Warehouse

[Broark]

Decided to take some photos of my 1001's as I've been wearing them for a little over month now.

All I've got is this iPhone 5 camera so I did the best with what I've got.

 

Also a quick question, what's the story with the printed 23 on the back pocket rivets?

[ironheartfan123]

anyone have one of these or try it on?  

 

http://blueingreensoho.com/site/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&product_id=15358&category_id=&manufacturer_id=4&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=62

[Broark]

Been eyeing that sweat myself, would be interested if anyone has a fit pic.

[Maynard Friedman]

Also a quick question, what's the story with the printed 23 on the back pocket rivets?

Photo please!

They're coming along very nicely.

Edited March 1, 2014 by Maynard Friedman

[Broark]

I'll try and post a picture of it after work tonight Maynard!

[jstavrin]

I recently bought a Heller's Cafe sweatshirt from a friend, and it might be one of the best I've ever seen (crew neck with a sewn on hood and front pockets). I'll post pictures soon. 

[Broark]

Would love to see the sweatshirt jstarvin, the 42 looks like the right size for me except the body length.

 

Also here's the photo of the back rivet, it's actually a 25, not a 23.

Any story behind it?

[aho]

Broark, not sure the significance of the number "25" itself; all Japanese websites just talk about the technique and properties of the hidden rivets rather than the meaning of the number. However, this is a period correct detail and you'll see these on this era Levi's (Leather patch, offset belt loop, pre '55):

 

 

[Broark]

Ah I see, well that makes sense, being a repo and all.

What exactly is the 1001 based off of?  I'm no Warehouse expert by any means.

I love the details on my 1001's, very subtle but that makes it even better in my mind.

I'll probably give them a wash before summer hits, plus the cut is great for warmer climates.

We've already had some 80 degree days here and they were perfect!

[aho]

^The 1001XX (and 1001 by extension) has always been an early to mid 50's cut, but different iterations may have different years they're based off of, although the differences are subtle (ranging from 1947-1955ish). In reality, there wasn't much variance in cut during this era either, so the recent cut alterings for the 1001 (slimming it down) is really for modern purposes. The offset belt loop/leather patch type for the 1001 is based around 1954ish, which then became the paper patch 1955 model for Levi's. Hope that helps!

[Broark]

Thanks for dropping some knowledge aho, really appreciate it!

I love learning about denim history and how well some brands are able to replicate it in modern times.

[setterman]

Last few years, the 1001XX has been 50s-ish. From the fit pix a page back, the 1001 looks kinda early 60s-ish to me with the increased taper. Offset belt loop is an early 50s to early 60s Levis feature. Warehouse generally aren't meant to be exact reproductions of any specific year, they're just interpretations (very good ones) of eras.

[aho]

^setter, agreed that it's pretty fuzzy but I'd say that they're actually really good repros of very specific pairs in recent years. My guess is that they base each release off of specific grouped pairs that lump together well with the same details...I'll dig up some examples for a future post but fwiw, the leather patch offset beltloop was a legit pair from ~1954 before it turned into the paper patch/offset beltloop from 1955 into early 60's as shown in my previous example! All of the details are very subtle, but after looking at hundreds of examples, patterns start to emerge (number of buttons, pocket shape, etc.)

Edited March 2, 2014 by aho

[setterman]

Models like the 1003, 1105, 1100 are very specific repros. IMO, the 1001XX 15th Anniv has been the best 50s shape since that model was introduced. To me the 2012 1001XX and current 1001 are experimenting with the late 50s early 60s shape and details.

[aho]

To clarify, I agree that cut wise slimming it down in recent years makes it closer to 60's cuts, however some of the details can be tied down to specific pairs. For example:

 

15th Anniversary 1001XX: Early 50's, Smooth denim, 4 button button-fly, flatter hidden rivets without the number, leather patch, normal belt loop

http://www.marvins-jp.com/denimpants/dp-343/dp-343.html

http://www.marvins-jp.com/denimpants/dp-1270-%28418%29/dp-1270.htm

 

2012 "Banner Denim" 1001XX: grainier fabric, 4 button fly, hidden rivets with number, leather patch, normal belt loop, funny shaped back pocket (more apparent on right pocket, sharp angle around the hidden rivet. there was a brilliant pair on Berberjin that showed if even more clarly). Even the cut seems very close with this example Levi's pair (hip flare-ish with taper)

http://www.marvins-jp.com/denimpants/dp-415/dp415.html

 

1001: 1954-55 era Leather patch, offset beltloop, hidden rivets with number, 5 button fly, more normal shaped backpockets

http://www.marvins-jp.com/denimpants/dp-1537/dp-1537.html
http://www.marvins-jp.com/denimpants/dp-1417-%28418%29/dp-1417.htm

 

By 1955, we have the 501ZXX, paper patches/offset beltloop, etc. and by the mid-late 60's we have paper patch, numbered/lettered top button fly, etc.

