LVC 06-Good quality or not?

[singlet2]

I just tried on some LVC 47's( raw) at Levi store NYC. I wasn't too sure about the fit. I have a pair of 555 one's from Valencia, which seem lower waisted. Wondering if any experts have tried out the '06 line-Is it a re-issue year or not. Is it one to add to the collection or better to wait til next year. At $175 on sale they aren't a bad deal, but I don't want a jeans lemon. Thanks

[triniboy27]

Is that the Levi's store on Broadway?

[Ted DiBiase]

i am severely disappointed with this years 47501. the fit feels wrong for some reason (too baggy), quality seems a little off as well, i dont know, just my opinion. i think im going to get rid of mine soon, i've worn it once and dont have any desire to wear it any more.

[singlet2]

Just talked to the store on Lex and 59th. The model 47's I tried on were leftover fall o5-which people have said had problems, so I passed on them and will wait for Spring 06, which they say is due in April. No point buying a crap version of a repro.

[BumbaClot]

singlet...

did they happen to mention (not enough) shrinkage as one of those problems?

I hope the answer is yes, i wasn't able to get my length....

[partytaco]

Quote:

Just talked to the store on Lex and 59th. The model 47's I tried on were leftover fall o5-which people have said had problems, so I passed on them and will wait for Spring 06, which they say is due in April. No point buying a crap version of a repro.

--- Original message by singlet2 on Mar 4, 2006 07:47 AM

they say something different each time i go into either one of the levis stores in nyc....first it was first week in feb and then mid feb and then march 3rd and now april....and each time i ask about the LVC clothes they point me over to the same Levis Premium shit....they really need to get their act together

[singlet2]

No mention of shrinkage problem, but then shopping there is not the same as going to cinch or the old selvedge, where they actually knew what the products were. We just have to wait-whoever find the new first, give a shout out.

[Paul T]

Don't think you can generalise too much. My 47s are Fall 06 and seem fine; right leg length, shrank from 34 to 33 with a short cold soak, and nicely made. The waist was slightly undersize, but this does happen with the 47. The 55s from spring 07 that I saw in December looked great too and there were no obvious errors.

I would be surprised if either range has consistent shrinkage problems - I thought the problem was that one batch was made with over-long legs, I'm prepared to stand corrected. But the 201s I saw were pitifullly bad - I expect to see a bunch going cheap at TK Max in the summer, but I wouldn't pay a tenner for them. Apparently there's no one person in Europe driving the LVC range any more, so I think there will be ongoing intermittent problems.

[thinkinFRESH]

My Friend works for Levis on Broadway and the LVC '47 DS they recieved are from the spring line ... I believe there still waiting on the washed LVC '47 DS version that is featured on the site

" evolution aint a game its another Name , For life fighting "

[Lars]

Paul, what was the problem with this years 201's? I've been wanting a pair..

[Paul T]

The 201s have the wrong-size pockets, and 60s style arcuates done with the double needle. Hence they don;t look at all like 201s. They really suck. The 201s are perhaps my favourite LVC jeans so this is a particular travesty. It is possible the problem is just with one batch, but they still had the faulty ones at Cinch last time I checked.

Edited by Paul T on Mar 8, 2006 at 08:33 AM

[Lars]

That's dissapointing. I've been wanting them for quite some time now.

[singlet2]

Hi Paul-I just broke down and bought the sale $175 LVC 47's from Levi's on Lex. according to them they are fall o5. I'm going to hold on and compare them with whatever new issue come in. I asked if they were sTF and they said no. I recall me older LVC jeans as being quite needing STF-they werre cut huge and these seem smaller-you men tion an inch shrinkage in the leg-did the waist or rise shrink at all and does this mean they are using sanfrodized denim? Also, how did you see Spring 07 models-isn't that a full year away? Just a note-the old LVC's were really inky-ridicolously coated in dye. I like these new ones better, dark, buit not coated feeling.

[singlet2]

Last thought for the moment. Anyone know if all LVC are being made in the same factory-I know I have two of the fisrt Red twisted and one was made in spain and one was made in belgium and they were a really different cut. If we are comparing the same saeson, but different factory's the details may be useless.

[Shorty Long]

Quote:

Hi Paul-I just broke down and bought the sale $175 LVC 47's from Levi's on Lex. according to them they are fall o5. I'm going to hold on and compare them with whatever new issue come in. I asked if they were sTF and they said no. I recall me older LVC jeans as being quite needing STF-they werre cut huge and these seem smaller-you men tion an inch shrinkage in the leg-did the waist or rise shrink at all and does this mean they are using sanfrodized denim? Also, how did you see Spring 07 models-isn't that a full year away? Just a note-the old LVC's were really inky-ridicolously coated in dye. I like these new ones better, dark, buit not coated feeling.

--- Original message by singlet2 on Mar 8, 2006 03:31 PM

I have a hard time believing the 47s you just bought were from the fall...if i remember correctly, the fall 47s were shipped very early...like June or July '05 and sold out fairly quickly.

i was at the lexington ave store in jan. and they only had one pair of deadstock '47s left.

my guess is that you have a pair from the new spring line, although i doubt there's much of a difference

[singlet2]

perhaps, but whatever I bought was on sale, reduced to $175 and they say a new shipment of a newer release is due in the next few weeks, so, according to your logic they would be expecting fall 06 in march which seems unusually early...but that Levi for you. I don't belioeve these are the new spring line-I think they may be leftovers from other stores that didn't sell them and they were sent to NYC stores-but I don't know for sure. Also, I belive these aren't shrink to fit anymore and that they angle the material on the leg so that it will suggest a twist-which normally would only come from a wash-now it is apparent in an unwashed pair.

