value of "36 x 36 inches" (= 1.0 x 1.0 yard) which is easier to convert for denim with different woven widths.

After the Korean War ended in a ceasefire, denim production increased and various types of denim began to circulate, and February 1955 was the time when the industry standardized the labeling system.

Looking at advertisements from workwear manufacturers at the time, we can see that starting in February 1955, denim weights gradually changed from "9-10 ounces" to "13-14 ounces" (Lee, Wrangler, Montgomery Ward, Sreas, J.C. Penney, and others also changed). It seems likely that Levi's 501XX guarantee tickets also changed from "10 ounces" around this time. Also, in "Lee Riders Lot 101 (c.1955)" (see page 29), which is shown at the beginning of this book,

As mentioned above, flashers marked 133/4 ounces were later labeled "SQUARE YARD WEIGHT."

One wonders whether this sudden change caused any confusion in the workwear industry, but it appears that nothing unusual occurred.

For example, in 1951, seven major denim manufacturers gathered under the name of the Denim Advice Committee, again at the urging of the Office of Price Stabilization, a new organization very similar to OPA. Since the heads of each manufacturer had an opportunity to meet, it probably didn't cause any problems for the industry to change the ounce notation for denim all at once.

I had noticed that the weight of postwar denim had increased over time, but I had assumed that denim had become heavier because of more advanced looms. I was surprised to find that it was simply the surface area being measured that had become larger.

Ed Cray's statement on page 134 that "denim weight has increased to 13.5 ounces" is probably referring to the weight after the weight standard changed. I think Cray heard about this in an interview with someone from Levi's, but the person he was interviewing probably didn't know when the weight had increased.

Although this is a double standard, both values were actually listed in the official denim specifications published in 1925.

Table C5-2 is the specification sheet for unshrunk denim and includes weight data, warp and weft thread counts (per inch), and tear strength.

There are two types of ounces for "Weight" in this table. The left side (Per square yard) is the weight in ounces of "1.0 x 1.0 yard", and the right side (Per linear yard, 28 inches wide) is the weight in ounces of "0.78 x 1.0 yard". Incidentally, the number for "Yards per pound, 28 inches wide" is the length in yards per 28 inches of denim x 1 pound (= 16 ounces).

As you can see, even before the war, there were various ways of expressing weight according to the workplaces where denim was made. These official specifications were subsequently revised in 1929, 1931, 1936, 1944, and 1961, but all of them basically contained the same several different ways of expressing weight.

However, despite the existence of these specifications, I have never seen any pre-1955 workwear or denim manufacturer product documentation that explicitly states that the ounce standard is "square yards" (of course, I may just not be able to find it).

And there is one more mystery. In fact, if you convert the numbers in this table of the old and new denim values into the area of the denim, the numbers don't match when the width of the denim is 28 inches. This is true when the width is 28.8 inches. There seems to be an undiscovered truth to this problem. The nominal 28 inches may have actually been 28.8 inches.

 

Snippets & table used in the above column:

 

Very interesting. That would answer the question, if I understood it correctly.
My TLDR: Before the fabric was categorized by the weight of one piece with the dimensions of 28x36 inches. 
Then in 1955 this was changed to a larger fabric of 36x36". Of course, a larger fabric is heavier.
And the increase is by 8", which is nearly 30%.
So 10 ounce x 1.3= 13 ounce.
 

Edited July 25, 2025 by indigoeagle

[beautiful_FrEaK]

^wasn't all this not something Michael Allen Harris always said and disputed about with Levi's?

[AnOldFolkSong]

On 7/25/2025 at 12:13 AM, beautiful_FrEaK said:

They are made by https://www.shinotex.jp/en/ 

The original maker from 30 years ago. With the help of Ueki-san who was responsible for Gardener back in the day. The denim is from Collect Mills

@beautiful_FrEaK Thank you!

[scooby]

[Broark]

Just wanted to bump this thread with an update on my collection of WWII repros.
It's hard to pick a favorite, I've worn the original FW S601xx or OAs the most. The late '45 FW could end up being a future favorite once I get around to wearing them.
Next in will (hopefully) be a pair of Slash war jeans, Cushman 22501xx or a pair from Little Hands. At some point I'd also like to grab a replacement pair of Rockets in a size up.
I know war repros have been all the rage in recent years and the market is a bit oversaturated, but I enjoy them for their small intricacies.
I enjoy that each maker has their own take on the era with varying degrees of accuracy. Not everything needs to be a "perfect" reproduction!
Ooe Yofukuten SOA03XXD.
Word of Mouth 411S.
Libra Pondus 40s.
Sugar Cane Super Denim Collectibles 1943.
Freewheelers: 1943, 1944-45, late 1945

[indigoeagle]

Nice and interesting to see this eclectic mix of war models.

[Hopethisoneisnttaken]

On 10/13/2025 at 5:38 PM, Broark said:

I enjoy that each maker has their own take on the era with varying degrees of accuracy. Not everything needs to be a "perfect" reproduction!

Same here. I’m mostly interested in the makers interpretation rather than the ability to copy to the highest accuracy possible. 

[indigoeagle]

WWII repros

 

This guy here compares the agering of his FW, WH, BR and RMC WWII jeans.

 

 

[ATWM]

^ I love that there’s a remote chance that the t shirt he is wearing was worn by someone I know in little league baseball. I can’t get auto translate to work so I have no idea what he has to say, but the t shirt is enough. 

[Cold Summer]

That's the same guy who wore the TCB Late S40s tux for thirteen months (and counting) that I posted in the TCB thread. That video's from a few years ago - I wonder where he'd rank the TCBs in there now that he's worn them for a long time?

Edited December 15, 2025 by Cold Summer

[CSL]

So is the last pair, the ones with the camo pocket bags RMC?

 

[indigoeagle]

On 12/16/2025 at 4:03 AM, CSL said:

So is the last pair, the ones with the camo pocket bags RMC?

 

Yes, RMC around 4:00.

He's saying that the RMCs are the slimmest, Buzz Rickson the widest, FW not wide, not slim, WH a bit tapered.
The Warehouse DD ones are his favourite out of the four (at ca. 07:00).

From 08:05 on he's showing a pair of Rockets and of B.O.T., which he has worn only a bit yet.

 

[Dr_Heech]

Random bump. 

Comparison of Lee WW2 model top button with Levi's WW2 model. Stitching looks cleaner on the Lee pair but as l've said before, this is probably due to the fact that Lee already had several factories by 1942, whereas Levis only had one. The factories that Levi's hastily opened during the war had alot of newly trained machine operators rushing through production of jeans, whereas Lee's factories were already established so more precise? Could be just the difference between sanforized and unsanforized denim maybe? Only a guess at this point but interesting nonetheless. 

 

Edited October 11 by Dr_Heech
To edit/add stuff

[Dr_Heech]

Not sure about the quality of the images but they should show the details clear enough. Comparison of early WW2 and later WW2 Levi's S501XX according to one collector.

 

Early model has wreath and donut buttons whereas the latter has regular Levi's buttons.

 

Early model still has a crotch rivet whereas the latter has none.

 

Early model has the green HBT material in front pockets whereas the latter comes with the regular white cotton drill material. 

^Interesting to note the comparison of the denim facings on the front pockets in reverse to show the stitching. Seems the later model has smaller/shallower facings compared to the green HBT S501XX.

Think my Csf WW2 s409xxx with the denim pocket bags and crotch rivet were based off of a later WW2 model (#24 in 501XX book) but will have to wait until l'm back home to check. Just thought some of you may enjoy, anyway carry on. 

Edited October 9 by Dr_Heech
To edit/add stuff