IH-1955S - 21oz Selvedge Denim "1955" Vintage Tapered Cut Jeans - Indigo
-
@Mister_Brue My taste for my 1955S pair (wearing right now) was plain hem with a little break. Looks good with loafers and boots, and in the spring/summer they're still long enough that I can cuff them into high waters.
-
Thanks guys !! Normaly I don't cuff and go for a light break with all my other denim (xhs and 19L 555s). With the 1955 I thought a single cuff helps me adjusting to the wider leg but it's like the opposite happens. Think I will try no cuff for now and let the fabric relax. Took a quick fitpic in my friends living room, funny thing the bunching above the knees seems less prominent this way
-
@thevintagefuture the difference is probably down to exchange rates.
-
-
@FlavourFade I think those jeans look like a great fit on you! Very chill silhouette. As the other poster said, I think maybe if you do a double cuff (which this 21oz fabric is GREAT for - heavier fabric makes for the absolute best cuffs IMHO. They're sharp and hold their shape well.) so that the leg doesn't break at all, which means it won't bunch up at the knee as much. Or just go get them hemmed shorter....OR just lean into the chill vibe and embrace a bit of the leg bunching, which looks real cool too, just a different, more relaxed looking aesthetic....Just might take getting used to cuz you're coming from 555 which is WAY at the other end of the fit spectrum haha. But you're pulling these off just fine, nothing about them on you looks weird or forced, just different. Just gotta figure out how to optimize the fit for your purposes, which takes experimentation.
Also dude, your other IH stuff is looking great! That green button up and the red hoodie - such great combos! Very cool pieces, solid fit on both.
-
@thevintagefuture thanks a lot my man !! Very helpful comment. It's always a trial and error when you can't try on, also I always get my denim hemmed right away, so no returns but I figured out what fits me in most cuts or fabrics but I take the gamble.. like you said it seems more a head problem and getting used to that kind of fit. I am not a fan of double cuffs anymore, I don't like how the cuffs touch each other while walking haha maybe a bit neurotic. Anyway I will keep them in the rotation and experiment with my outfits
Btw: I like your YouTube channel, helped me already with my long going journey looking for engineer boots
-
Just got my pair and they fit perfectly! As someone who owns several 888 cuts, including this denim, I love the higher rise and ample room in the lower block.
Def a wider lower block than I’m used to, but they feel great! And they have a classic more straight feel to them. Really awesome and different. I find them more comfortable than the same denim in the 888.
-
@thevintagefuture yeah I totally get that. Fwiw I've got fit pics of all of them which sort of show what I mean. Not the best since the the OD fabric acts as something of a black hole, but you can sort of get an idea.
1955 are on the left. 634 are on the top right (you can see the belt is basically over my hips), and 888 are on bottom right. If you care to zoom in over the crotch you'll see how they bunch up when worn as a high waisted jean, as well as the relatively tighter fit along the low thigh. If I wasn't someone who religiously tucked my shirt in, the 634 would be totally fine because it can be worn very comfortably hanging off the hips, even at a few sizes up.
-
@KA56 this is a super helpful post, dude! Thank you so much. It's a little hard to see cuz of the lighting, but with close inspection the differences you describe are apparent. It's really kind of like (and you can see this in your pictures) 1955 is approximately what you get when 888 and 634 have a baby. Like, 634 has the wider legs and 888 has the roomier top, then you roughly get both with 1955?....The 888 almost has a Wrangler leg tbh...I've never tried a 634 or 888, but yeah this 1955 I have would be hard to wear at the hips or below the hips (as you're saying. Like how you say 634 CAN sorta be moved up or down a little, at the hips). Like, 1955 just naturally goes above the hips and feels perfect that way, as a true high rise cut.
