levis 501xx 1947 or 1890'

[darkblack]

Cannot decide to which one to buy? have tried on the 47' but have not tried the 1890. Is the 1890 shrink to fit? The sales lady said the 1890 do not shrink as much like the 1947. What kind of cut is the 1890? Does anyone have pics of worn 1890. Anyone can help?

[minya]

The 1890 doesn't seem to be a "wearable" jean as much as a "collector's" jean. For instance, there's only one back pocket. And, from what I've seen, they look very wide with a kind of a strange fit. (I haven't tried them on so I could be wrong.)

If you're planning on wearing the jeans often, I would go with a 47, if I were you.

[darkblack]

have you seen anyone putting on those 1890?

[Guest Berget__]

I have only seen the 1890s on a plastic doll. They were really cool but the ass area was kinda huge. looked great from the front though.

I aint gotta get money man money get me

[Paul T]

The 1890 is more antifit, baggier backside, wider legs - note also it's in a lighter denim which makes it hang very differently. If it wears like my 1901 pair, they do age beautifully - there seems to be a lot of indigo in them, they stay dark, and you tend to get a great, high contrast fade. You're more likely to appreciate it if you wear your jeans baggy and low; the two are very different shapes.

BTW, note that some of the new LVC seem to be sized quite small, the finished pairs in particular. The new 1937 36 inch waist, in the Indigo Heart finish, shrink down to more like 32! I suspect the rigid pairs will just shrink the normal 2 inches or so.

Generally, I get the feeling there's a big move away from baggy, low-slung jeans, towards more 1947-style cuts. But maybe I'm saying that because that's where I'm at...

[Paul T]

just realised that post was confusing - by lighter, I mean the 1890 jeans are lighter in weight (not colour!) - 9oz as opposed to 13oz.

[adsurgo]

Quote:

just realised that post was confusing - by lighter, I mean the 1890 jeans are lighter in weight (not colour!) - 9oz as opposed to 13oz.

--- Original message by Paul T on Sep 21, 2005 11:01 AM

12.. the 47s are 12oz.

[Paul T]

Levi's specs: '47 repros are 13oz. The '44 repros are 12oz. Original Levi's Cone fabric was 12.5 oz.

[adsurgo]

where did you get that from?

[Paul T]

THE LVC info book. They do a limited edition version each year. It might just get distributed in Europe.

[adsurgo]

damn i couldve sworn they were 12.. and ive seen people on ebay claiming they were 12. weird as hell. whatever tho. how can i get ones of them books in the us?

[Paul T]

I guess people claimed they were 12 because the weight was traditionally 12.5. WhHy they have LVC in both 12 and 13oz, I don't know, it's only a nominal difference. And of course the weight goes up when they shrink.

Those books, unfortunately, are like gold dust. Have they closed Selvage now? That would be the only place in NY I would've thought they had any, unless there's a flag shop store there. The info they have is fairly basic this year, not much more than on the website.

[adsurgo]

the store selvage is now closed.

[Paul T]

Seriously, Levi's European website has about as good info as the booklets. It specifies the same weight denim, too.

[rnrswitch]

I was under the impression that the new STF levis were of considerably less weight than the LVCs. I own both the new STF and a pair of the 1947 LVC and the difference is immense. One this website it states that the STF 501s are 12.5oz.

http://www.levisstore.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2076855&cp=2068573.2075200.2075211&page=1&doVSearch=no&pageBucket=0&parentPage=family

If the LVCs are 13oz then what accounts for the drastic difference in rigidness? The difference in the STF 501s of the mid 90s to early 00s as compared to those bought today is stunning. The color and stiffness after the first wash is drastically different. Why would this be the case if they are so close to the same weight?

[johninger]

The 'rigidness' of a woven fabric is a function of the weight of the fabric (in the way that the heavier it is the more saturated the weave has to be), the structure of the weave and the concentration of indigo bound to the fibre.

So you can imagine that with the multitude of different weaves ie left, right, broken twills all of which can be altered depending on your warp/weft intersection(ie 3.1 or 2.1 etc) and the quality/weight of yarn used in warp/weft and the amount of indigo actually bound to each fibre there is many combinations of rigidness. That is it is not just dependent on weight

Sorry not sure of some of the terms in english

I hope indigo doesn't cause cancer...

[Paul T]

LVCs are ring-ring.