Levis vintage denim questions

[Vintagestyle]

Here is a fit guide for 501XX LVC jeans ( without 1976 model though and maybe others missing ,not sure ) :
http://www.aeroleatherclothing.com/upfiles/LVC_Fit_Guide17x24_lores.pdf
The 1978 is a slim fit and low rise and the 1976 seems to be mid rise and slightly tapered ( and slimer than some previous ones based on levis website description ,although not sure compared to the 1947 ) .
I don't look for the 80's fit as i found and bought some new STF 501 from this era a few years back ( might still have one or two brand new ones with tags for sale in 32/34 ) but they have tapered legs unfortunately for me ,although the thickness of the jean is nice ( thicker than the 1947 ) .
It's right that the early 2000's 501 had low rise but that is not what i look for when speaking about them , it is more about the straight and wider legs and top block than the 1947 ( so you can move with it and without fearing to tear up the crotch ).

 

[Mich486]

If the model of 47 501 you are after is a washed version it’s very likely a seasonal item, so once is gone is gone from the main shops and you can only resort on eBay.

The permanent LVC collection is made up by the shrink to fit versions (and also those sometime change). Plus they throw in a few seasonal washes twice a year.

Honestly, saved from a few washes from time to time, i’d stick with the shrink to fit versions. That’s why I’d go LVC in the first place otherwise you could just buy off the main line. Many washed version there and I don’t think from the late 90s till today the fit of the 501 changed so drastically that you couldn’t just upsize or downsize of one tagged size to achieve what you are after.

Good luck with your search anyway


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Vintagestyle]

Here is another interesting website i had found ( unfortunately after i had bought mine ,) for sizing LVC jeans .
https://www.ropedye.com/2013/06/lvc-1944-1966-size-guide/
I have seen several websites in Japan ,selling this 47501 0136 but they are mostly written i Japanese unfortunately and the price is higher than what it was in Europe , (and with import taxes , it would be quite expensive ,so i would prefer finding it in EU if possible ).
I also saw one or two other website selling them in USA but those don't ship internationaly unfortunately .
Another advantage of this model is that it was cheaper than the Shrink to fit model , like 50 to 70 euros less, so ,knowing you can't go wrong with the size as it is pre shrunk and also that it is nearly an inch longer than the STF once shrunk ,for me it is perfect ( for that at least ).
The STF model 1947 should shrink about 6 to 7 cm, so 85- 7cm =78cm , what is a bit short ,especialy if i want to make a cuff,whereas with the one wash model , i can wear it with or without cuff , without it being too short or too long .
So i see only pros with this one wash model .
Also , i have to say i prefer the quality of the LVC line over the regular ones ( it is not night and day but there is a difference ).
As i am slim , i like how the 1947 fits me except it is a bit too slim , but maybe if i buy a bigger size , it might be less slim ,although i am not sure it woukd change much as it is how it is made .
Just a bit larger on the legs ( maybe on the block as well , not sure ) ,would be great ,to be able to move more easily .
The 55 would be nice for me if i was bigger, but with a slim butt ( and legs but for the legs it's ok ) , it is not that good looking on me.

 

[Sloan1874]

Where did you get them? Aero?

Yep, during the big blow out sale a couple of years back.

 

[tropicalbob]

Thanks. I'm always afraid when I ask that question that I'll be directed to a Japanese site that will be completely incomprehensible and intimidating. Gustin's about as exotic as I've gotten.

 

[Edward]

Modern ones not that high waist. Modern one with four buttons fly in regular (not big and tall) sizes.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Levis-50...c-straight-leg-button-fly-jeans-/182431435770
https://global.rakuten.com/en/store/jalana/item/levis_501/

Yeah, modern 501s, at least since I first tried a pair in 1992, have always been low-waisted, basically hipsters. It's a cut I hate; even before I discovered a vintage, high-waist, I knew that a low waist was uncomfortable: Lee's standard fit in the eighties and into the mid nineties (when they finally closed their Northern Ireland factory) was a low waist too, which was why I never bought them (even though they could be had cheaper than almost any other brand at the time, and the factory shop did 'seconds' where you couldn't find the flaw for twelve quid....).

