66 type jeans

[beautiful_FrEaK]

By the way, Mepse posted a 10% off coupon for orders through their Base.shop..maybe something the proxy service could use as well.

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Still waiting for my Mepse&co jeans...

[oomslokop]

since june?

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Yep, 1 month was quoted. They are now at my proxy and now I only have to wait until they reach me.

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Teaser!

[beautiful_FrEaK]

More impressions, my thoughts will follow 

[blooming]

That denim looks beautiful in its grey-blue raw state. Excited to see those age.

Edited August 8, 2023 by blooming
typo

[Hopethisoneisnttaken]

Really nice. How’s the fit?

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Mepse claims these are based on a vintage pair he owns (?) and becauseI don't own one I can only judge based on other brands I handled.

The jeans are smaller than advertized so this was a small surprise and I saw others claiming a lot of shrinkage on this denim, it will be interesting to see how they will fit after a soak.
Right now I have a bit space in the waist but the 0.5" more would have been nice  Thighs are also off by 0.5" and so is the inseam. All in all inside the accepted variation I think.

36x34 raw
Waist: 35"
Front rise: 11.75"
Back rise: 16.25"
Thighs: 13"
Knee: 9.8"
Leg opening: 8.5"
Inseam: 33.375"

The construction of the jeans is sound and does look clean. The tab is sewn crooked on purpose. On the left back pocket you see that the stitching at the bottom is not completely straight at the left edge but it looks nice this way. The placket is very long in comparison to the front rise in general which could look goofy. We will see. The back pockets look quite small, I have to test how well they will contain a wallet or so. Rivets and buttons are generic (blank or "World Jeans International") but I think this should be accepted with a small brand that is just about to really start. The red tab is branded but doesn't look like rayon or so...it looks/feels a bit cheap. Back of the top button is stamped with a "6".

The chainstitch at the hem looks nice and I think will lead to good roping. The double chainstitch on the waist however looks somehow off. Quite thin threads are used and the SPI looks quite low. This is somehow my biggest disappointment but maybe it won't have any major effect. All other stitching looks good from what I could see. The belt loops are on the thin side, feature a two-tone stitching and are not raised. Belt loops from other brands feel/look better to me.

The pocket bag material is a bit flimsy and the pocket bags aren't the biggest. But they are accessible.

The denim is really interesting. It should be a 12.5oz denim and it does feel thinner which I really like. The denim is darker and more irregular than what other brands usually use for their 60s models. The denim is from Okayama, Mepse didn't disclose the mill (or he doesn't know or he didn't understand). I really look forward to see it evolving.

 

Which important parts did I miss?

Edited August 9, 2023 by beautiful_FrEaK

[Paul T]

These look great. 

Purely because I just came across these by accident, here's a pic of Curtis's old late 60s 302, in their raw state, for comparison. The only vintage Levi's I've ever documented from the raw state. 



 

[Maynard Friedman]

16 minutes ago, beautiful_FrEaK said:

Which important parts did I miss?

The positives! Seriously, that sounds like an excellent, honest appraisal. Thanks b_F

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Usually I don't do this but I wanted some proper pre-soak pictures so I am wearing them raw right now. Honestly, that would be a good looking post-soak fit so I have to see how I deal with the shrinkage.

The 12.5 oz denim is very comfortable. 

[reallypeacedoff]

Not a 66 type jeans but my new SDA 508 are 12 oz, and I agree, so comfortable. Almost doesn't feel like denim when you are used to 14.5 and above.

They look great now @beautiful_FrEaK, I am assuming you are aiming for minimal shrinkage once you soak?

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Definitely! I'd take that top block fit post soak any minute  
So yes...cold soak/wash and that's probably it. These could be worn raw without much discomfort but that goes against all my beliefs

[buler]

Perfect fit BF. Is the denim loomstate or sanforized or preshrunk in any way? 

[beautiful_FrEaK]

It's at least unsanforized, probably loomstate as well. I soaked and machine washed them yesterday. We will see this evening if they are wearable. If not, anyone intersted can PM me  

[beautiful_FrEaK]

The denim stiffed up quite a bit after the soak/wash and really came to life. Really nice!

Here are the measurements. 

One-wash

Waist: 32.25"

Front rise: 11"

Back rise: 15.25"

Thighs: 12.375"

Knee: 9.4"

Leg opening: 8.25"

Inseam: 31"

 

And yeah, I can't even close them and I don't want to risk it. So please DM me!

[Hopethisoneisnttaken]

I feel like I may have asked this before but I couldn’t really find it anywhere so here goes - is there a brand out there that makes a 66 cut but with a fuller rise? Let’s say around 12” f.r for size 33? 

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Sugarcane 1966

Size 33 (Pants Shop Avenue)

 

Raw

Waist: 35.5"

Front rise: 13"

Back rise: 17"

Thighs: 13.5"

Knee: 9.8"

Leg opening: 8.5"

Inseam: 36.5"

 

Machine wash

Waist: 33"

Front rise: 12.25"

Back rise: 16"

Thighs: 12.8"

Knee: 9.4"

Leg opening: 8.125"

Inseam: 32" (hemmed at DC4)

[vIGGiou riou]

hey b_F. I think, I can report on those SC 66. What you present as Machine wash changed. It's exactly measurements which I did after you ship them to me.... Unfortunately they are in closet for half of the year, but with the winter they will go out... So, I wore them cca 2,5 months. Now they are more relaxed and they are very comfy.... Top block and upper part of the leg are one of the best parts of jeans I had.... It's really fuller than straight cut jeans...

Actual measurement no wash :

W : 89 cm

FR : 31,5 cm

BR : 41 cm

Th : 32,5 cm

Knee : 24 cm

Hem : 20,5 - 21 cm

Insem still same

 

 

 

Edited November 5, 2023 by vIGGiou riou

[CharlieMike]

Hello, what do you think is the best reproduction of the model 66?

[CharlieMike]

Would anyone know the difference (if there is a difference) between: the last BIgE (period 1970-1971), without "V" stitch, with the upper belt in orange chain stitch, coin pocket without selvedge and the first model called "type 66" (period around 1971-1978?

[unionmade]

@beautiful_FrEaK

Are those Mapse worth picking up? SC 1966 are my favs so far!

[beautiful_FrEaK]

@unionmade I was not totally convinced. But I think he improved since then. I sold my pair already several months ago. They were too small anyway 

[silencejoe]

On 2/27/2024 at 8:02 PM, CharlieMike said:

Would anyone know the difference (if there is a difference) between: the last BIgE (period 1970-1971), without "V" stitch, with the upper belt in orange chain stitch, coin pocket without selvedge and the first model called "type 66" (period around 1971-1978?

Here is the 70 to 80 levis i got

Edited March 22 by silencejoe

[xav22]

On 2/27/2024 at 7:02 AM, CharlieMike said:

Would anyone know the difference (if there is a difference) between: the last BIgE (period 1970-1971), without "V" stitch, with the upper belt in orange chain stitch, coin pocket without selvedge and the first model called "type 66" (period around 1971-1978?

changes in dyeing technique leads to different fabric qualities

some of the early stages of the latter period have printed pocket bags, middle and later stages include a printed tag with numbers usually sewn into the outseam of the jeans

model and size printed differently on patch, differs among factories

maybe a change in thread composition too?

[NilsLW]

Orslow just released their own 66 repro, simply called ”66”. Looks really good from fit pics online.

[yung_flynn]

I have no experience with Orslow because I'm too tall for their inseam in my waist size. However, these look pretty nice. The denim looks very similar to the Resolute 710 denim in stock photos, at least it does to me

[NilsLW]

Oh yeah those look really similar