Ooe-Yofukuten & Co.

[Broark]

@julian-wolf I don't have much supporting proof/evidence directly linking the two, but in both releases the Cone denim used was referenced as XX-27.
Here's a photo of a hem scrap from the Roy R01 side by side with the OAs. OA looks a bit lighter in color and slightly more irregular weave and a fluffier looking weft.

Compare this with the picture of the LVC 1937s taken from American Classics London and the denim etc. blog:

[srudy]

Here are my Ooe Cone 01 going in the tub for a double hot soak. The denim in its raw state is very supple, smooth. The fit feels a bit different than my other 01 from Ooe, but I’ll see after the soak.

[julian-wolf]

@Broark Makes sense, thanks for the run-down—didn’t realize this was labeled XX-27 as well, & that does seem like a pretty good indicator

[AlientoyWorkmachine]

Barnstormer seems to only have stuff in 33 or higher. Is this typical for Ooe? I'd probably prefer their traditional (non-Cone) denim all things considered - I'm also in no hurry but would waiting for a 29 (or whatever shrinks to a real 29) in a straight fit something that likely won't happen? 

[Broark]

@AlientoyWorkmachine you’d probably be a 31 in OA jeans most likely. Size availability will really depend on the store. Seems like Barnstormer is mostly getting normal to larger sizes in these runs, so I’d keep an eye out for future releases. 

[Broark]

So, despite these two denims being referenced as XX-27 from Cone they feel very different.
The OA version is a lot more rough, while Roy's version is smoother.
The color of the OA version is a lot brighter blue, while Roy's version is more muted/dark.
Here are some comparison photos, OA on top and Roy below. I think the last two photos do the best job representing the variance.

Roy left, OA right:

OA on top, Roy below:

Roy up front, OA behind:

[Fooleo]

I am willing to bet they are both technically the XX27 style from Cone, but just from production lots that could be very far apart. I have actually been lucky enough to come across a roll of XX27 that was dated 2006, and also remarked that it felt a little different than the R01s in XX27 I also have from last year. No idea when Roy's lot was from but I am sure within the 10-15 + years they ran that style there was certainly plenty of variation in cotton / indigo / machine maintenance / finishing quality. It is Cone after all  

Edited August 16, 2021 by Fooleo

[Broark]

Yeah no doubt!  I was just surprised at how different the hand feel is between both pairs. I know the Cone on the OAs was made in 2017, not sure of the origin date for the R01s. For what it’s worth the Cone used on the Mechanics Pants is also pretty irregular compared to most Cone I’ve handled.

[Broark]

OA1927-BS jeans. Same Cone used as the 01's previously posted, but with some nice 20's details and a different cut.
I've been meaning to add a pair of 20's to my collection since the TCB contest debacle, these seemed like a fitting replacement.
Not sure how historically accurate they truly are, but they do tick a lot of the boxes that I associate with 20's era jeans.
Highlights include: lightweight denim belt loops, exposed back rivets, cinch, suspender buttons, crotch rivet, higher coin pocket positioning, exposed internal seams on the fly and front pocket openings, snaggletooth stitch on the back pockets.
Vintage experts let me know if there's anything missing. 

[bartlebyyphonics]

no expert here... they look handsome ...

major difference to tcb pair looks like size of back pocket; these seem bigger... reminiscent of the recent lvc 1915 back pocket's which I believe were called out on DB for their over-sized-ness...

if I remember in discussion of the tcb20s the inestimable @Dr_Heech was most concerned with bar tacking above the rivet on interior of the back pocket which seems all correct here? I may be very wrong but thinking other issues I remember from the tcbs that I don't see on these ooes: selvedge (no pics; should be white only?) and hemming (no pics, but shouldn't be chain stitch?) and with tcb 20s and lvc 1915 (and earlier): branded buttons for top fly button only ... [but as I remember reading from the good Dr; that changes after '26?) those with the 501 book will have far more info than I ...

[size-wise the back pockets actually remind me a little of the csf 20s version posted this page: but I think they had them rotated more and more tapered...]

Edited August 28, 2021 by bartlebyyphonics

[ulu]

23 minutes ago, bartlebyyphonics said:

no expert here... they look handsome ...

major difference to tcb pair looks like size of back pocket; these seem bigger... reminiscent of the recent lvc 1915 back pocket's which I believe were called out on DB for their over-sized-ness...

if I remember in discussion of the tcb20s the inestimable @Dr_Heech was most concerned with bar tacking above the rivet on interior of the back pocket which seems all correct here? I may be very wrong but thinking other issues I remember from the tcbs that I don't see on these ooes: selvedge (no pics; should be white only?) and hemming (no pics, but shouldn't be chain stitch?) and with tcb 20s and lvc 1915 (and earlier): branded buttons for top fly button only ... [but as I remember reading from the good Dr; that changes after '26?) those with the 501 book will have far more info than I ...

