IH-1955S - 21oz Selvedge Denim "1955" Vintage Tapered Cut Jeans - Indigo
-
@Tago-Mago @m4xime oh baby - thanks for the link. I wish these had the high rise of 1955 but seems close enough
-
Anyone here with a pair of these in a 32? Looking after a specific measurement
-
-
@pdee Amazing thank you, could you give me the leg opening measurement at 27" down from the inseam please? This is where I'd hem mine so curious how that compares to the 7.5" of my 888
-
"OK face up to it - you're useless but generally pretty honest and straightforward . . . it's a rare combination of qualities that I have come to admire in you" - Geo 2011
-
@Giles this is crazy. It does make sense that there's a way to calculate this specific measurement but still it's very thoughtful to share this with the community because it's something you think about before hemming your denim...
-
@Giles Thank you super helpful. So I think if my calculations are correct I'd end up with a hem of 8.69" at 27" on a pair of 32s which would be perfect.
Must say I was scratching my head running through the calculations and doing them on my phone
-
@m4xime Got the same result for you
-
-
@pdee Legend thank you. Slightly less wide than the calculations then
-
said in IH-1955S - 21oz Selvedge Denim "1955" Vintage Tapered Cut Jeans - Indigo:
@m4xime 888 hem came in about .5" smaller to the 1955 at 31" inseam for me. These are both OD but the standard indigos should translate. Also 888 overlayed on top of 1955 to see the difference.
@worn2fade I found the 1955 to have a good bit more room through the leg compared to the 888 in the same size. Switch the topic here from the new cut to not divert, but I'm excited to see how roomy that one will be. I'll be in 1955s full time til the new relaxed cut once my 888s have a few more miles on them.
edit: last photo - 888 on top of 1955
-
@catdad1 thanks for that dude. To me though it’s not enough of a change. I love that 9” leg opening on the 634’s, that’s what I would need out of these.
-
Stupid question potentially but is there a reason behind the fact that the 1955 doesn't have as much of an intricate patch design vs the other cuts like 888, 634, 666 etc? Read the info about the 684 patch which made me wonder.
-
The 1955 is basically my take on the Levi's 1955 cut. So the cut is effectively not ours (and as an aside, therefore Haraki hates it
) I thought I would keep it simple and just say what it is....The 555, 666, 777 and 888 were also initiated by me (but given to Haraki to Iron Heartify, so he loves them
), for those, I came up with a Lot Number and then grew a story and imagery around that lot number.... -
-
Thanks all. So I love my 634s but could use more front rise (sometimes feels like low rise jeans) and a bit narrower leg opening. Do I go 888 or 1955?
-
@CuseMM below the knee the 1955 will keep a stronger leg impression than the 888. If you are fitting either of these to your natural waist you should have enough room with your front and back rise but the 1955 will wear slightly more comfortable, at least for me.
-
If you love the 634 and want a tighter hem 1955 is the option.
