Differences between Levi's LVC 1947 and Sugar Cane 1947

[rnrswitch]

My SCs were definitely darker than my LVC 47s when new. I have worn the SCs more and over time they are now lighter.

The other big difference is the color of stitching. SC I believe uses banana yellow for some of the stitching, while LVC uses a dark orange/gold stitching around much of the jean.

And the fit is pretty different, although, I have two different sizes of jeans, so I wouldn't know how two new pairs compare which have the same measured waist.

edit: I will try to take some pics later on. If I can get my lazy ass to do it.

[Busted Seam]

How about this pair?

[/

Coleslawyum's SC look to have the wrong pockets - they are much more a wartime shape; while the LVC pockets are probably a bit small. These photos show the correct, orange stitching - a lot of repros use yellow stitching because it looks prettier, and because most people's udea of the vintage look was established by 50s jeans.

I have no idea on the shape, as even original jeans vary hugely... this pair looks trim, though, much narrower in the seat than the LVC 55 model, but wider in the thighs than the 47.

]Edit: more pix fomr the 1947 at six months spread for a colour comparison

HEre they are next to new 1947s, I think from this season.

And here, for comparison's sake, is a pair of original 40s 501s whihc went for a good price on eBay recently. These 30s and 40s jeans have a very black look to them... I think the reissues are pretty close.

[rnrswitch]

I actually like the darker stitching on the LVC better, but I did like the SC denim better, although it was probably too heavy to be similar to original levis denim.

[rnrswitch]

I also sometimes wonder if I had the "blind taste test" with a pair of original levis (47s) deadstock and some other nice japanese denim, which would I pick? I mean if we take away the cultural/historical/iconical(?) relevance of Levis would they be better than some of the jeans that are made today, at least from my perspective? Just food for thought.

[civicex]

im really curious on how the new, oversized 09 lvc's measure compared to the sugarcane 1947's.

[Johnnylazar]

I own the Lvc 1947 in a size 34, and the SC 1947 in the same size. Two completely different fits, the Sc is way looser, i probably should have sized down at least 1 or 2. The denim on my Lvc's is darker then my one wash canes. The canes feel heavier then the lvc though. The lvc's get more wear then the canes, i even bought a second pair of the lvc's for backup!! I can post some fit pics if anyone is interested.

[rellabgib3]

I'm thinking about getting a pair...but I heard for the lvc 47 501s you are supposed to size up? I typically wear a 32 for Studio D'artisans, and a 31 for samurais. Does anyone know if I should get 32 or 33". Also, are these jeans sanforized... or shrink to fit?

[Johnnylazar]

I normally a 33 in most jeans. I got a 34 in Lvc's, which measured at a 33. When i hot soaked em they went to a 31, then i stretched them back out to a 33. They fit perfec now, good slim fit. I don't know if that helps.

[erk]

in previous seasons LVC 47s measured one inch smaller in the waist, the newest 47s measure true to size so sizing up extra is no longer an issue. But like traditional Levi's, they shrink from tagged size, so sizing up 1 size from your waist size IS necessary. So i would get a 33 for a classic fit.

[rellabgib3]

Thanks a bunch guys!

[rnrswitch]

Alright, the son is sick today, so i have some time while he is napping to snap some pics.

First pic is of the waistband area:

The stitch colors are way off. Probably intentional by SC, but I like the gold all the way. One big distinction is the width and length of the belt loops, the SCs appear to be thinner and longer. Also, the the LVC belt loops are flat. The SC belt loops are have the lump between the two vertical seams, which according to Miz's artisan is to help protect the thread so the denim gets the wear and not the threads. The threads last longer on the SC due to the less friction.

It is hard for me to tell from pics of vintage 47s which belt loop is correct.

Next Pics are of the pockets.

LVC

SC47

The distance between the two seams around the pockets is different, giving a pretty different aesthetic. The SC starts thin at the bottom and then as the inner seam moves towards the hidden rivet it bends inward, while the LVC inner seam appears to take a direct line.

Last pic for now. Both pockets together.

Crappy edit job (aliasing), but the shape of the pockets is pretty different. The pockets on the SCs appear to be rounded, while the LVCs are straighter.

[Hendodo]

just reading up on this thread and i realized that the sugar cane 1947 and their hawaiis have different measurements ( minor but nevertheless, existent). which ones are closer to the levis 1947??

