Time For a New Jeans Cut….
-
Same here. The thigh measurement is my bugbear when buying pants, unfortunately. Due to this, the only feasible IH jeans for me at the moment are the 1955s, which do work decently, but the rise is pretty bonkers. I swear there are like 18 fly buttons. Well, not literally, but I've never undone the bottom one. It also has the effect of elevating the pockets so they feel short, even though they aren't. I'd love a 1955s cut in the leg with a lower rise.
-
There's jeans with larger thigh measurements, and then there's jeans which look like WW2 German officer trousers on everyone else but those with freaky big thighs
-
Plenty of IH cuts already for folks for regular thighs (nearly all of them actually)…
It would make sense from a range versatility POV to also cater for those of us with larger than usual thighs.. Why the greed brothers? -
Whilst I agree in principle,I have to question how big is the market for people with Hulk thighs?
-
Whilst I agree in principle,I have to question how big is the market for people with Hulk thighs?
How big it is at the moment, I can't tell you. However, I can tell you this: it's getting bigger (and I mean that in both respects).
-
I know this doesn't want to be known as a lifters cut. But so many more people are lifting weights these days that bigger thighs is something that more people are having to deal with when buying trousers.
-
I like how the measurements of these are looking, I'm also size 36 if there's a spare sample pair.
-
i don't lift weights, but a 12-12.5" thigh in a 31-32 is really important if i want a pair of jeans that i can actually move around comfortably in.
i do like a higher back rise than i usually can find in my size/fit, but front rise is a totally different story - i really can't do more than 10.25-10.5"… i hope it doesn't end up in the 11" range like a lot of repro fits.
-
Whilst I agree in principle,I have to question how big is the market for people with Hulk thighs?
Sound question Gav.. Possibly big enough to be served by 1 cut out of a total of 10, if I counted right..?
(Didn't count the 1955: the rise makes it a specialty jeans and a deal-breaker for many) -
I feel like I'm missing something here… maybe it's something to do with style, or how the smaller sizes scale, but I have BIG thighs. With the 555, 666 and 777, even with the BB's I have to buy a waist size over what I need in nearly all the models if the thigh is going to fit me. Even then it's touch and go. Many releases are just a "Hell, no".
I've never tried the 634 or the 1955's; the former because wide hemmed straight cuts don't suit me, and the latter because I just don't know how it would fit. But they are the only two models where I could fit the jeans by correct waist size and not thigh.
This suggested model (I'm calling them Optimus Gav in my head) will, fingers crossed, solve that problem for me beautifully if those postulated W36 measurements work out.
My point is, these are the missing link for me and my oversized man-cans. How much bigger do they need to be?
-
I think the simple thing is that the cut is intended to solve a few issues that some people have in getting a modern mid cut which works for them. A mid cut with a little more room in the thighs and a taper from above the knee to allow a more modern fitting lower leg.
I believe that they will prove to be quite popular with wearers of all shapes and sizes as they should flatter a multitude of body shapes.
-
I know that since I'm a woman my thigh/waist proportion is different from many of you. That said, it has always been a challenge to find a cut that is comfortable in the thighs without sizing up by one or sometimes even two. 301s would have been perfect with an inch more rear rise. I'm very hopeful for this new cut.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I know that since I'm a woman my thigh/waist proportion is different from many of you. That said, it has always been a challenge to find a cut that is comfortable in the thighs without sizing up by one or sometimes even two. 301s would have been perfect with an inch more rear rise. I'm very hopeful for this new cut.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've thought the same about the 301. I love how it fits but would really like a higher back rise.
-
It occurs to me that this whole lifter thing is threatening to de-rail the thread (my fault, I started it). @Giles has made it clear that these aren't to be considered "made for lifters". @Megatron1505 has pointed out that they are intended to be a flexible cut that fill a gap in the IH range. So lets move the lifter discussion here https://www.ironheart.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=9725.new#new if there is life in the discussion the thread will thrive, if not it still leaves this thread free for us all to get frothy about new jeans and not get bogged down in lifter problems.
Mods, if this was inelegantly executed or just plain stoopid, feel free to clean up
-
It's fine with me @neph93 , have any of you considered sourcing some Joe Bloggs jeans from the 90's? As worn by the Stone Roses and the Happy Mondays
