Posts made by JohnM

Sounds like the waist bag is a hair smaller, not to mention an altogether different shape. Do you have the waist bag worn2fade?

Surgery? Hope it goes well. Love the bag. Torn between it and the waist bag.

For those familiar with the IH waist bag, do you prefer it in 12 or 21oz?

Any word on a restock of the 21oz. IHE-37 Waist Bag?

^ I have the 1955 in 21 and 14oz and they fit similarly. While the 21 has more than a little give/stretch, I'd say the 14 will also give with waist pressure. If the 21 is too big, than go size 29. If you're happy with the fit, then 30.

Most important, however, are the measurements -- trust those and ask your AD for what you need. Obvious, but true

Just received these. Very nice denim that feels heavier than 14oz.

Thanks yannis. That's what I was thinking. I'd guess the 14oz is a bit more tightly woven than 21 or 16 slub.

Anyone know if the 14oz denim is as stretchy as the 21oz or 16oz Slubby?

Thanks selbstzweck. The 19 does look very practical, but, yes, more basic and less sauce! There are quite a few bags that resemble the 19 but not too many like the 37.

These look great. Trying to decide between this and the IH denim waist bag (IHE-37). Anyone have both?

^ What did you like most about them Choko?

If you haven't tried Iron Heart's 16oz. Slubby denim, you might want to give it a go. I've had many IH denims over the years (18, 20 left hand twill, 21, and UHR) and, while I love them all, the slubby is the softest and most comfortable. I was hesitant at first because the look is different with interesting vertical lines, but it's a nice change of pace and extremely comfortable out of the gate.

For those familiar with Iron Heart's 21 oz. denim in OD and indigo versions, would you size up one size for the OD version here? I know that some of you did this with the OD version of the 888S-21 and it worked out well.

Too bad, as the 1955 has become my favorite cut -- even better (for me) than the 888. I do have a size 34 pair of 1955 UHR from a few years ago that I love but are now too small, so get no wear. Would love to see the 1955S-UHR reintroduced. But happy to have the 1955S in 21 oz.

^ Right Alex. I was just referring to the overall measurements, which all start out a touch larger as you move up in size.

We have a divergence of opinion re sizing but a lot of enthusiasm for the 1955S! An obvious but important point about sizing up is that it’s not only the waist that gets bigger but everything else too. Given the width of the 1955 down below I’m hesitant to size up for fear they’ll get too wide from the knee down. This isn’t an issue with the 888, which is pretty trim through the lower leg. Here, sizing up might be an advantage.

To their credit, Iron Heart makes jeans for different body types and preferences. I’ve always looked and felt better with higher rise pants. Some guys are the exact opposite. The 888 and 1955 are a dream fit for me up top — similar but not identical. The 634 sits lower but is surprisingly comfortable, probably due to the top block shape and front/back rise differential.

On skinnier guys with no arse, higher rise jeans can sag down and result in diaper butt. On guys that are fuller up top (like me), low rise jeans feel like they’re falling off. Thankfully, this isn’t the case with the 888 or 1955, or even the 634.

^. thanks KA56 -- keep us posted.

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

^ that's probably a good thing Go For Chill

If the OD versions do stretch a bit more, as yannis suggests, I could probably make size 35 work. If not, 36 is the safe bet.