Warehouse

[GregoryH]

Nice trim fit there. Looks really good. Did you wear WH 800 before? I'd be interested to know how the two compare from a wearer's point of view if that's the case.

I have both 800's as well as 660's

The rise on these isn't quite as high as the 800's and I feel that they taper a tad less with a similar "slim" straight cut through the thigh (hope that helps somewhat)

[Sugar Mountain]

That does help. On paper, the 1001 would be an ideal fit for me it seems, but I tried them on in Osaka and they didn't work for me at all somehow. One less jean to buy, I suppose!

[Rain Dogs]

How much stretch can I expect in the waist on the 800's (1000xx denim)?

edit: meaning after they are soaked/washed.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Rain Dogs

[edmond]

I COLD SOAKED AND AGITATED THE 1003xx i got with chmabray pocket bags and omg they shrunk a ton with a cold soak!

[Rain Dogs]

did they stretch back out to the presoak size after you wore them?

[claes]

Anyone any experience of the new lot 900? Accurate measurements. I see Son of Stag has them in their online store and are listing them as 34 inseam. Japanese sites appear to list them significantly shorter.

 

Caliroots to which I posted the link a couple of posts up has them listed in L32 and L34 and the size chart says they're 86cm and 91cm respectively (presumably raw state). Only the L32 show up in stock though.

 

I have both 800's as well as 660's

The rise on these isn't quite as high as the 800's and I feel that they taper a tad less with a similar "slim" straight cut through the thigh (hope that helps somewhat)

 

Echoed, perfect description!

[edmond]

quite surprised that the 1001sxx and 1003xx share almost the same measurement after a cold soak on both! weird!

[claes]

How much stretch can I expect in the waist on the 800's (1000xx denim)?

edit: meaning after they are soaked/washed.

 

I got the 800s already washed so not entirely sure about the raw waist measurement, but my size 34 are now 90 cm across the waistband when stretched out, which I would guess is more or less the measurement when raw. Hope that helps!

[Max Power]

That's a bit more than my 800 raw measurement (of course another Lot). So I'd assume they Stretch back to presoak size. The 660 also stretched a good amount in the waist.

[claes]

That's a bit more than my 800 raw measurement (of course another Lot). So I'd assume they Stretch back to presoak size. The 660 also stretched a good amount in the waist.

 

Oh, that's right. My info is for the older version. Might be safer listening to someone with the newer one then.

[beautiful_FrEaK]

quite surprised that the 1001sxx and 1003xx share almost the same measurement after a cold soak on both! weird!

 

1001SXX = late 30s / early 40s model. Just pre-war, transition model.

1003XX = mid 40s model aka WW2 model

 

not that weird that the cut is similar if not alomst the same

[edmond]

whats1000?

[beautiful_FrEaK]

1000 is 1 less than 1001, and even 3 less than 1003

 

Edited January 27, 2015 by beautiful_FrEaK

[edmond]

so slimmer??

[beautiful_FrEaK]

Ed, this is the last time that I refer you the official Warehouse sizing charts:

http://info.ware-house.co.jp/basic.html

 

 

Make it a bookmark, look at the measurements and compare them. There is your answer

[edmond]

thanks bf appreciate it.. fuck i should have gotten a 1001

[Bobbo]

Warehouse 1001 love:

 

[aho]

ed, at least the 1001SXX and 1003 use different denim!

 

The 1001 is my favorite cut that I've ever worn. Still loose in the leg if upsized (for a more 50's fit), and the lower rise with wider waist is perfect for me. 

[edmond]

aho. well teah at least! hahaha

but i think i like the color on the 1003xx more

[Broark]

So I just gave my 1001's another wash, lost count by this point but I haven't really been wearing them much of late.

Will try to get some well lit detail shots, but this is definitely some of my favorite denim that I own.

Very grainy and crinkly!

[Broark]

In hindsight I should've stopped keeping my phone in my back pocket a long time ago.

And iPhone quality shots don't really do these justice.

[Maynard Friedman]

Some better (iPhone) shots of my Warrens. Unfortunately the arcs had deteriorated so much that I had to remove them.

 

 

 

[Max Power]

Did the arcs leave just the imprint or are  traces of the stitches visible (hard to tell from that distance)?

[Maynard Friedman]

It's the imprint Max, I removed all the stitching, inside and out. I suspect it'll settle down and be less noticeable with further wear and washing.

[Flash]

the warrens look great Maynard , wish i got a pair years ago when Kiosk78 were selling them ( for £90 )

[Maynard Friedman]

Thanks Flash, they were actually selling them for £80 in summer 2009 but I procrastinated too long at the time and missed them. Fortunately they got one last pair in a size 32 a few months later (a return perhaps?) so I managed to get them in a 20% off sale (£128 shipped). I really like them and managed to hunt down another new pair in my size about 3-4 years ago. I think they'd be a little loose for your liking, plus as you know, Warehouse denim stretches easily. The 1000XX oxidised denim is great though.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Maynard Friedman

[Flash]

it was the denim that really made me want a pair , i remember drooling over them in the old Lightning Indigo Master mag . make sure and post some more updates mate 

[Maynard Friedman]

Funnily enough, that worn pair in the Lightning Denim Indigo Master mag (p198) aren't actually Warrens, look closely, there's no crotch rivet. If you have the Lightning Denim Style Vol 2 book (from 2006), the same pair is shown on p235 as 2-yr worn 1000XX! All a bit trainspotter-ish I know, but we all love nerding out over denim sometimes, that's why we're here!

[Flash]

never realised that , thanks mate

[Flash]

checked the mags , 100% correct mate