wash your jeans?

[jonesy86]

Here's an old man in jeans. Go ahead take your shots. I just have never found anything as comfortable and durable as denim for daily wear. That's why I've worn them most of my life. ( JC Penney jeans 32 waist 32 inseam ) No soak or shrink to fit. Just throw them in the washer and dryer. These have been washed twice. What do think this 71 yr old old man 'should' wear?? Let me know.

View attachment 150252 View attachment 150253

I think you should wear these 21 oz. selvedge, straight cut.
https://www.ironheartamerica.com/bottoms/ih-634s.html

 

[jonesy86]

I think you should wear these 21 oz. selvedge, straight cut.
https://www.ironheartamerica.com/bottoms/ih-634s.html

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Well jonesy...I just can't see much difference except the price. I think I paid $20 for mine before Christmas during an online JC Penney sale for dark rinse jeans. Plus I can't see a button fly as an upgrade. A zip is more simple and efficient for me. After I saw how heavy Penney's denim was I then ordered another pair. Wished I had ordered more. Just think how many JC Penny jeans I could have purchased for $335.

 

[jonesy86]

Well jonesy...I just can't see much difference except the price. I think I paid $20 for mine before Christmas during an online JC Penney sale for dark rinse jeans. Plus I can't see a button fly as an upgrade. A zip is more simple and efficient for me. After I saw how heavy Penney's denim was I then ordered another pair. Wished I had ordered more. Just think how many JC Penny jeans I could have purchased for $335.

I like zippers too, and the price is just stupid, but there is a difference. Try these rope dyed, 14.7 oz. Zimbabwe cotton ones.
https://www.denimio.com/momotaro-je...lassic-indigo-wide-straight-zipper-fly.html?#

 

[jonesy86]

I like zippers too, and the price is just stupid, but there is a difference. Try these rope dyed, 14.7 oz. Zimbabwe cotton ones.
https://www.denimio.com/momotaro-je...lassic-indigo-wide-straight-zipper-fly.html?#

 

[HoosierDaddy]

I'm sure that my new JC Penney dark rinse Arizona jeans aren't near as heavy as 21oz or even 14.7oz. I really don't know what they are except that they came in heavier than my other jeans. They don't leave blue dye on my legs or places I sit so I'm pretty sure that they won't fade easily. I kinda like them. Any heavier though and they would more than likely be uncomfortable for me. Once again, Just can't see paying hundreds of dollars for such heavy jeans that must be shrunk to size when most modern jeans barely shrink at all and fit from the get go.

When I was a kid, jeans had to be washed several times to shrink and rinse the over dye out of them. Why do some want to backtrack to that hassle and pay top dollar to do it? Some seem to giggle with glee at the anticipation of going through that bother. Please explain.

Thank you
HD

 

[Seb Lucas]

It's a fashion thing, I guess. There's a robust cult of authenticity regarding all sorts of things, from shaving to food to clothing. Many consumers want to see items and techniques that evoke nostalgia and are built upon the idea that 'things were better back then' - whenever 'then' was. Denim has been a rich source of such longings.

I remember those days - jeans wept blue dye for ages and getting them to fit was a whole process. I hated that. But the jeans, when they did fit, seemed to last a lot longer.

 

[navetsea]

I like the easiness of zipper, but I can see why in combination with thicker fabric zipper fly might not be a good idea, it might strain the zipper tape too much thus make it into a weak link, it would create a bulge when sitting unless the zipper is slightly slanted, however I still hate these buttons on the 2nd day of wearing and needing tool to help buttoning the lowest button, if I have to use public toilet, I'm not sure I can button up my pants while standing, because I really need to sit down to button them.

I'm still very new to this, but I can appreciate thicker fabric just by their creasing, the same way on thicker jacket, they make fatter blunter creases that looks like ripples and rolls rather than crisp folded line on thinner denim.

while I have some blue fingernails wrestling with them buttons, but surprisingly I don't get blue legs from wearing a damp jeans until it dried on me, maybe the thickness of the jeans play some role here, since the blue dye that is only on the outside doesn't penetrate enough into its dense fabrics maybe.

so far the pockets are still useless on my pants, still too though and doesn't stretch enough

 

[red devil]

A bit late to the party but here goes, I got a pair of 21oz Iron Hearts a few years ago and found the whole mystique surrounding how to treat them excessive. I just made sure to wash them a bit less regularly than my old jeans and that's about it really. What was interesting is that the fabric feels different to the more common denim you find everywhere. It holds better and looks better to my eyes. I also liked the feeling of it. I did get the crotch area unravelling after about a year and half of pretty constant use but it was repaired free of charge.
Having liked the feel of these jeans, I got a pair of 25oz, now these took much longer to break in, took a week of constant use to be able to use the buttons, and about 6 to 9 month to break in, but they feel really nice. Not sure which one I prefer overall... They have not shown any structural weakness so far.
I will be trying some raw denim next, but I don't think it's worth the whole babying of it (I did try doing that with the 25oz for a while just to get the idea), just wash in a delicate programme and be done with it.
As opposed to jackets, I like to focus on one pair of jeans at a time, so no big selection of colours and style here. and yeah, not going back to the basic denim either, it would be the equivalent of going back to heavily corrected lamb skin jackets in my mind.