 

In the end, it's all conjecture on my part and YMMV. Fun to try to pick out the details and match them up with historical pieces though! They have to be getting inspiration from somewhere when building their jeans, right? I haven't tried finding the "prototypes" for pre-15th Anniversary pairs but I'd say they've gotten more specific over the years and earlier pairs might've been based more on the "standard" 50's details. Dubbleworks was originally created to experiment more with mixing the details and there's been more playful models like the 660, and even a 1001XX type cut with paper patch/offset belt loop) but that's a whole other discussion!

Edited March 2, 2014 by aho

[chantheman]

first time logging in in years.

 

SUFUx660 contest jeans checking back in

 

 

tracks

 

patch

Edited March 3, 2014 by chantheman

[jstavrin]

^The 1001XX (and 1001 by extension) has always been an early to mid 50's cut, but different iterations may have different years they're based off of, although the differences are subtle (ranging from 1947-1955ish). In reality, there wasn't much variance in cut during this era either, so the recent cut alterings for the 1001 (slimming it down) is really for modern purposes. The offset belt loop/leather patch type for the 1001 is based around 1954ish, which then became the paper patch 1955 model for Levi's. Hope that helps!

 

Yeesh, I love Warehouse denim but keeping track of their naming/numbering scheme is such a headache! Across the 1000, 1001, and 1003, is there any sort of consistency in regard to denim or cut? My 2008 1001 (thanks for the ID!) is absolutely a 50s cut, for example, but that doesn't seem to be the case anymore (as you mention). 

 

edit: Didn't see your posts on this page--good stuff!

Edited March 3, 2014 by jstavrin

[S-Town]

It would be cool to compile a Page 1 list of which models were made in which years; and key details or changes from previous releases.  Not that I have much input at all, but it would be a great resource.

[setterman]

To clarify, I agree that cut wise slimming it down in recent years makes it closer to 60's cuts, however some of the details can be tied down to specific pairs.

 

 

 

Oh, I don't disagree that certain details apply to specific historical pairs. I guess my point is that the 1001XX and 1001 are an homage rather than a reproduction. And while they may have details or combinations that we can say "that's '54, or that's '62" they aren't meant to be an exact 501 reproduction.  They're attempting to capture the style and feel of the period from the early 50s to the early 60s by blending details and shapes.               

 

I wish Warehouse didn't fiddle with the 1001XX from year to year, at least when it comes to pattern.  I'd prefer the flagship model stay consistent (think FC 0105, SDA 101).  If they want to try different shapes, detail, and patterns, I'd rather they were done as they're own different model, say, 1014, 1015, 1016, with the last two digits being the year of production.  Would make it easier to keep things straight.  

[aho]

^Agreed on all counts!

[beautiful_FrEaK]

me too!

 

although your scheme of numbering would make all this denim-talk obsolete j/k

Fullcount does it too with their WW2 model every year, would make it really easier

[jstavrin]

Oh, I don't disagree that certain details apply to specific historical pairs. I guess my point is that the 1001XX and 1001 are an homage rather than a reproduction. And while they may have details or combinations that we can say "that's '54, or that's '62" they aren't meant to be an exact 501 reproduction.  They're attempting to capture the style and feel of the period from the early 50s to the early 60s by blending details and shapes.               

 

I wish Warehouse didn't fiddle with the 1001XX from year to year, at least when it comes to pattern.  I'd prefer the flagship model stay consistent (think FC 0105, SDA 101).  If they want to try different shapes, detail, and patterns, I'd rather they were done as they're own different model, say, 1014, 1015, 1016, with the last two digits being the year of production.  Would make it easier to keep things straight.  

