Jeans

[Jan]

No, these are really light and "hairy." They were only like $20 or so. They have the same ones from Kohls, at Sears.

 

[theinterchange]

No, these are really light and "hairy." They were only like $20 or so. They have the same ones from Kohls, at Sears.

Ahh I know the ones.

 

[Lefty]

What did I buy?
Are they jeans, uniform pants, etc.? They seem to be denim - they're quite heavy -, but have no stamps/labels/tags on the pocket bags or anywhere else. The pocket bags are a really heavy drill, much like the 40s and 50s Army pants I've got. The patch on the one wasn't a label, it's a repair over a hole.

 

[flat-top]

I have a few pairs of denim work pants (not jeans) that I would think have an Army or Navy origin. The cut is different from yours though, Lefty. I hate to say, ( and I may be dead wrong) but those may be 70's denim slacks. Nothing wrong with that, but I suspect that wasn't what you were hoping for!

 

[Lefty]

I accept that as a strong possibility, as the zipper and buttons certainly don't look like they'd be all that old. The pants don't have any of the off-putting 70s characteristics, so I'm good with whatever they are/whenever they're from. The only thing that is a bit odd is the rise. It's a long way from the top to the crotch seam.

 

[Tomasso]

Yep, they look to be denim odd trousers. I actually have a similar pair (but with reverse pleats and cuffs) from Luciano Barbara; the man himself talked me into buying a pair at one of his trunk shows back in the mid-90s. It wasn't until I found SF/AAAC that I discovered the igent hate for them. Even so, I still wear them on occasion.

 

[djgo-cat-go]

No expert here, but those 'slacks' don't look seventies to me.. My dad had 70's denim slacks and they were absolutely hideous (bellbottoms, low rise.. ugh..)

 

[flat-top]

No expert here, but those 'slacks' don't look seventies to me.. My dad had 70's denim slacks and they were absolutely hideous (bellbottoms, low rise.. ugh..)

Not overtly 70's, but I can't think of another era that had denim slacks like these. That doesn't mean they are of course.
I think Lefty can make 'em work just fine!

 

[apba1166]

I don't think we ever called them jeans back in the 50s - they were just Levis. And of course, they could only be Levi brand. I remember seeing Wranglers and Lees now and then, but only on cowboy kids. I still won't wear any brand but Levi's.

Girls who wanted to look great wore Lees, better, tighter fit. Levis, in the 60s, became hip for their lack of fit.

 

[boone33]

Maybe it's just me, but I've never been comfortable in jeans.

 

[Corky]

How Can Jeans Cost $300?

How Can Jeans Cost $300?
Shoppers Shell Out More for Designer Denim, Lured by Signature Details, 'Made in America'

WSJ - Los Angeles


It is an enduring mystery to anyone reared on $50 Levi's: How can a pair of jeans cost as much as the Phantom, the new look from True Religion that will be priced as high as $375?
The answer can be found here in Los Angeles, in the global capital of so-called premium denim—one of the few areas of fashion that remains largely American-made. An industrial zone here near the city's center is home to True Religion, J Brand, Seven For All Mankind and other pricey denim brands that have elevated what was once workman's togs to a luxury industry all its own.
This is a rarefied segment of the denim business. Americans bought $13.8 billion of men's and women's jeans in the year ended April 30, according to market-research firm NPD Group. But only about 1% of jeans sold in the U.S. over that year cost more than $50.

Interactive:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...tml#project=JEANS0711&articleTabs=interactive

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303365804576429730284498872.html

 

[The Good]

300 and 375 dollars is insane. I personally wouldn't really consider anything over 50 dollars to be worth it for me.

 

[Tomasso]

Well, consider this: When you buy a 1k suit the trousers are costing you over $300..........

 

[The Good]

I would go on saying the "apples and oranges" comparison, but I think to quite a few people, this means a lot more to them than it does to me. For the sake of argument, it depends on the maker, but I understand that there is a crowd that would equate the value of jeans with suits, more or less.

 

[Tomasso]

And don't forget t-shirts, which can get a lot pricier than jeans.

 

[KILO NOVEMBER]

$50 for Levi's !?

I can buy a pair for less than $20 at WalMart. What is it about the $50 pair that would make me want to pay 2 1/2 times as much?

 

[Travis Lee Johnston]

The fit will be better. I only like the Shrink to fit Levi's. Other jeans never fit right.

Also the quality of the denim is usually slightly better. Depends how much detail you like. I like the open seams on the 501's which you don't see unless you cuff them up. That is how jeans used to be before the mid 60's.

 

[Dav]

I am one of the people who will spend $350 on a pair of jeans. I know they are expensive but I absolutely love the ones I buy. These ones are of a far superior quality to any Levis I've ever seen both in manufacturing and material choice, I also believe that the factory workers are paid a decent wage.
We all have our indulgences, this is one of mine.

I'm sure you'll think I'm mad, but I like them.
They were $350 btw.

 

[Tomasso]

Those need some breaking in.....................

 

[Dav]

Those need some breaking in.....................

Agreed!