Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Thoughts about fit?

Carlos840

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,944
Location
London
That’s an interesting thought MrProper and I agree.

I do like this jacket and the tea core is starting to show through in spots. I think it’s really going to be a looker. I’ll probably keep it and focus on dressing to meet its needs. How many of you have changed how you dress to meet the needs of your jacket?!

Up untill 3 or 4 years ago i used to wear modern low rise Levi's and used to call Iron Heart 634 "dad jeans", to me they were super high waisted.
I realized one day that all my jeans were too low rise and made the proportions of jackets look off.
I ordered a pair of IH 634 and that's all i have worn since, i love them.
 
Last edited:

MrProper

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,375
Location
Europe
Up untill 3 or 4 years ago i used to wear modern low rise Levi's and used to call Iron Heart 634 "dad jeans", to me they were super high waisted.
I realized one day that all my jeans were too low rise and made the proportions of jackets look off.
I ordered a pair of IH 634 and that's all i have worn since, i love them.

I think it depends a little on the individual proportions of the body. A high waist makes short legs look longer, while a low waist makes long legs look shorter.
I therefore tend to wear a low waist, as this suits my proportions better. The jackets are then a little longer;)
 

Edward

Bartender
Messages
25,084
Location
London, UK
Up untill 3 or 4 years ago i used to wear modern low rise Levi's and used to call Iron Heart 634 "dad jeans", to me they were super high waisted.
I realized one day that all my jeans were too low rise and made the proportions of jackets look off.
I ordered a pair of IH 634 and that's all i have worn since, i love them.

I never liked jeans sitting on my hips. I remember when I was in my teens, Lee still had a factory in Northern Ireland, and twenty minutes from my parents' home was a factory shop where I could pick up a pair of seconds (though the flaw was rarely visible) for £12 (This at a time when the average jean was £20-25, and 501s were still a scandalous £45 per pair). Sadly, I could never find a pair of Lees of any sort or fit that actually had a rise I was comfortable in - always felt like I was trying to pull them up about four inches more than was possible. I'm guessing that the Lee Coopers and military surplus I later gravitated to were simply cut with a higher rise, though it wasn't until later years I had the vocabulary to express that. I was already getting into higher waists for comfort when I picked up on the vintage look, so it all worked out quite neatly for me. Wouldn't dream of wearing anything else now.

Absolutely agree about jacket proportions. There's room for personal taste to an extent, but when (as many mainsteam fashion copies do) you take as Perfect or a Type 3 design that originally would have had a 24" or 25" back length and take that up to 29" to match low rise jeans, it looks really, really wrong. Throws the balance of the whole thing right out.
 

Carlos840

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,944
Location
London
Absolutely agree about jacket proportions. There's room for personal taste to an extent, but when (as many mainsteam fashion copies do) you take as Perfect or a Type 3 design that originally would have had a 24" or 25" back length and take that up to 29" to match low rise jeans, it looks really, really wrong. Throws the balance of the whole thing right out.

Exactly that. When i first joined TFL i thougt "this isn't the 40s anymore, i need to make these jackets work with modern jeans". Now i know i was wrong...
I used to ask for 26" back length minimum, now i am happy around 24.5"-25.5" (i am 6'2").
It doesn't sound like much but it looks much better to me.
 

roadking04

Practically Family
Messages
938
Location
The Rock 'n Roll Capital
Up untill 3 or 4 years ago i used to wear modern low rise Levi's and used to call Iron Heart 634 "dad jeans", to me they were super high waisted.
I realized one day that all my jeans were too low rise and made the proportions of jackets look off.
I ordered a pair of IH 634 and that's all i have worn since, i love them.

I lost a few pounds and need to "upgrade" my jeans. I always thought jeans were jeans. Now I realize I have "dad jeans". lol. I always wore Levis loose fit for extra room in the thigh. Now that my squatting days are over, I really don't need that much room in the thighs.

My problem is, I don't want "dad jeans" for my "dad bod". lol. I have a smaller "dad bod" now, but still a "dad bod". Looks like the denim rabbit hole is a DEEP one.
 

Edward

Bartender
Messages
25,084
Location
London, UK
Very much so. UNless you want to ride the selvedge bandwagon, I think the best place to start isWrangler's classic 13MWZ CowBoy Cut. They come in the original 1947 pattern (and a slim or relaxed alternative if you want that). Simultaneously some of the cheapest and yet best jeans I've ever owned. If you're frightened off by the big, wide 30s cuts (which I also love), these are much more similar to the cut of the Lees and whatever that Brando and Dean wore. Can be had for buttons in the US, too.
 

jadub

A-List Customer
Messages
342
Location
Saco, Maine
Very much so. UNless you want to ride the selvedge bandwagon, I think the best place to start isWrangler's classic 13MWZ CowBoy Cut. They come in the original 1947 pattern (and a slim or relaxed alternative if you want that). Simultaneously some of the cheapest and yet best jeans I've ever owned. If you're frightened off by the big, wide 30s cuts (which I also love), these are much more similar to the cut of the Lees and whatever that Brando and Dean wore. Can be had for buttons in the US, too.
I just bought a couple of different sizes of the wranglers. They are less expensive for sure. It’s like shopping in the eighties.
 

Mich486

One Too Many
Messages
1,690
Imho for budget jeans the 501 shrink-to-fit are hard to beat. Not too wide, not too slim, medium rise... and the blue they fade to is quite nice.

