IH-634S-UHR - 21/23oz Raw Selvedge Denim Straight Cut Jeans - Indigo

[Twistlock]

[popvulture]

They're pretty fun, man — enjoy!

[endo]

good choice @Twistlock mine are gradually becoming my new favourites

[Twistlock]

Let the fun begin.

[Jdub]

Very nice

[Twistlock]

Day 3 of wear, they are already pretty comfy. These will see loads of wear in the coming months.

[A Former User]

Any restock in sight?

[Alex]

Yes, but no ETD

[seven-k]

I was just able to pull the trigger on a 634 UHR on ebay and the guy that sold them doesn’t know if they were soaked/washed already. He had bought them on ebay also but they were hemmed, which the previous seller didn’t point out and they were too short for him. Wondering how I could tell if they were soaked/washed before already like they’re supposed to?

[flannel slut]

@seven-k you could make a good guess looking along the hem/chainstich… if there is some “roping” going on, chances are they’ve been soaked. Either way, the indigo loss is very minimal w a soak, I would err on the side of caution and soak regardless.

[seven-k]

@flannel-slut that sounds pretty reasonable. I was looking at the images again and the patch actually looks like it’s seen some water. The leather doesn’t look that bright anymore. The jean is in pretty mint condition judging from the pictures.

[seven-k]

@flannel-slut now that I’m writing this … these are the 634S-RAW not the UHR. What’s the difference between these two models?

[popvulture]

The most recent runs of UHR’s patches don’t look like that, but the older ones might’ve. Most of the phony stuff I’ve seen is pretty obvious though, and aside from the wording, patch thickness and everything else isn’t screaming fake to me.

[seven-k]

@popvulture I noticed that there was a batch in 2011 that was made out of the 21/23 RAW denim which had this patch. That’s why I also edited my post already. But thnx for your help

[popvulture]

Alright sweet! Glad to hear

[flannel slut]

@seven-k wow. Those are in outstanding condition!
In regards to having been soaked, the leather patch may not be a good barometer. The veg tan getting darker is most likely due to exposure to sunlight and/or oils. I’m still on team safe-n-soak

[drewfonse]

Hey everyone, a little feedback would be appreciated here in the most recently active UHR thread.

I’m considering the 888 UHR, but it’s only available in a 29, and I am a 30 in the 888 with all of my other denim.

The measurements for the tag 29 look spot on in the waist and pretty close elsewhere else, almost identical to tag 30 measurements in every other 888.

I know this gets a soak and wash, and the out of bag waist is pretty much what you end up with after soaking, washing, and wearing a good bit.

If the listed measurements for the 29 would fit me perfectly, should I go for it?

How much shrinkage other than inseam am I looking at? Front rise, Thigh, knee, etc. I know those can be harder to stretch than the waist.

Thanks!

[Ross]

@drewfonse you are going to see a little shrinkage outside the waist and inseam, but it's proportional...

The waist and inseam are most noticeable because they're the biggest measurements to start with and so 'have the most to loose' if that makes sense.

Are you going to notice it elsewhere? a little.

Enough to make a difference to your sizing? Potentially, depending on your tolerances

Are you going to get stretch in those areas? Probably, if they're under enough strain eg. Knees if they're particularly tight (unlikely in a 634)

[drewfonse]

@Ross

Good thanks

[seven-k]

@flannel-slut I took your advice and gave them the RAW treatment with a two hour soak and 30° wash afterwards. The 634SR were a little too loose in the waist anyway so I was hoping for a bit of shrinkage. And I must say … they turned out to be perfect. After 5 years of wearing 777s I need to get used to the more loose and roomy look, but they actually are extremely comfortable. The length also turned out perfectly to be able to wear them without a cuff if I feel like it.