 

 

I agree wholeheartedly with your second paragraph. Warehouse denim looks so incredible both new and old (the variety of which even outpaces my favorite brand, Sugar Cane), that it frustrates me even more that they have no consistent "flagship." 

 

Somewhat related: I'm sure someone can clear this up for me, but how sure are we about the designation of Levi's cuts? I've always wondered about this in regard to the competing LVC/SC (and whoever else) 1947 interpretations. 

[setterman]

I agree wholeheartedly with your second paragraph. Warehouse denim looks so incredible both new and old (the variety of which even outpaces my favorite brand, Sugar Cane), that it frustrates me even more that they have no consistent "flagship." 

 

Somewhat related: I'm sure someone can clear this up for me, but how sure are we about the designation of Levi's cuts? I've always wondered about this in regard to the competing LVC/SC (and whoever else) 1947 interpretations. 

 

LVC's designations are correct for the years they are attempting to reproduce.  These designations get used in general conversation as a simplification, though it might be better to more broad (i.e., use late 40s or late 60s, rather than '47 or '66) because while a detail LVC is playing up might have only been around a couple years, a shape could be there seven to ten.  

[Maynard Friedman]

I like the way Warehouse tinker with the cuts and bring models in and out in the same way I like how LVC rotates some of its 501 models through different seasons. It adds a certain mystique and air of exclusivity to specific models such as the various anniversary 1001XX pairs. It also encourages you to move quickly before an offering is gone as the replacement may not quite be the same. I understand it is frustrating to those who miss out on a model first time around but it's probably only a matter of time until that incarnation returns. Overall, it adds a bit of a fun/unknown element to seasonal collections and gives people the thrill of the chase in tracking down a sought after model or patiently awaiting the reissue of a popular one from the past.

[jstavrin]

I like the way Warehouse tinker with the cuts and bring models in and out in the same way I like how LVC rotates some of its 501 models through different seasons. It adds a certain mystique and air of exclusivity to specific models such as the various anniversary 1001XX pairs. It also encourages you to move quickly before an offering is gone as the replacement may not quite be the same. I understand it is frustrating to those who miss out on a model first time around but it's probably only a matter of time until that incarnation returns. Overall, it adds a bit of a fun/unknown element to seasonal collections and gives people the thrill of the chase in tracking down a sought after model or patiently awaiting the reissue of a popular one from the past.

 

 

I see this side, too. In fact, discussions of Warehouse models/details almost start to sound like vintage Levi's discussions, and maybe that's the point. I do think it's pretty neat the 1001 I have is very specific to the year it came out--still, I wouldn't mind if they had *one* model that stayed the same. 

[ironheartfan123]

i haven't worn warehouse since 2007, amazing how time flies; when do the new models come out?

[jstavrin]

This Heller's Cafe sweatshirt might be the coolest I own. I've been coveting this for awhile, and I finally got one from a customer. It's a crew neck sweat (V on the front and back) with a sewn on hood and front pockets. The fit is incredible and it's double-layered. Here are some shitty pics: 

 

 

 

Bonus shot of my 2008 1001s. Purdy: 

 

[bradl]

Probably known, but Gordon said the 660 are almost done production and he is expecting them towards the end of the month.

[whackedout]

How well does the 1000xx denim stretch? I'm thinking about grabbing the 660 from Gordon when it comes out which hopefully be by the end of this month or beginning of next month, been loving the fit on my denime 66xx back from the shins era, I wanted a pretty similar fit. Judging by the measurements and from the gurus on this thread lead me to 660.

 

 

Edit: The measurements on my Denime 66xx this was after about 1 hot soak and 2 washes. Was thinking about grabbing a 32 and machine washing it and let is dry in the sun. But a size 31 is pretty much on point. Btw I'm looking mainly at the one washed chart.

 

Measured it Blue in Green style:

Tag Size: 34

Waist: 32

Front Rise: 10

Back Rise: 14.25

Thigh: 11.75

Knee: 8

Leg Opening: 7.75

Edited March 22, 2014 by whackedout

[Maynard Friedman]

whackedout,

I've been wearing my Warrens for the last few months, which are made from oxidised 1000XX denim. They stretch a lot. When my size 32s are fresh from the wash they're snug; after a week or so of wear it feels like I could definitely have sized down to a 31.