'things were better back then' - whenever 'then' was.

That is an interesting one, technology and progress have certainly improved on convenience for so many items, but maybe at a loss of performance... not saying that it's not possible to keep the performance, but it probably was not an interesting strategy for the manufacturers.
The example of shaving is a good one, the gillette mach whatever are very convenient but very expensive to use regularly and the blades are never really sharp, not giving anywhere the feeling of a well honed straight razor.

 

[Mich486]

I’d also would like to throw in the discussion that — as for leather — quality denim doesn’t equate to 20oz+. Again, a substantial and stiff denim is easily associated to a higher quality given that most high street stuff is less than 12oz and with elastane 9 out of 10 times.

I’m personally very happy with 12/13oz. Substantial but not impractical (i.e. I don’t need pliers to button/unbutton the fly) and for those who care also historically accurate. I’ve tried out a few brands and lately I’m liking a lot the Warehouse Co denim. Great texture and hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[navetsea]

I hate mach3, the lubricate strip always turns ugly after a week, and even when the razor still quite OK, but the whole thing looks shabby and ugly, and also since now they use hollow plastic handle, they look even cheaper and ever so often when I tap them against sink bowl to shake off the hair, the razor cartridge falls off due to very minimal hook onto the handle. So I use Schick Quattro this last few years, much better build, although very simple in comparison to the free floating blades of Gilette Mach3, I really don't bother about single razor or traditional shaving ritual... too much effort in preparation although I only shave weekly.

 

[Bfd70]

I’ll just point out that we are 5 pages into a topic where there is a good natured debate about perceived value of $300 pants and their fading on a website where the other 95% of the time we discuss $1000 jackets and their creasing without argument. If we were not the sort of peacocks who appreciated good stich counts, popping grain, and contrast fades we’d all be on a different site.

 

[Seb Lucas]

I’ll just point out that we are 5 pages into a topic where there is a good natured debate about perceived value of $300 pants and their fading on a website where the other 95% of the time we discuss $1000 jackets and their creasing without argument. If we were not the sort of peacocks who appreciated good stich counts, popping grain, and contrast fades we’d all be on a different site.

Sure. But the more curious point is why do some of us have several $1000 jackets and a bunch of $30 jeans?

 

[Edward]

Looking good HD - no smarty pants comments possible from what I see.

This is the general look I think we all want to avoid. The awful, even, light blue fading and the baggy fit. Jeans worn as chinos or track pants.

View attachment 150254

Horses for courses, really: those are far from "baggy" in my view... As somebody who prefers an accurate 30s/40s fitvin jeans, they look positively skinny to me!

As an old punk, I've certsinly worn my share of drainpipes, but I much prefer a wide leg now.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Horses for courses, really: those are far from "baggy" in my view... As somebody who prefers an accurate 30s/40s fitvin jeans, they look positively skinny to me!

As an old punk, I've certsinly worn my share of drainpipes, but I much prefer a wide leg now.

Well, I think an accurate 1940-50's wide cut looks totally different to these Wallmart jeans, no? Not a cut I can wear (I am too slim) but dignified in its own way.

 

[Mich486]

Sure. But the more curious point is why do some of us have several $1000 jackets and a bunch of $30 jeans?

That’s a really a good point and something I can’t really comprehend myself. Lotsa money on niche leather jackets but cheapo jeans are good enough?! I think this was discussed already recently in broader terms. In my opinion, if you pair a good quality item with something that is obviously cheap you bring down the whole outfit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Seb Lucas]

I personally can't tell the difference between most cheap and expensive jeans and personally won't often pay more than $100 for any item of clothing - including boots. I came to this site via thrift shop finds.

 

[Bfd70]

Different strokes and all. Most people i know have big expensive TVs. My tvs so small and old I recently i had to move the couch closer

 

[Blake54]

TVs have gotten a lot cheaper though. Years ago, we purchased a “big” 27” Toshiba that weighed about 150 pounds. Can’t remember exactly what we paid, but it got to where I couldn’t read the graphics on the screen that were obviously made for a modern screen. Ended up buying a 42” tv that cost about half what we paid for the old cathode tube tv. Only downside is...ended up watching too much tv!
But I just buy Levi 513 slim straight off the shelf because I’m 64, getting ready to retire, and cannot cross the divide to $300 jeans.

 

[ton312]

Tony and Superfluous informed me a while back that outerwear was serious business and that I needed to change my happy go lucky attitude.

Indeed. Now take your hands off your hips and ball up your fist man. You're 95% of the way there!