Wranglers got that rodeo vibe plus the double felled outseam that I really can’t get to like.
 

Seb Lucas

I'll Lock Up
Messages
7,562
Location
Australia
Imho for budget jeans the 501 shrink-to-fit are hard to beat. Not too wide, not too slim, medium rise... and the blue they fade to is quite nice.

Wranglers got that rodeo vibe plus the double felled outseam that I really can’t get to like.

With 501's I can't do the button fly. I hate them.
 

Mich486

One Too Many
Messages
1,690
^not the first time I heard that complaint. On the shrink-to-fit there is a practical reason why there isn’t a zipper. On the sanforized versions just tradition. 505s have got a zipper if that’s the only gripe.

Anyway, I personally don’t have any problem with buttons as it takes 2 secs more than a zipper and they are more robust. In fact I think I prefer buttons.
 
Messages
16,855
Exactly that. When i first joined TFL i thougt "this isn't the 40s anymore, i need to make these jackets work with modern jeans". Now i know i was wrong...
I used to ask for 26" back length minimum, now i am happy around 24.5"-25.5" (i am 6'2").
It doesn't sound like much but it looks much better to me.

It's tough to find a good high rise jeans that don't have baggy legs. It's either all modern, low rise stuff or that 50's shapeless, wide look which I dislike even more. 777's are a great balance and it's good to have them as a backup once I destroy my current pair. What's worse is that the 50's tubes look okay on jackets but for some reason, I can't stand them. Too close to sweatpants. IH is good in that way that they avoid it, though...

With 501's I can't do the button fly. I hate them.

Only time I have problem with the button fly is when I'm drunk. Takes a serious effort then. Luckily, I almost never drink so...
 
Messages
11,169
Location
SoCal
I wear 505s a lot, but the thighs are larger than 501s.
I actually went full-Japan baggy with a pair of 569s recently...
 

Edward

Bartender
Messages
25,084
Location
London, UK
With 501's I can't do the button fly. I hate them.
I liked the buttons, but gave up on my 501s after a couple of months. Couldn't abide the low waistband, which (alas, like all too many modern trousers) sat inches below my actual waist. Looked bad, felt far worse.
 

Seb Lucas

I'll Lock Up
Messages
7,562
Location
Australia
I liked the buttons, but gave up on my 501s after a couple of months. Couldn't abide the low waistband, which (alas, like all too many modern trousers) sat inches below my actual waist. Looked bad, felt far worse.

The other problem with 501's is they seem to change according to the fashions and they really don't look better than the jeans I got from Target.

I think because I am skinny, the mid rise feel pretty comfortable and look fine to me. Not all body types can wear all types of jeans. Much as I like the Wrangler cowboys, I don't have a big enough bum or thighs to fill up the denim and so the pants fabric flap about like sails on a clipper ship.
 

Downunder G Man

One Too Many
Messages
1,190
Location
Australia
I just yesterday scored these from ebay Australia. Brand new NOS 501's MADE IN AUSTRALIA in November 2002

$50 AUD Aussie dollars "buy it now". That's $36 USD ! My kinda price !

I get by with the button fly , got used to it over the years.

"Unusual" size in 35 inch waist , I will need to be careful with the shrink on these or they will be "gonad stranglers"

Normally I am a 36 these last (Quite a !) few years. Had to try them at the price.

Levi 501 NOS 1.jpg


Levi 501 NOS 2.jpg


Levi 501 NOS 3.jpg
 

Edward

Bartender
Messages
25,084
Location
London, UK
The other problem with 501's is they seem to change according to the fashions and they really don't look better than the jeans I got from Target.

I certainly noticed a change between when they were first a "thing" in the UK in the eighties and about fifteen years ago when I last tried them. It definitely seems that whereas the other Levis numbers denote a specific fit and cut, 501 is more of a brand that changes with fashion.
 

Mich486

One Too Many
Messages
1,690
The fit of the model number 501-0000 (classic blue 501s shrink-to-fit 12.5oz) has hardly changed over the past 30years. Yes every 5 years or so they do some tweaks to the stitching etc but very minimal.

Levi’s 501s have never remained the same for more than 10years throughout their 150 years or so history. Just look at all the LVC 501s iterations.
 

Seb Lucas

I'll Lock Up
Messages
7,562
Location
Australia
I just yesterday scored these from ebay Australia. Brand new NOS 501's MADE IN AUSTRALIA in November 2002

$50 AUD Aussie dollars "buy it now". That's $36 USD ! My kinda price !

I get by with the button fly , got used to it over the years.

"Unusual" size in 35 inch waist , I will need to be careful with the shrink on these or they will be "gonad stranglers"

Normally I am a 36 these last (Quite a !) few years. Had to try them at the price.

View attachment 269820

View attachment 269821

View attachment 269822


I saw those too. I never know what size jeans to get as I fit 32 to 35, depending on the cut.
 

l0fielectronic

Practically Family
Messages
666
Location
UK
As the label says those 501s pictured are pre-shrunk so there should be no issue with washing hopefully.

Even the Levis Vintage 501's vary greatly year on year and they are supposed to be authenic fits to the period - I picked up a pair of their 1955 501s in the sale last year, liked the fit so bought this years 1955 model and the fit was way more loose.

They put out this year/fit changes guide a couple of years back;

fw13.jpg
 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,326
Messages
3,078,961
Members
54,243
Latest member
seeldoger47
Top