(see posted picture I made by grabbing the sizing charts off IH webpage haha - I did this to help myself understand what you're saying about the top block differences)
...Even though 1955 has a slightly lower back rise than 888, looks like it has a decently taller front rise than 888 - and IMHO differences in front rise are often more noticeable and more felt than small differences in back rise. And 1955 has overall about .5" more rise than 888 (like if you add the front rise and back rise measurements for both).All three of these jeans look amazing on you, btw. Though you probably know that already haha
Would you say 888 top block has less volume than 1955 top block, relative to its rise? Not sure if that question makes sense...Like two jeans could have exactly the same front and back rise measurements but one have more volume than the other due to the hip measurement (which virtually no manufacturers provide, annoyingly haha) and how extreme or shallow the yoke is. Like is 1955 a roomier "shape" from all cross-sections vs 888? It looks like your 888 isn't just lower but also a little slimmer, but that's just me hypothesizing off internet pictures lol
I really should just buy all of them right now, but that would be a bit irresponsible
-
@drewfonse WOW killer fit, dude! Looks clean
-
@FlavourFade glad the channel helped! These 1955s would be killer with your engineers!! That's probably where they'll shine the most
Enjoy! -
I started with the 634, then transitioned to the 888 and now I think I'll leave them both behind for the 1955. This cut just works for me from a comfort standpoint.
-
In response to your question thevintagefuture, I'd say the top block of the 1955 is slightly roomier than the 888. The latter is pretty body contouring while the 1955 comes in a little more at the waist with a bit more room in the hip. Put another way, it's easier for me to get my hands in the pockets of my 1955. Both have a nice top block -- I prefer the 1955's by a hair. Down below, the ideal would be a blend of the two. So I'm waiting for the 1958 or 855
-
@thevintagefuture yeah I would describe the 1955 as:
- Start with the 888
- Add an inch to the front rise
- Graft on the leg of the 634 at the next tag size up
- Taper from the knee
As for top block room, I would say the 888, when worn as intended (eg. not how I wore mine) is a bit roomier than the 1955. One thing that it took me a while to learn is that when there's a bigger difference between front and back rise, it's a sign the jeans should slouch a bit. This is really common with Japanese repro cuts (look at how Full Count describes their 0105 and it's iconic slouched silhouette), and is in line with the "modern taper" that IH was going for with the 888. If you wear them that way (check out TJ at The Shop Vancouver for a perfect 888 fit), there's plenty of room in the seat and upper thigh because all that rise sort of hangs off the top of your hips. If you try to pull them up ala a Cowboy Cut, you'll quickly find that you get really odd vertical creasing in the crotch that isn't there on Wranglers (and the broken twill is much more comfortable when worn tight than IH's 21oz denim haha)
Personally I always tuck my shirts, so slouching is a no go. And if I wear pants that are too tapered, I look like a leg-day skipper, so I dropped the 888 pretty quickly. The 634 is better, and if I wasn't adamant about the tuck thing, I could make it work, but they sit on my body like how low rise jeans in the early 00s used to sit (firmly below my hips and hanging off of my butt). At that spot a snug belt gets really uncomfortable really quick. The plus side though is that if you aren't dead set on shirt tucks, the 634 is a cut that you can get away with upsizing to a significant degree because all you need to do is notch the belt a little bit to keep them hanging from the right spot.
-
@KA56 I didn't realize that the 888 was intended to be worn with a slouch. I have a pair in UHR and I like how roomy they are but didn't like those weird vertical lines. I just tried wearing them on the hips instead of pulled all the way up and that fixed it. Thank you for explaining this.
-
That’s the first I’ve heard of it as well. I always thought that wearing jeans was more of a personal thing and that’s why there are so many styles to choose from.
If you like to wear your jeans higher on the waist, then find a pair that works for you. The 888’s do that very well but it’s one of the reasons I don’t love the 888’s as much as the 666’s and 634’s because they sit on my comfortable waistline.
When I wear 888’s in the same spot, I end up with diaper butt…
YMMV
-
There’s a great thread here about different cuts that illustrate where they sit on the waist: https://www.ironheart.co.uk/forum/topic/12810/graphic-comparisons-between-ih-cuts?_=1742902461518
-
It has a lot to do with your body shape too, I’ve got a long torso so would suit high waisted jeans but they won’t stay on my waist whatever I do, so 666 and 634 suit me better as they sit just above my hips, and every pair ends up there even with a tight belt on.
The vertical lines are a body shape thing too, they can happen to me on any kind of cut, but usually on a looser top block, I’m sure it’s because I have a flat arse.