IH-1955S - 21oz Selvedge Denim "1955" Vintage Tapered Cut Jeans - Indigo
-
slow & steady wins the race @richardjohn22 . in my limited experience I've found heavier denim almost always looks weird/off until it settles down. 21oz denim is a great gateway because it gets you used to the heavier weight without being restrictive or uncomfortable.
Your crotch issue would have possibly been worse with heavier denim . . . but then again that 634 cut is golden for a lot of folks & that 25oz denim wears in so nice, hahahahaha
Sorry no help
-
Your crotch issue would have possibly been worse with heavier denim . . . but then again that 634 cut is golden for a lot of folks & that 25oz denim wears in so nice, hahahahaha
Haha!
thanks for that! 
By the way, the 634 "cut" is massively variable in 36 waist, same silhouette basically, but the XHS is far roomier and big rear rise. Some of them I couldn't even pull up over my legs in the shop! haha. Considerable variation.
-
By the way, in Dubai this week my friend took me to a shop where they sell skinny jeans that even fit me! How bizarre. I still can't bring myself to buy stretchy jeans, yuk, but interesting that someone makes them with sufficient thigh and seat room. 11/17 front rear rise even. Wow. But £180 for stupid skinny stretchy jeans? Nonono
-
Aesthetics aside it is impractical if you use your front pockets for your wallet and phone- as the pockets come up higher on the hips it is a pain to get anything in and out of them, and if you have these items in your pockets when you try to bend to put socks on or something you realise you cannot bend at the hips and have to empty your pockets and try again- the items are pressed up against your hip rather than on your thigh. An extra inch of pocket length would solve the problem of movement when loaded up with a medium sized phone and wallet.
I had the issue you describe above with my 634 jeans when I upgraded my phone to an iPhone 6 Plus. With the 1955 jeans the pockets are deep enough that I don't have this issue, even though I also have a big bum and tree trunk thighs. Just one of those "your millage may vary".
-
Aesthetics aside it is impractical if you use your front pockets for your wallet and phone- as the pockets come up higher on the hips it is a pain to get anything in and out of them, and if you have these items in your pockets when you try to bend to put socks on or something you realise you cannot bend at the hips and have to empty your pockets and try again- the items are pressed up against your hip rather than on your thigh. An extra inch of pocket length would solve the problem of movement when loaded up with a medium sized phone and wallet.
I had the issue you describe above with my 634 jeans when I upgraded my phone to an iPhone 6 Plus. With the 1955 jeans the pockets are deep enough that I don't have this issue, even though I also have a big bum and tree trunk thighs. Just one of those "your millage may vary".
If I wear these down on my hips I can put my iPhone 6 in my pocket fine, it's only when I wear them higher up that there is an issue. Worn an inch or two below the navel I couldn't bend with even an iPhone 4 in my pocket.
-
@tmg:
I also have a big bum and tree trunk thighs.
I'm in that boat, and looking forward to getting some of these when they next appear in May, but I never carry anything in my front pockets, so it'll be interesting to see how they sit at the front.
These sure can accommodate massive legs. If you can't wear these it's down to custom making your jeans or wearing something else…
By the way, I experimented with a few different pairs of jeans (I have tons), and think the crotch bulge issue will go away when I fill out the seat area once more... Jeans definitely flatter more when you can fill out your chosen pair.
-
The fairytale schedule says so. But it is a Japanese trait that admitting that a production run will be late is like an admission of failure. So I don't get told until really late (if at all) that stuff is running late because no one can pluck up enough courage to tell me….
-
Might need these in 34 when restocked
Probably a 34.5" hem, be perfect! -
Got an e-mail these were restocked, but all gone?
-
RESTOCKED TODAY - ALL SIZES: 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42 AND 44
-
Thanks @Madame Buttonfly Looks like a 34 is in my future, just got to drop some money off at the bank.
-
Okay, I keep meaning to come on here and say something about these jeans. I have been wearing Iron Heart for a while now. The 634S being my go-to. As much as I love those jeans (especially the pair I have worn for a good 4 years or more) they've always felt a bit too tight in the thigh and loose in the waist and seat. A short while ago I figured I'd give the 1955 a go.
Wow. I went an inch smaller in the waist, which gave me a much better fit there and the seat but with plenty of room in the thigh. The length is perfect and the taper actually sits a bit nicer on my trainers. My new favourite jean I reckon. Going to live with them for another month or so and then a second pair will most certainly need to be purchased.
Please can we get these in brown, or overdyed, or grey, or…or...or...I don't know...something else. I want excuses to buy more!
-
Just wait until you get them broken in.
-
-
So I've known about IH for about a month now and my upper body is well supplied with 4 phenomenal shirts. Now my lower body needs some love (earmuffs).
I'm very sure that this is the cut of jeans for me (34in waist/26in thighs), but alas, there are no 33s in stock. So, is my best bet to…
-Buy 34s and ask them to find a pair that's under by about a 1/2 inch in the waist?
-Ask if they "have any in Japan?" (seems like people do this frequently, not sure how annoying it is)
-Ask when they'll have 33s back in stock?
