The Wide Jeans Thread

[Maynard Friedman]

So if the SC-1947 is Sugar Cane’s slim-straight cut, then which model is their straight cut?

I don’t think the SC-66 has ever been considered a slim-straight cut either. I’m really confused here…

Edited September 16, 2023 by Maynard Friedman

[julian-wolf]

None of SC’s current lineup reads as true straight (let alone wide), to me

Plenty of the old M-series did…more recently, I guess the 1099 comes to mind? but even then it’s been a few years since they produced those

[chicote]

Just to clarify Maynard, I was suggesting that the sc-47 (a more or less “straight” cut imo) is playing the middle of the road role today that slim straight cuts had played ten years ago, as a benchmark fit to which things like “wide” or “narrow” are measured against. What do you consider the sc66 to be? I have only worn one pair of sc66 and they fit me relatively slim compared to my sc47, so that’s my basis for comparison.

I appreciate the conversation in this thread because i think it’s been some time since we have had a broader discussion about the sorts of fits people are after in this community as of late. To me, there is less of an orthodoxy than there was when I first joined sufu; people wear a somewhat wider (lol) range of cuts, even though we are still largely confined to a handful of the same brands. I see looser cuts with higher rises becoming the trend over the last few years, not just in our community but in the fashion world more broadly, and of course that’s to an extent dictated by the trends within the denim manufacturers themselves (one year everyone makes a 20s repro, then a 37, then 46, etc). So a thread that’s sort of reflecting on this movement towards wider fits in general I think is poignant and interesting, even if it veers a bit outside of its original purpose.

Also, just wanted to add the tender 132 as a wide fit option — again, just my experience wearing a size 2 (roughly 1 inch oversized on me) which I felt like I was swimming in years ago!

[Talan]

12 hours ago, bloom said:

@julian-wolf those Dawsons look very good indeed. Current currency rates would sting, but I do love that they’re made in Brighton. 
 

@smoothsailor I have admired your at last jeans in various threads before, but still can’t figure out how to go about to order a pair.

 

one thing that does appeal to me with the full counts, in addition to price and availability, is that they’re a sort of gentle first step towards more volume. And no buckle, I struggle with buckles. 

You can order At Last products through mail order. Check their web site timeworn-clothing dot com. It worked for me. However, they have only limited variety at any time.

[Talan]

10 hours ago, Maynard Friedman said:

I know this could run and run but most people would consider the SC-47 a classic straight cut. I don’t know anywhere that you’d find it described as slim-straight.

For me SC 47 cuts were quite wide in my size 36, but waist too narrow. Apparently I have very special belly/thighs ratio.

Edited September 17, 2023 by Talan

[bloom]

1 hour ago, Talan said:

I have very special belly/thighs ratio.

That just means God loves you more

[Talan]

2 hours ago, bloom said:

That just means God loves you more

No doubt. However, in reference to this particular detail I don't see it as an intervention of God, but rather of beer.

[FurnitureMaker]

This dood has great fits. 
 

https://www.instagram.com/s_xx_24/?hl=en

[Sympathy-For-The-Denim]

thanks for sharing and indeed he has, but its all about the angle...

[FurnitureMaker]

Angle and attitude!

[Maynard Friedman]

6 minutes ago, FurnitureMaker said:

Angle and attitude!

All about alliteration.

[Double 0 Soul]

19 hours ago, Maynard Friedman said:

So if the SC-1947 is Sugar Cane’s slim-straight cut, then which model is their straight cut?

I don’t think the SC-66 has ever been considered a slim-straight cut either. I’m really confused here…

Worry not Maynard.. i think his brain has turned to mush since he stopped studying

[81FXR]

An interesting challenge I find with wider fits is the rise becomes much more important. As I mentioned, personally I think a wide cut looks best with a tucked shirt/tee (or some sort of cuffed sweater).  For this reason, the rise is obviously fully on show. I’m 6’1 and find ‘med-high rise’ is often more like medium on me. I can’t help but feel shorter guys might have a much better choice of wider fits due to typically having shorter crotch-waist measurements.

