IH-555S-21 - 21oz Selvedge Denim Super Slim Jeans - Indigo PREVIOUSLY IH-555-01
-
My first IH denim..bought it last year..IH-555-1,its 33 tag size.
-
Hi, this is my first post so please excuse me if I say/do anything wrong. I was just wondering what the details on these jeans were like? Things like stitches per inch (STI), different materials used for the jeans, physical features, etc. Basically I'm asking to what extent these are "over-engineered". Thanks
-
This is an old reddit post but Giles put some good answers on what makes IH different and I think one comment talks about the quality of the threads. I don't know that this will answer your questions about IH but it definitely helped me justify the price for buying a pair. http://www.reddit.com/r/rawdenim/comments/1v4988/giles_padmore_of_iron_heart_ama/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Hi, this is my first post so please excuse me if I say/do anything wrong. I was just wondering what the details on these jeans were like? Things like stitches per inch (STI), different materials used for the jeans, physical features, etc. Basically I'm asking to what extent these are "over-engineered". Thanks
@Butterfly
IH denim, according to R&H, is made from extra long staple cotton. Extra long staple cotton holds dye better, wears harder (some say by about +50%), is softer, retains suppleness better over time, and can be spun looser while retaining strength. IH's flagship 21oz denim is great stuff with fluffy 2-ply weft and fade retardant resin coating which enhances fade contrast. The jeans are stitched together with super thick thread that has a nice cotton shine to it. All hardware looks, feels, and functions beautifully. Back pockets have hidden rivets and reinforcement stitching which seems to prevent that annoying pocket blowout that happens with lesser jeans. Leather patches on IH jeans are made of really nice leather and get better with age.
In short, every single detail is over-engineered, but not only over-engineered… also quite comfortable and nice looking.Also check out this thread: http://www.ironheart.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=7695.0
-
Restock here on Monday…....
Might work for my buddy in a sz 34. He is normally a sz 33, but wants a 34" waist with 12"-ish thigh and narrow hem. He has a true 33" waist but has ulcerative colitis which causes him a lot of bloating and pain so tight waistlines dont work. Any chance you guys could get him the size 34 with measurements closest to these? Thanks in advance.
-
Restock here on Monday…....
Might work for my buddy in a sz 34. He is normally a sz 33, but wants a 34" waist with 12"-ish thigh and narrow hem. He has a true 33" waist but has ulcerative colitis which causes him a lot of bloating and pain so tight waistlines dont work. Any chance you guys could get him the size 34 with measurements closest to these? Thanks in advance.
-
Hey guys, after reading about how much they can stretch, I am unsure of how I should size for these. I've got cycling legs so thighs will be my main concern.
My current pair measures:
Waist: 31"
Front rise: 9.25"
Rear rise: 13.75"
Thigh: 11.75"
Knee: 7.5"
Hem: 6.75"
Inseam: 31"Any advice is appreciated!
-
Thigh: 11.75"
Simple. Dont.
You'll need a tag size 29 or 30 and the thigh on those will never stretch as much as you need.
Giles is right. Real world example: My pair of these in tagsize 34 came with a 12.3" thigh it is now at 12.6" after 200 days of wear. That's about 3% stretch which is what you can expect from the 21oz.
If you needed around 11.75" you'd get it, just, from tagsize 32, but you'd also end up with a waist around 33"-34" and a top block that would be baggy. If it's indigo jeans you're after I'd recommend looking at the 1955 fit or the 634. If you don't mind a flappy waist and a belt then a 32 in the 777 fit may work.
-
Sorry, let me phrase myself better. I understand that the thighs don't stretch out much, that's why I want to watch the thigh measurements. However on my current pair there's still room in the thighs, it's the waist thats killing me. The feedback on the "comfy rise and roomy top block" is what got me interested. Baggy top block and diaper ass is the opposite of what I am looking for. I wear a belt depending on occasion, not all the time, so I would want a snuggish waist that doesn't have to rely on a belt.
Any comments on 555 vs 777 in this aspect? (roomy top block and thigh, slim leg, small leg opening?)
-
Sorry, let me phrase myself better. I understand that the thighs don't stretch out much, that's why I want to watch the thigh measurements. However on my current pair there's still room in the thighs, it's the waist thats killing me.
If I understand you right then you could do with a larger waist than the measurements you posted and a thigh about the same? In that case you've still got a problem, I think. To get the thighs the same you'll need a tagged 31 in the 555-01 but that will end up with an actual 33" waist which will be way too big. The tagged 31 in the 777 will end up with a 32 waist which sounds like it might work for you, but a slimmer thigh than you have now. So, still risky.
Any comments on 555 vs 777 in this aspect? (roomy top block and thigh, slim leg, small leg opening?)
I own the 555-01 but not the 777 (although the denim is the same). They are both slim, tapered jeans. The major difference (I believe) is that the 777 has a lower rise and a more aggressive taper than the 555. Otherwise you can compare the sizing charts yourself and remember, on the 21oz denim you'll get about 3% stretch on all areas that are subjected to stress (waist, thighs, crotch, arse, knees). Good luck.
-
"comfy rise and roomy top block" is a good way to describe 555 based on my experience - and the taper is not so dramatic that they look overly skinny. Very comfortable and well-tailored look imo, a slim fit that works well for a lot of people, but not all. These fill a unique spot in my collection.
-
Skinny fit, it´s relative, for me it´s just a slim tapered, like a 1955 or lvc 1954 with a more slim leg and front/back rise. Fit good on me or on people with VERY skinny legs. If not it´s ridiculous. And inverse, the 666 fit loose on me, ridiculous… I imagine a 634 on me...
Any idea for the 777, very Nice patch, fit, un alternative between 666 and 555.Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