I hate the way Levis mark their jeans with the size that they are, rather than the size that they shrink to. I had a similar experience to yours with a pair of 30x32 1937s - they're currently up for sale on eBay!
I've since bought a pair of 1933s, got the right size this time 32x34. One wash so far and barring quite a pronounces seam twist they seem to have shrunk as per the instructions. They're a nice jean: comfortable vintage fit, a good wide straight leg that can fit over my engineer boots, and a good slubby denim, though not as nice as my Lee archives. That said, I'll be interested to see how they age with with some wear and washing. I am however tempted to snip off the cinch belt as it's a pain in the ass!

I've never bought a pair of STF Levis. My Prison Blues I had some years ago shrunk to their labelled size from a bit bigger; I think I had a a pair of Carhartt work jeans that did the same.

Real McCoy’s also came out recently with their lee repro (lot 002) but £325 for a pair of jeans is when I say no.

Yeah. Horses for courses - I'm sure a lot of folks would say I spend crazy money on leather jackets and such - but for me, jeans are consumables and I've always found the shelf life of one pair to be much the same as another. I'll pay a bit more for the right cut and colour, but tbh for me the denim scene has gotten a bit smoke and mirrors. I don't hold with the idea of 'dress jeans', and if I got to the point where I felt I had to baby a pair of jeans rather than wearing them without thinking, as originally intended, it's a sign I've spent way too much on them.

I think the most expensive jeans I've ever bought were the SJC Brakemans; lovely stuff. As close to the Japanese stuff as I'd ever want, but without the BIG price, and vastly better than Freddies, for just a little more. I used to be a big fan of Freddies of Pinewood, but they've pushed the price up to a hundred quid a pair, and I just don't think they're all that. The ones that Soldier of Fortune do for fifty quid are every bit as good (and rumoured to be the same denim).

Seems like Lee are becoming more popular in the repro scene these days.

Even a scene which professes only interest in more of the exact same demands novelty some times!

What I like about Lee is that they don't feel obliged to amp up the denim weight in its archive series for the sake of current tastes. I'm guessing that 12oz is probably the heaviest the originals ever reached.

I think that's probably true; I certainly have had the impression that the fad for extra heavy denim followed on the heels of the era in which the 'heavier the better' philosophy hit leather jackets. The idea of a 21oz pair of jeans for the Winter appealed to me for a long time (these days, I suspect I'd be better served with a 12oz denim flannel lined), but I've yet to see any in a cut I like at a price I'd be prepared to pay. Experience has certainly led me to conclude that denim weight alone does not make for a necessarily longer lasting pair of trousers; I've had 11 and 12 oz jeans that have been heavily worn last for far longer than 15oz pairs that have blown out at the crotch after a couple of years of comparably heavy wear.

 

[Vintagestyle]

Sure the weight of the denim is not the only thing that can make it good quality but yes , for winter it's a good thing !
As far as i remember ,levis 501 went back to low rise ( mid 60's and 70's were low rise if i remember well) maybe at one point in the 90's or early 2000 but all the 501 i have from the 80's and maybe early 90's are regular high rise but they are all tapered leg and i really don't like that anymore but in the 80's i bought levis 501 and i knew shit about jeans fit or anything else .
In the late 90's i went on wearing some Twisted Levis i discovered in New Zealand and really liked them and even webt back to them ( bought some second hand ) in early 2010's so much i was bored with the skinny jeans trend and not being able to find a regular wider fit 501 ( then discovered over priced LVC ).
I am certainly among the conservatives but for me , jeans are Levis and i dig the arcuate ! I remember how nice girls butts looked good in a pair of Levis ( high or low rise when adapted to their body ) whereas so many now really don't look nice in the fit they wear ( many cheap brands have bad fit and/or maybe those girls don't know how to choose the right fit for them) !
That said ,i did not always wear the best fit for me either ! Lol