[size-wise the back pockets actually remind me a little of the csf 20s version posted this page: but I think they had them rotated more and more tapered...]

These are 1927s... I believe that's the first year Levis used Cone red selvedge denim, so selvedge should be red?

Edited August 28, 2021 by ulu

[Broark]

@bartlebyyphonics you definitely hit on a few inconsistencies/inaccuracies on this pair!
-Selvedge is not solid white, rather the same red ID very close to the center of the seam, white on the edges.
-Hems are chainstitched.
-Back pockets are a little large, even compared to the 01s I posted previously (I'll have to do a side by side for visual representation).
-Buttons are all branded (fly and suspender), but maybe if this changes in '26 they'd be considered accurate?

All in all I don't think OA is really going for 100% historical accuracy by any means, but for me this scratches the 20's itch I'd been having.
Also I noticed when taking off the paper tag that's attached to the suspender button: it was actually stamped between the button and the fabric when the button was set.
I'll have to check if that bit of cardboard came off in the wash or not.

[bartlebyyphonics]

8 minutes ago, ulu said:

These are 1927s... I believe that's the first year Levis used Cone denim, so selvedge should be red?

got it: thanks!

... in truth trying to get the good Dr's attention on this; I am no expert; only working from pairs of repros I own ... [I remember going through all the workwear research threads on db but have frankly forgotten the shifts/variables of '22 - '26; stone me fellows!]

remembering a good post by the Dr here of a 20s pair ... remembering @aho epic shot of 20s-30s backpockets here too ...

my only real observation of any substance is about the pocket size ... as I said: a handsome pair!

[ulu]

4 minutes ago, bartlebyyphonics said:

got it: thanks!

... in truth trying to get the good Dr's attention on this; I am no expert; only working from pairs of repros I own ... [I remember going through all the workwear research threads on db but have frankly forgotten the shifts/variables of '22 - '26; stone me fellows!]

remembering a good post by the Dr here of a 20s pair ... remembering @aho epic shot of 20s-30s backpockets here too ...

my only real observation of any substance is about the pocket size ... as I said: a handsome pair!

Actually I got it wrong myself... Not the first year Levis used Cone denim but the first year they used Cone red selvedge denim...

[MJF9]

@Broark lovely jeans... would be interested in measurements if you have 'em...

[Broark]

Definitely can get those for you @MJF9!

[Maynard Friedman]

I remember handling a pair of LVC ‘27s many years ago and they had a pale, ecru-like colour stitching. The selvedge was the same as the Ooe pair, with the redline abutting on the denim (same with LVC ‘33 and ‘37) but I can’t remember if they had a chain-stitched hem, although I think not. Anyway, I’m not saying LVC necessarily got it right! 

[Broark]

30 minutes ago, MJF9 said:

interested in measurements if you have 'em...

Fresh out of a hot wash, no dryer time. 
Waist: 17 in.
Front rise: 12.5 in. 
Back rise: 17 in.
Thigh: 14 in. 
Knee: 10.5 in.
Hem: 9.75 in.
Inseam: 33 in. 
Initial thoughts are that the waist is a bit snug, but they should stretch easily. Got them buttoned up without much hassle, this denim is pretty pliable. Rest of the leg is perfect, super wide! I’ll try and get some fit pics up soon.

[aho]

Pictures once mine arrive! 

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Fit pics of course   

[Broark]

Out of the three pairs they've released this might be the one I ultimately miss out on. 2 out of 3 isn't bad right? 

[aho]

Been wearing my OA02XX from Standard & Strange religiously lately. Long way to go but at the point where the blue just starts to break

[scooby]

@aho let’s see a fit pic!

[efujobu1]

Just received my OA03s from Barnstormer. Really nice and smooth. Need to throw these in for a hot wash and get hemmed lol 

[Broark]

Let's see some photos!
I ended up missing out on these, so if anyone gets a pair of size 38 and wants to move them, I know a guy (me). 

[srudy]

Still waiting on my 03….

But I’ll post pics when I get them.

[srudy]

Breaking down and soaking the 1927-here are some pics of them raw. Hopefully the 03 will come soon in the mail. 

[aho]

All good @srudy  still waiting on mine as well...Taking a bit longer as I asked for a hem methinks 

[srudy]

@aho I think mine are on the way but shipping has been taking a while these days

[Broark]

Something of interest I just stumbled across, new sub-brand from OA? No posts yet but listed in their Instagram profile. Something to keep an eye on!
https://instagram.com/oa.sporting_goods?utm_medium=copy_link