That's an example of why I think it's absolutely pointless to wear a new pair of jeans for any length of time without washing them, whether unsanforized or sanforized, raw or one-wash. Washing may have some effect on the jeans' color, texture, etc. but so what? if you are gonna wash them at some, just wash them carefully before you start wearing them so you don't run into any surprises in the future.
The exception being if you plan to NEVER EVER wash them. That's gross.
I never posted any pics of my 634-XHS, size 33, from the DWC tux division. About 18+ months of wear, 20+ washes. I didn't follow the rules of posting monthly updates, so I suppose I was disqualified. I had RCFG taper them to 8.25" hem, and cut to 34" length. The did shrink quite a bit from new, and they were just too tight for me to deal with any longer. Now retired.
XHS is till my favorite IH denim, perhaps my favorite denim of all. I've stated it before, and I'll do so again: I'd love to see the 634-XHS details updated as per other 634 models, with double selvedge fly, tucked belt loops, lined rear pockets, and particularly the heaving gauge stitching that has been used in some areas. This denim deserves the extra attention to the finer details.
And just for reference, a fit when brand new:
I just read {glanced, really} through this entire thread, and I'm surprised there's no mention of shirts.
I'm not a "big" guy by any means 5'-11", 185+/- lbs. I have a harder time fitting shirts than jeans. I prefer a more fitted, tailored fit for my clothes, even for denim-wear (which is all I ever wear). I really don't like boxy, baggy, over-sized clothes anymore. Work shirts are usually too boxy in the mid-section and waist, and why I prefer westerns for the slimmer body.
What I never see mentioned in any discussions of shirts of any type (tees or L/S button front) is the proportion of shoulder-to-chest measurements. I find that most shirts' shoulders at the top of the sleeve seam are too narrow compared to the chest width at the arm pit. Extra shoulder width would do a lot for comfort and ease of motion without changing the body width.
The best fitting shirts I have are The Flat Head westerns, in XL/44. The are cut like they are tailored specifically for me. Wide in the shoulders and chest, narrow in the waist, perfect length body and sleeves. If anything, the arms are a bit tight. It seems they don't work for most western guys though. Kyle, on SuFu, used to work for TFH in Japan some years ago, and he said Masa-san develops patterns cut for his own body, which even for a small Japanese man he has a large shoulder-to-waist ratio. Then the pattern is scaled up and down for other sizes. (Correct me if I'm wrong). However TFH does it, it works for me.
The other shirts I've found that fit me well are Wranglers Retro and Western Cowboy Work cut. They're super cheap - in price and quality - but they fit me well. A L gives me more room in the shoulders and chest, but are too long in the body, so I wear a M.
I wear an XL in IH westerns, and they are not ideal for me. I LOVE the styling, fabrics, details, etc. The chest and shoulders are tight, too wide in waist width, the body sometimes too long. Not including the collar button, the top 2 snaps pull outwards and the fabric looks distorted. Dean DelRay mention this too in his podcast interview w/ Giles. I need an XXL in the chest and shoulders, and a L everywhere else. I don't have an IH Work shirt, because the measurements look too wide in the waist and opening for me.
First world problems, I know, LOL! 
I live in the mountains of CO, in the Vail area. We definitely get cold temps here in the winter, but not as cold as where @neph93 is. I'll only be wearing this N1 when it's really cold and I'll have some type of heavy flannel or denim shirt underneath. I don't wear multiple layers like heavy sweaters or cardigans. Worst case scenario is I'd wear an extra insulated layer on those scarce occasions when it's a high of -10F.
I did speak with the IH crew prior to purchasing, and was advised that given my stats an XL would suite me. Hoping to hear back from them here, or I'll contact them directly.
Thx fella's. mpp
Gents,
I just copped this N1 BLK size XL f/ the outlet. Been looking for a proper winter coat for literally years. This should do nicely.
Opinions on fit? I have an IHxSE type III denim jacket and the blanket lined riders jacket both in XXL. I wear IH westerns in XL. In fit pics I have on an XL UHF under the N1. I think this is on the edge of being too large, but acceptable. I could have gone w/ and L, but wasn't available at the time.
Cheers!
When someone just says thigh, to me they're referring to the thigh measurement, either at the crotch seam, 2" down, whatever. And I've heard several guys refer to the 888 as having bigger thighs than the 634, so that's what I thought he meant.
I’m telling you, I used to think that the 633 was my favorite but the rise and thigh of the 888 have me bowled over atm. I might need to get some 21oz 888 next.
I have to ask/address this statement, as I've seen it come up several times, both here and other places - where does/did the notion come from that the 888 has a larger thigh than the 634, and therefore the 633? I'm not going to dig for it too much, but in Giles' original announcement/description of the 888 was that is was based on the 634: "New jeans cut. Higher rise than IH-634 - particularly at the back. More taper from the knee than the 634." The first iteration had the same thigh measurements as the 634 in the same fabric. Shortly after the first release, some guys were asking/requesting a larger thigh for subsequent runs, but the response was that it was selling so well it wouldn't be changed. When I've compared the 634 to 888 measurements in the same fabric, the thigh is the same with an expected small amount of variation.
I get and acknowledge that each version in different fabrics will have slight variations in measurements. One of our fellas on SuFu had an OD 634 version that looked skin tight, like a 777. He's a tall, lean, athletic guy with bigger thighs, but not a gigantic weight lifter build. They were too tight for him, and looking at the fit pics it was understandable. I think that was an extreme case of a 634 variat being unusually slim.
The 633 is SE's proprietary cut, and seems to be continually evolving with each release. Every variant that I have looked and compared seems to be a bit different from one to the next. But in general "taking their famed 634s and tapering the leg for a smaller leg opening and also lengthening the inseam by a few inches.", it still based on the 634.
Could it be that you're comparing a 633 variant that happened to have smaller thighs than a standard 634?
My point to all of this is that if the 888 is/was not intended to have bigger thighs than the 634, let's put that notion to rest once and for all.
edit: wow that was unintentionally long winded… 
@Denim:
Nice mock-up. IMO, IH's chest pocket could be slightly larger, and raised higher to align the the upper pleat stitch.
What about wool shirts? IH has done a couple in the past, correct? How well did they sell? Any plans to do more? UHF fabric is all that, but it is cotton. In the mountain communities cotton is affectionately and appropriately know as Death Cloth. I'd never wear a UHF for any extended vigorous outdoor winter activity, but I would definitely wear an IH wool shirt.
@Denim:
Japan's VISVIM，
Thanks
That's a cleaner way to do pockets on a Type II, and I like zippers on hand warmer pockets for security when you don't have you hands in them. My only comment is having pocket openings on the side seams might make them slightly awkward to use. What brand is that?