I see pics of dudes in jeans described as medium rise, sitting really nice on the waist, and I try them on and it’s Robert Plant levels of inappropriate.

 

Edited September 17, 2023 by 81FXR

[chicote]

@81FXR I agree with this completely — for me, a wide leg is second to a high rise in my list of priorities. Granted, I am 5’9” / about 176cm tall, so maybe the effect is more pronounced on you because of your height, but I do really like jeans that sit at about my belly button, or slightly above my true waist, and feel consistently a bit disappointed with “medium-high rise” jeans that end up 3cm below my waist, even with a belt, after a day of wear. The TCB 40s, for example, which had a notably (and sometimes uncomfortably, if I recall some others’ experiences correctly) high rise, were almost perfect for me, and honestly if I could find a pair with a 4-5cm wider leg and 2-3cm higher front and back rise, I’d be happy to call that an ideal pair of wide-leg trousers. Perhaps that fruitless search is what’s motivated my interest in overalls lately… they’re always plenty wide, and you never have a problem holding them up!

[NilsLW]

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but isn't the SC 1947 like the gold standard for a classic straight fit in the denim repro world? From all pictures I've seen online the outseam and inseam does look very parallel from the knee down. If the definition of a true straight is that it has to have zero taper throughout the leg at all wouldn't that mean that the thigh and hem measurements would be the same? Even for a baggy pair of jeans that sounds ridiculous.

Edited September 17, 2023 by NilsLW

[AlientoyWorkmachine]

Funny how preferences manifest. 

I'm 5'8" - and I just can't get comfortable with anything too wide. I have a few pairs of pants (not jeans) with >9" hem, and I think it makes people my size look a little bit shorter, including myself - which whatever, but I'm not sure it's the best look. I also find the IG profile cited...well, I get that this dude has his thing but let's just say it's got very little that appeals to me personally. The mean mugging cigarette stuff is just too much lol. I think I am more in the camp of finding medium rises pretty comfortable, even on wider legs.  

I'm also more of the school of thought that tucking in shirts with jeans is pretty paradoxical. Makes more sense with chinos etc. We've all got our things, I suppose, but I do agree my wider pants look better with a shorter sweatshirt/sweater that has some sort of ribbed hem.

I bought a lot of different stuff at the beginning of the year, different fits, fabrics etc. My 0105's haven't had a day of wear yet! Unexpectedly the jeans that feel most "at home" to me, the ones that  seem most versatile, timeless, not too...anything are the '51 freewheelers. (Also least expensive, so definitely best value I've hit this year). One of the slimmer pairs I've gotten in recent years but still plenty of room and seems perfectly proportioned for a pretty average size person like myself. I like the other stuff too but it all feels like more of a statement and that's usually the opposite of what I want from jeans (plus that's what the top half is for).

I liked some of the looks I saw on others, and it's fun sometimes but even when I was a pretty hardcore skater in the 90's I had some of the less voluminous pants out of the bunch, so it tracks I'd have a low threshold with age. 

[JDelage]

Depending on your definition of wide, the following could (or definitely do) qualify: FC 0105, FW 601XX 1947, FW Bakehead, FW Longshoremen, FW M-1942, IH 1955S, MFSC Lot 44, SC Okinawa, SC SC40304, SDA SD-102 (low rise), Tender 132 (lowish rise). Warehouse has done some too (e.g., cowboy pants). Several makers have made seamen' pants, and those are always wide and often light weight.

[Maynard Friedman]

13 hours ago, Double 0 Soul said:

Worry not Maynard.. i think his brain has turned to mush since he stopped studying

I think they’re trying to gaslight us with their own ‘truths’!

 

[81FXR]

@AlientoyWorkmachine

I think your post highlights the point that really style comes down to dressing comfortably and relies on what looks good on the individual. 

I’ve always felt that looking good and dressing to fit a sub-culture or particular look are quite often different.

I frequently see people dressing in the 50s style, rockabilly etc and they’ve nailed the look, period correct, but still it just doesn’t really suit them. Perhaps that doesn’t matter, who knows. But at that point it’s more of a costume, I think.