 

[Blackadder]

Real McCoy's actually has the licence to use Lee and Wrangler labels in Japan just that they can't export those. Edwin and Lee "Europe" obtained the licence to use Lee and Wrangler labels outside US. Levi's at one point also granted licence to Levi's Japan to manufacture jeans for Japan market but took it back when they decide to launch the LVC. The interesting thing is Levi's Japan has the licence to the Levi's Label with the big "E" but is not allowed to use 501. In stead those early Japanese 501 repros of 1920s and 30s are called 701 and 702 which are model numbers that were not used by Levi's at that time.

 

[mathematiques]

So , nobody knows the difference between 47501 0117 ( 1947 STF Rigid sold a few years ago and maybe still sold but not in France anymore ) and the more recent 47501 0167 ( 1947 STF Rigid as well ) both LVC 501XX ?

Hey! Does anyone know the difference between 47501 0117 and 47501 0167? 0167 was the final 1947 Rigid jean made in USA of Cone Denim. 0117 was the previous release made of Cone denim in Rigid - what were the differences, if any?

 

[Blackadder]

Hey! Does anyone know the difference between 47501 0117 and 47501 0167? 0167 was the final 1947 Rigid jean made in USA of Cone Denim. 0117 was the previous release made of Cone denim in Rigid - what were the differences, if any?

Perhaps you should also ask the people on Denimbro.

 

[Vintagestyle]

It seems the only difference was that the ref changed through the years but they seem to be the same apart from that .
Now they are 47501 0200 for the STF and 47501 0201 for the Rinse / one wash ( dark blue ) model and they are made in EU , at least for the ones sold in EU , from Japanese Denim due to the fact the Cone Denim factory closed in 2017 or so !
There was also the Rinse model of them ( and other ones as well) with different ref .
The Rinse 47501 0136 sold a few years ago in EU and other parts of the world , was tighter ( at least the ones sold in EU ) than the 1947 STF once shrinked and also compared to some other Rinse ref of the 1947 made during other years .

 

[mathematiques]

It seems the only difference was that the ref changed through the years but they seem to be the same apart from that .
Now they are 47501 0200 for the STF and 47501 0201 for the Rinse / one wash ( dark blue ) model and they are made in EU , at least for the ones sold in EU , from Japanese Denim due to the fact the Cone Denim factory closed in 2017 or so !
There was also the Rinse model of them ( and other ones as well) with different ref .
The Rinse 47501 0136 sold a few years ago in EU and other parts of the world , was tighter ( at least the ones sold in EU ) than the 1947 STF once shrinked and also compared to some other Rinse ref of the 1947 made during other years .

The new models (0200) are made in Bulgaria and the denim is made by Kaihara mill (Japan).
The older rinse models made of Cone Denim are all made in Turkey - only the Rigid Cone denim models were made in USA.

Regarding 47501 0117 and 47501 0167:
They are both made in USA and are Rigid Cone Denim - I believe the codes are reference to the factory they were made - 0167 was the final 1947 made in the last couple of years of LVC Cone - it was slightly cheaper than the 0117 model. Sometimes there are small variations between models - the 1915 for example there was a mistake with the position of the watch pocket on the final version - you would only notice if you were looking for it. Maybe there is a difference between 0117 and 0167 but you may have to work at Levi's or be a wholesaler to know.

 

[Vintagestyle]

Yes, i had been told that .
And yes 0167 was the last 1947 STF Cone denim production.
I speak only about 1947 STF and Rinse / One wash models as they are the only ones i really know as i have all these refs , several in different sizes ( but only one 1955 STF ), from Cone and Japan .
I measured them in same size for waste , leg width , front and back rise , seat , hem width ...etc and did not notice differences apart from the ones you can notice between two jeans of the same ref and same size ( as there can be size differences , especialy waste , between two jeans tagged same size ) .
I have been told it was only ref differences for Levi's to know what production it was .