[cheapmuthafukr]

if its twisted, its been washed, either by levis or someone washed some raw lvc and returned them

denim is the new crack

[Paul T]

Singlet, sorry, the ones I saw in Dec were spring 06 of course, I'm getting ahead of myself. And generally confused, maybe you should post a photo of your 47s so we get a better idea of what they look like.

Again, while there have been odd quirks/mistkaes in the spring 06 range that I've seen, I haven't noticed that the denim or finish on the dry jeans was any different from the autumn or spring 05 range. I did notice some differences on the 1890 jeans, which I believe might not use Cone denim, but that was it.

[singlet2]

Cheap muth-I believe you are ill informed. I will post pix soon, but it is quite possible and a bit of a sad trick to create the appearence of a twist in the leg selvedge by cutting the denim on a bias, thereby swinging the seam a bit. These are not washed. I would know-This bit of info re: seam is direct from Scott Morisson, so take it for what you want. More and more these compainies are figuring out how to fake everything. So, no wash, but twist.

[singlet2]

Paul-re: inky surface, my LVC 555's from circa 2000 were ridiculoulsy over dyed so that it came off on your hands immediatly. I think they have figured out a diferent dye process-my only worry being that they are singed or sanfordized and that is why the dry is so dry. I remember my 201 from the late 90's being basically like an ink pad. Will post pix later today as well as pix of the some special cone denim I will see later in the day.

[fmc]

i purchased a pair of deadstock 1947's from the levi store on lex and 59th last week. they are definitely the spring 2006 lot. the fit through the thighs does seem to be the slightest bit more relaxed than last season but the quality seems up to par with previous years. haven't had a chance to soak them yet though.

[cheapmuthafukr]

Quote:

Cheap muth-I believe you are ill informed. I will post pix soon, but it is quite possible and a bit of a sad trick to create the appearence of a twist in the leg selvedge by cutting the denim on a bias, thereby swinging the seam a bit. These are not washed. I would know-This bit of info re: seam is direct from Scott Morisson, so take it for what you want. More and more these compainies are figuring out how to fake everything. So, no wash, but twist.

--- Original message by singlet2 on Mar 9, 2006 07:21 AM

so if they are not washed they are shrink to fit, or they are not lvc. these are reproductions, right? im not saying you washed them, but levis wouldnt make a reproduction with an artifically twisted seam when all they would have to do is make a pair unsanforised and throm them in some water.

denim is the new crack

[singlet2]

FMC-cn you confirm that the deadstock LVC you just bought have the twist in the leg before wash. Nowhere on the label does it say STF-but it is from the LVC line. My point being I think they are cutting back on STF denim or both FMC and I just got duped into buying a pair of hidden rivet 47's that are not LVC which doesn't make sense. I will post pix. FMC love to know what the shrinkage is like from your cold soak.

[singlet2]

Does anyone know how to post pix?

[Paul T]

Go to photobucket.com and download the pic to their site. It should resize it automatically. Once you've downloaded it, they give you a URL you can paste into your posts, post the line marked 'Tag'.

I just tried it with a pic of my new watch...

Edited by Paul T on Mar 9, 2006 at 05:45 PM

[fmc]

hey singlet2, there is no twist in mine. i did see 1 leftover fall 2005 pair in size 30 x 32, they were marked at $154. all the 2006 stock had the spring 2006 booklets attached including stf info. i'll tru to post a picture soon.

[singlet2]

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e44/singlet2/IMG_0269.jpg

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e44/singlet2/IMG_0273.jpg

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e44/singlet2/IMG_0271.jpg

Thanks for the tip and nice Tag-vintage right, a beauty. I'll post my Wakman(sub-brietling) chrono from the 60's)

So hopefully this works, my first time on photobucket-not sure how to make the automatic link though. The pictures show old LVC washed and new unwashed-note where the selvedge is on the inside leg-maybe that is always how it is, but there seems to be no difference in an older model washed and new one. Then you see side by side.

[giantreptile]

ask shorty long this question, he seems to know!

[Shorty Long]

what's the question exactly? i have a number of '47s...one stamped '555' a few stamped '554' and one 'R,' and i can't find any significant difference in quality...that's just my untrained eye talking though...

my non-Levi made ('R'-stamped) '47s are from last fall, so i can't speak for the new spring batch

Quote:

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e44/singlet2/IMG_0269.jpg

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e44/singlet2/IMG_0273.jpg

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e44/singlet2/IMG_0271.jpg

Thanks for the tip and nice Tag-vintage right, a beauty. I'll post my Wakman(sub-brietling) chrono from the 60's)

So hopefully this works, my first time on photobucket-not sure how to make the automatic link though. The pictures show old LVC washed and new unwashed-note where the selvedge is on the inside leg-maybe that is always how it is, but there seems to be no difference in an older model washed and new one. Then you see side by side.

--- Original message by singlet2 on Mar 10, 2006 09:28 AM

Edited by Shorty Long on Mar 10, 2006 at 11:50 AM

[Paul T]

Tell us more about what's wrong with them? I looks like they have the narrow selvage band, which my fall 05 have... I think the spring 06 are the same, I have a pair on the way. Apart from that, I didn't notice any difference between those and the previous ones, but I don't own any 555 '47s, would be interested to know the differences.

Those old ones are looking good. My 05 are now five months old, first wash is a month away.