IHSH-454-BRN - 11oz Military Serge Western Shirt - Brown
-
If you should like to tuck your shirts or should want to even occasionally tuck any of them, the overall length will be too short to do so when wearing a 555 or 666 unless you’re a person that is extremely vertically challenged. Being of a shorter stature myself at 5’-6”, I personally don’t wear high rise jeans like the 888, but that cut may be the only one that can tuck these recalibrated shirts if the measurements of these recent FW26 releases are the new standard. I personally find it difficult to keep the previous size XS shirts tucked in a 555 or 666 when getting shorter than 28.0”.
-
The other thing to note with the recalibrated western shirt dimensions in terms of overall length (if they should all continue as the recent FW26 releases), this shortened length leaves zero room for potential shrinkage when washing even if wearing as untucked depending - particularly for anyone taller than me at 5’-6”. Sleeve length is another item to note, but this is also a factor of the shoulder dimension which appears to had somewhat increased for the given sizes. But the bigger shoulder dimension also will make the chest wear larger of which that dimension increased by approx. 1.5” per given size. Fingers crossed that future releases trend back towards what has been a given for the western shirt typical dimensions over the past 6+ years I’ve been purchasing.
-
The work shirts are a shorter, wider, roomier cut. Now the recalibrated western shirt dimensions are running similar to the work shirts. I personally found IH based on their slim fitting western style that were long enough to tuck and were one of the few brands that provided a size XS and the typical chest measurement around 19.5-20.0” worked well along with the slim waist and opening dimensions so not a lot of excess fabric when tucking. Again, hoping this is temporary resizing for the westerns - fingers crossed.
-
IH has a tough job trying to find that happy compromise so that their shirts fit the largest cross section of its customer base. That said, this new sizing is a bummer for me. XL westerns fit like they were made for me. Now the shoulders and chest are larger, yet shorter in both body and sleeve. Not sure why IH would essentially want to push westerns to basically the work cut just for the sake of reverting back to some historical ideal. The difference between the 2 cuts was such a nice nuance of the brand. Oh well, at least my wallet will be happy.
-
How far back was it that the westerns were sized like this?
-
-
@V-P yeah, I’d be really bummed if the next run of 33’s and such followed this chart. IH tops and westerns specifically have always fit me better than absolutely anything else out there, and this size chart is essentially unwearable for me
-
I’ve been buying/wearing IH for 15 years,and since day one people,myself included,have been complaining about the measurements. I for one am thrilled to see these measurements,and actually had to do a double take. Over the years,I’ve managed to curate a wonderful collection of IH shirts that fit me quite well. Did I measure out of some shirts that I really wanted…yes,but the IHUK crew has always done their best to help when I needed a certain measurement,and sometimes,It’s just not going to work.
-
Not to beat a dead horse, but you know I will…
Save for being an XS, I’m not really sure how these larger runs affect people all that much. I know we all have our preferred measurements, but I’d be surprised if any two Western shirts I’ve bought, whether 3XL or 4XL, have ever matched up across the board.
There’s always been a little give-and-take with shoulders, sleeves, chest, and length. At least that’s been my experience.
-
I own IH shirts from M-XL that fit me. I believe I’d be a Small in this one from the size chart. I wish I could just blindly order a Large and it always fits but it’s never worked that way. This doesn’t really change the calculus for me. Have to read the size chart and ask questions.
-
The issue for me is not that I have to move to a different tag size, its that the overall fit has changed to a shorter boxier fit. Whereas before the fit was perfect, now there is a tradeoff between ideal length or ideal width.
-
@northsouthdenimguy can't speak for others, but for me XL westerns almost always had 26.5" or longer sleeves. More recently they have been shortened to 25.5 or even shorter. That is a deal breaker for me. There were limited cases when I could jump to an XXL if the sleeves were only around 26, but with the much bulkier body and shoulder measurements that isn't an option. Same situation with body length, but that is easier to work around.
-
This is better way to say it: the new XL westerns now have size XXL+ shoulders and chest but size Large length and sleeves. If you are tall and thin with long arms, you are in no man's land with the new sizing.
-
@Phil_NYC yeah, this is essentially it. It’s not as simple as just choosing a different tag size to achieve your standard IH fit. Much like yourself, I’ve come accustomed to an Iron heart XL meaning ~23” chest, ~19” shoulders, and ~26.5” sleeves, or some very close version of those measurements. It looks like the space between the bottom button and the bottom of the placket was shortened to the exact width of the space between buttons as well, which explains the shorter length. I’ll likely still give this shirt a shot, as brown westerns are hard to come by, but if the next run of 12oz denim or wabash westerns share the re-tooled sizing, that will be a distinct and huge bummer