There are fits that look horrendous on me, and I’ve bought things over the years that I’ve had to accept just don’t look good. This also changes as I get older and seemingly less able to keep the weight off. I was a super lanky, scrawny guy in my 20s and even slim leg jeans looked fairly regular on me. 

Again, just whatever looks good on the wearer. That pic I posted in the white shirt is Drakes (British Ivy/Prep brand) with military repro pants, and some English Derby shoes. An odd combo on paper but it seems to work.

It’s about buying what looks good on the wearer, not on the model or in the store. There’s a difference between great looking items and looking great in them.

 

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by 81FXR

[NilsLW]

@81FXR How are the shirts from Drake’s? I’ve been interested in getting one for a while. Seems like a good quality brand.

[AlientoyWorkmachine]

@81FXR Yes agreed on all. You’ve got to do what works for you, on you, first. I do think you’ve got your arrangements down well - they seem to suit. Same tbh with most of the wides I see on this forum - but outside of it, it’s a different story. It’s just as hard to sell a complete 50’s look (no interest in that here) - well, maybe harder out in public these days since the wider stuff is pretty much the norm for the student crowd. 

[81FXR]

1 hour ago, NilsLW said:

@81FXR How are the shirts from Drake’s? I’ve been interested in getting one for a while. Seems like a good quality brand.

Amazing. I’ve got a few of the OCBDs. The quality is some of the best I’ve seen in any garment. Fits regular without being 90s boxy. The collar roll is also supreme. 

I’ve got one of their chore jackets and a mariner sweater also and it’s just next level. Although pricey, I think their shirts represent the best value for money across their range. 

Whilst it’s not a style I’d fully commit to, their look books are incredible. Especially their Perennials 2022, absolute perfection in my opinion. The way they mix casual tailoring, borderline sportswear and workwear really shows how not sticking to one formula can look great.

https://us.drakes.com/blogs/news/drakes-perennials-22-lookbook

Edited September 18, 2023 by 81FXR

[NilsLW]

@81FXR Good to know, a great OCBD is a staple in any men’s wardrobe. Will probably be a Drake’s then when I buy a new one.

[conqueror]

drake's OCBDs are amazing, but the pricing is absolutely insane (even for MiE). i personally can't stomach paying rrp for them.

[81FXR]

Yeah they are pretty pricey It’s always hard to know the inside story on what they’re paying workers etc but they’re single needle shirts made in a fairly small county in the UK. A Full Count Chambray is £199 here, an IH Flannel is almost £300.
 

At £175 it’s certainly a lot more than you’d pay for a high street OCBD and even a fair bit more than some of the high-volume British shirt makers charge but again, arguably better value than some of their other garments.

Sorry, back on topic now!

Edited September 18, 2023 by 81FXR

[shredwin_206]

Look at CeeBlues denim. They have some wider loose cuts 

[vIGGiou riou]

With wide denim pants I was thinking about warehouse 1004xx dsb couple of month ago till they were sold out. After I was hesitate if to buy full count 0105 1944 till I lost the chance to buy them due sold out. Now is in my head to buy real mc coys 900s, which are real wide. And if I procrastinate it, I will wait for restock of WH 1004xx, which I like due to the arcs….

[81FXR]

Just ordered some FC 0105 in what are called ‘new loose straight’ as it seems they updated the cut slightly at some point. Purely out of curiosity as they’ve been mentioned here.

I haven’t had a pair of Full Count for years, I think my previous experience was 1108 about 10 years ago.

Is a wash recommended before first wear on the raws?

Edited September 20, 2023 by 81FXR

[blooming]

Yes, a wash is always recommended if they are raw so that they fit correctly. I've only had one pair of raw Full Counts (older 0105 before the update), and they shrink at least 8% across the board after a wash or two.

[81FXR]

@blooming thanks!

They're in the wash right now. Hoping they still fit afterwards… let’s see. They weren’t too tight before the wash and I’m guessing they’ll stretch back out.

Nice denim though!