Bennarion
Call Me a Cab
- Messages
- 2,158
If you also pick up jeans with a high fit, it will be even cooler.
It depends on the stature.If you also pick up jeans with a high fit, it will be even cooler.
Same problem here. 6'4, with a 33" waist and 25" thighs. I'm basically sized out of most pants due to my thighs. I like a high rise and a nice snug fit at the waist too, which means I usually have to buy for the thighs and get the waist taken in. Only two pairs of pants* have ever fit me off the rack in both the waist and thigh: Buzz Rickson 1945 chinos and Sugar Cane 1947 jeans.Jeans fit is a funny thing to get right.... I'm 6'1 and have spent my adult life lifting weights and playing sport, so I have a big ass and thick thighs. I almost exclusively wear Levis 541's, with a front rise of 11" and rear rise of 17". I own and wore a couple of pairs of Iron Heart jeans regularly, but they fit just wasn't as good. The 888's have front/rear rise of 12.5/16.5 and the 1955's 13.5/17.5. The waist band ends up sitting in the almost the same place for all of them (perhaps in inch higher for the 1955's) because of the the shape and size of my hips/ass, and the fact the waist bands aren't snug, which results in an unflattering amount of fabric in the crotch. The is a bigger problem in Iron Heart jeans because the angle of the legs is spread wider, creating a wider hip, adding yet more additional fabric to the crotch. It's only passable if I stuff my pockets full. Few jeans on the market fit my thighs without a massive waist circumference, so my options are limited.
My point being that it's not easy to bring jeans up to reach a jacket, unless your shape accommodates that.
After 3 years of my idiotic habit of buying expensive jeans I returned to the 541's, which are tragically being discontinued, simply because they look so much better. As I have lost something like 45lbs from my heaviest, so 541's actually fit me even better now. At my largest my thighs were about 29 inches, and my waist 35/36. I have a funny story about jeans- The wife of my closest friend here went to buy him a new pair as a gift. "My husband has 30 inch thighs and a 29 inch waist", she told the staff. "Is he a freak?" they replied. She didn't realise what a problem massive thighs are. Haha.Same problem here. 6'4, with a 33" waist and 25" thighs. I'm basically sized out of most pants due to my thighs. I like a high rise and a nice snug fit at the waist too, which means I usually have to buy for the thighs and get the waist taken in. Only two pairs of pants* have ever fit me off the rack in both the waist and thigh: Buzz Rickson 1945 chinos and Sugar Cane 1947 jeans.
*ever since I got into the idiotic habit of buying expensive pants
Wrangler jeans (13MWZ) are my go to budget option, but even on those I need the waist taken in a bit. I used to wear 541s but I like something a bit less tapered now, more of a straight leg. I've worn 505s as well but I don't remember how high the rise was. Regular 501s simply don't work for me.After 3 years of my idiotic habit of buying expensive jeans I returned to the 541's, which are tragically being discontinued, simply because they look so much better. As I have lost something like 45lbs from my heaviest, so 541's actually fit me even better now. At my largest my thighs were about 29 inches, and my waist 35/36. I have a funny story about jeans- The wife of my closest friend here went to buy him a new pair as a gift. "My husband has 30 inch thighs and a 29 inch waist", she told the staff. "Is he a freak?" they replied. She didn't realise what a problem massive thighs are. Haha.
Have you tried the 569s? They're the 541s but without the taper from knee to hem.Wrangler jeans (13MWZ) are my go to budget option, but even on those I need the waist taken in a bit. I used to wear 541s but I like something a bit less tapered now, more of a straight leg. I've worn 505s as well but I don't remember how high the rise was. Regular 501s simply don't work for me.
I haven't. Maybe I'll look into them.Have you tried the 569s? They're the 541s but without the taper from knee to hem.
This.I have long torso and short legs, I think I still prefer medium or short jackets since it makes my legs look a bit longer with how it breaks up the outfit visually. I still like my Model E, it's quite long but I would love an older pattern C2, the modern ones are only slightly shorter than my E, maybe about half to an inch shorter.
I love 569s, but I like a baggier look.Have you tried the 569s? They're the 541s but without the taper from knee to hem.
They look like slim fit jeans on me in my waist sizeI love 569s, but I like a baggier look.
That's interesting because I have big thighs and a slim waist and tapered jeans make me look fat. Wider legs with a higher rise actually show off a slim waist better in my experience.I also care little for current trends. I can't go back to jeans that aren't tapered, though, as with big thighs and a slim waist it looks it looks out of proportion. Mid raise tapered jeans for good for me! (Or until I'm a retiree!)
It depends on things like height and thigh size- true straight jeans or trousers look like flares on me! I don't want carrot shaped or tight round the ankles jeans/trousers, just a moderate taper to cut down on excess material.That's interesting because I have big thighs and a slim waist and tapered jeans make me look fat. Wider legs with a higher rise actually show off a slim waist better in my experience.
Oh yeah well a true straight would look like a flair on basically anyone! Even my very wide Buzz Rickson chinos are technically tapered. "Straight fit" is such a weird misnomerIt depends on things like height and thigh size- true straight jeans or trousers look like flares on me! I don't want carrot shaped or tight round the ankles jeans/trousers, just a moderate taper to cut down on excess material.