[erk]

Also, the the LVC belt loops are flat. The SC belt loops are have the lump between the two vertical seams, which according to Miz's artisan is to help protect the thread so the denim gets the wear and not the threads. The threads last longer on the SC due to the less friction.

It is hard for me to tell from pics of vintage 47s which belt loop is correct.

both of my LVC 47s have the lump between the vertical seams...

perhaps you havent worn them long enough to make it apparent?

[rnrswitch]

The jeans do have a slight lump on some of the belt loops, but it looks like it was intentional on the part of SC, while the LVCs look to me (from my jeans) that it is not intentional, but something that may happen with washing and wearing. Also, while these jeans have not been washed much (LVCs) they have been soaked and worn quite a bit. Definitely not as much as the SCs though. The SCs were worn when I was working construction during my college years.

The japanese jeans just exhibit a lot of the characteristics brought up in Miz's thread (peaking selvedge, interlocked inseam, raised denim between seams (belt loops and pockets). It looks like the SCs might be an exaggerate version of the 47... possibly.

[civicex]

It looks like the SCs might be an exaggerate version of the 47... possibly.

i'd definitely have to agree. good work on the comparisons rnrswitch

[Busted Seam]

yeah, interesting, thanks for the comparison.

SC seem to be an idealised 47. Better in some areas; but the back pocket, as said earlier, is much more a 44 shape, together with the more attractive, but less accurate, yellow stitching. The SC belt loops look way too long compared with the original on the last page - look where they offset the yoke. This could vary on originals, but... again, I wonder if they are idealised. I like the owrn red tag on the SC, looks cool.

Course you can't tell that much from one LVC, because another produciton year might be completely different. I've even seen 555 jeans with the stagger and without - and these are jeans made in a factory with 100 years of heritage.

[rnrswitch]

I was looking at some pics of some vintage 47s on the marvins website and it looks like SC may have somewhat the correct width of the belt loops, but the pockets on the LVC 47s look better. The width between the seams on the LVC's back pockets looks wider compared to the vintage 47s. BTW I believe the LVC jeans are 2004s or 2005s.

http://www.marvins-jp.com/

[civicex]

I was looking at some pics of some vintage 47s on the marvins website and it looks like SC may have somewhat the correct width of the belt loops, but the pockets on the LVC 47s look better. The width between the seams on the LVC's back pockets looks wider compared to the vintage 47s. BTW I believe the LVC jeans are 2004s or 2005s.

http://www.marvins-jp.com/

This is just my observation; Its really hard to compare vintage jeans to new models. As we all know, jeans conform to our bodies when we wear them, and some areas may be stretched more than others.

As a control, i tried to compare my regular Levis 501 STF's to some of the ones on the mynudies.com contest page. Even though they were identical jeans with the same cut, they looked different based on how the person's body shaped them.

[glimmertwins]

This is just my observation; Its really hard to compare vintage jeans to new models. As we all know, jeans conform to our bodies when we wear them, and some areas may be stretched more than others.

As a control, i tried to compare my regular Levis 501 STF's to some of the ones on the mynudies.com contest page. Even though they were identical jeans with the same cut, they looked different based on how the person's body shaped them.

That's a really good point.

....btw, does anyone know who carries the newer 09 "true to size" LVC 47s? Cultizm's site appears to still have the old ones. Is this the Japan versions people are referring to or is it the European version too and Cultizm doesn't yet have the new ones in? Inquiring minds want to know.

[rnrswitch]

That's a really good point.

....btw, does anyone know who carries the newer 09 "true to size" LVC 47s? Cultizm's site appears to still have the old ones. Is this the Japan versions people are referring to or is it the European version too and Cultizm doesn't yet have the new ones in? Inquiring minds want to know.

Just ask cultizm what the measurements for the jeans are. If you know the waist measurement of a pair of jeans that fits you, then attempt to match that up with the correct size for 47s.

[glimmertwins]

Just ask cultizm what the measurements for the jeans are. If you know the waist measurement of a pair of jeans that fits you, then attempt to match that up with the correct size for 47s.

...ya, but I'm at the top end of what they make. A 38 sized at a 38 would be doable but a 38 sized at a 37 that then shrinks down would likely be too tight to be a comfort jean.

[erk]

raised belt loop

its actually more pronounced in real life, cause the flash sucked out some of the fun.

[rnrswitch]

What year are those? Because that leather tag looks completely different than mine.

[erk]

What year are those? Because that leather tag looks completely different than mine.

spring 08

643M

blank button

also the leather tag looks completely different than my 07 1947 as well...