Time For a New Jeans Cut….
-
Then what would the thigh be on a 34?
Dunno.
Ask 100 people their opinion, you'll get 101 answers. Sometimes shit just doesn't work out for everyone, I can't help or do anything about that….
But I agree, the thigh could be a little larger....
-
Since I've been feeling nostalgic these days, I've been lusting after the perfect vintage fit. 1947 top block, 1966 thigh to knee and classic 505 knee down. This sounds like it might be just that. Hoping the vintage 18oz denim does well and we might see this cut in a classic looking/feeling denim.
In my mind, here is what a size 36 would look like:
Waist 36-37
front Rise: 12
Back Rise: 16.5
Thigh: 13.5
Knee 9.5
Hem: 8.25 @ 36" inseam and 8.5 at 34' inseam.Essentially it's a 666 with a larger thigh and more taper from knee to hem… but I think that's what you guys are getting at anyways haha
Since we are similar sizes you might want to check out the 666 uhr. It looks like it is right on the money for you except for the hem. Mine came a tad under 9, which is close to your specifications. I definitely think I found the perfect jean for me.
Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk
-
Thanks @DrBabyhorse - the measures do look great for the new UHR. I had the one ones in the 666 and loved them.
-
Just my two cents but these measurements look way too close to the 555.
My size 36 555-02 currently measure:
Waist: 38.5
Front Rise: 11.75
Back Rise: 17.25
Thigh: 13.25
Knee: 8.6
Leg: 8' at 33"I think the hardest part of these is the knee. 8.6 is after stretch, which means post wash they are about 8.3. that's a really drastic taper from thigh to knee and only about a .5' taper from knee to my hem, although the original 36" hem was closer to 7.8. If you take the knee to a 9' (adding essentially 1.3' total space pre-stretch) you get a much roomier thigh overall.
Your plans sound great @Giles - excited to see them in the future.
-
lol I wondered how long we could derail that other thread haha
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
-
- If we want to have selvedge side seams and a proper cut, there is a limit to the taper that can be given to the jean. To have selvedge side seams, the outseam HAS to be parallel, so you have to take the taper off the inseam, take too much and the cut is a joke. One of the reasons that the IH-634 is a better cut in many ways than the IH-634S, is that we don't have to worry about a parallel outseam.
- We could use selvedge denim and dispense with the selvedge ID showing on the outseam (like the IH-461S), but that is probably a compromise too far.
I totally don't care about selvedge showing.
-
same here. The selvedge ID not showing is not a deal breaker for me.
-
Is for me. Wouldn't dream of dropping big bucks on some without it. But then I am
Someone who likes all the extra details.Giles those measurements for a 36 only have 0.5 taper from the knee to hem? Isn't that pretty much what the 634 have?
-
Selvedge ID doesn't really matter to me, as long as the denim and construction is IH quality. I do think that it is a big enough deal for enough people that it should probably be kept for sales sake. I want this cut to sell well so it will be made available in the new 18oz. Vintage and XHS…
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
-
Is for me. Wouldn't dream of dropping big bucks on some without it. But then I am
Someone who likes all the extra details.You simply can't have your cake and eat it. It is impossible to give stacks of taper and retain the selvedge ID as per my explanation above….
