IH-555S-21 - 21oz Selvedge Denim Slim Jeans - Indigo

vittel

Hey guys, after reading about how much they can stretch, I am unsure of how I should size for these. I've got cycling legs so thighs will be my main concern.

My current pair measures:
Waist: 31"
Front rise: 9.25"
Rear rise: 13.75"
Thigh: 11.75"
Knee: 7.5"
Hem: 6.75"
Inseam: 31"

Any advice is appreciated!

Giles

Simple. Dont.

You'll need a tag size 29 or 30 and the thigh on those will never stretch as much as you need.

neph93

@vittel:

Thigh: 11.75"

@Giles:

Simple. Dont.

You'll need a tag size 29 or 30 and the thigh on those will never stretch as much as you need.

Giles is right. Real world example: My pair of these in tagsize 34 came with a 12.3" thigh it is now at 12.6" after 200 days of wear. That's about 3% stretch which is what you can expect from the 21oz.

If you needed around 11.75" you'd get it, just, from tagsize 32, but you'd also end up with a waist around 33"-34" and a top block that would be baggy. If it's indigo jeans you're after I'd recommend looking at the 1955 fit or the 634. If you don't mind a flappy waist and a belt then a 32 in the 777 fit may work.

vittel

Sorry, let me phrase myself better. I understand that the thighs don't stretch out much, that's why I want to watch the thigh measurements. However on my current pair there's still room in the thighs, it's the waist thats killing me. The feedback on the "comfy rise and roomy top block" is what got me interested. Baggy top block and diaper ass is the opposite of what I am looking for. I wear a belt depending on occasion, not all the time, so I would want a snuggish waist that doesn't have to rely on a belt.

Any comments on 555 vs 777 in this aspect? (roomy top block and thigh, slim leg, small leg opening?)

Giles

Personally I don't think either of these cuts is not for you, but if you are determined, the 777 would be better…..

neph93

@vittel:

Sorry, let me phrase myself better. I understand that the thighs don't stretch out much, that's why I want to watch the thigh measurements. However on my current pair there's still room in the thighs, it's the waist thats killing me.

If I understand you right then you could do with a larger waist than the measurements you posted and a thigh about the same? In that case you've still got a problem, I think. To get the thighs the same you'll need a tagged 31 in the 555-01 but that will end up with an actual 33" waist which will be way too big. The tagged 31 in the 777 will end up with a 32 waist which sounds like it might work for you, but a slimmer thigh than you have now. So, still risky.

@vittel:

Any comments on 555 vs 777 in this aspect? (roomy top block and thigh, slim leg, small leg opening?)

I own the 555-01 but not the 777 (although the denim is the same). They are both slim, tapered jeans. The major difference (I believe) is that the 777 has a lower rise and a more aggressive taper than the 555. Otherwise you can compare the sizing charts yourself and remember, on the 21oz denim you'll get about 3% stretch on all areas that are subjected to stress (waist, thighs, crotch, arse, knees). Good luck.

vittel

Thank you for all your suggestions. I was thinking the 555 in tag size 30 might be what I need, but I'll go check out the 777 before I decide.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bluegrass

"comfy rise and roomy top block" is a good way to describe 555 based on my experience - and the taper is not so dramatic that they look overly skinny. Very comfortable and well-tailored look imo, a slim fit that works well for a lot of people, but not all. These fill a unique spot in my collection.

Simoon

Skinny fit, it´s relative, for me it´s just a slim tapered, like a 1955 or lvc 1954 with a more slim leg and front/back rise. Fit good on me or on people with VERY skinny legs. If not it´s ridiculous. And inverse, the 666 fit loose on me, ridiculous… I imagine a 634 on me...
Any idea for the 777, very Nice patch, fit, un alternative between 666 and 555.