New 501s question

[dancinggods]

I just went to the levis outlet and tried on some unwashed shrink to fit 501s. I liked the look and fit. I tried searching on here to answer my question but didn't find anything. These are just regular 501s. No xx, or any other designation. The cut seems pretty classic, but my question is how does the waist height compare to older 50s or even 40s 501s? These go just about up to my natural waist. I'm aware there are the levis reproductions in the older styles, but if you've read my posts before you might know that I'm very utilitarian with my clothing and will compromise certain details to afford my clothes at "working man's prices." So just the available basic 501 unwashed found at any levis store is the best I can do for levis.

 

[Blackadder]

Levi's site provides description on the fit of some of their vintage repros. However, those are repros not originals.

http://www.thehambledon.com/designers-for-men/levis-vintage

http://levisvintageclothing.com/the-historic-501/

 

[AmericanIron]

I own the Levi's 501xx 1947's and the Levi's 501 STF model.

The difference is not in the waist height so much as the thigh and knee width. The 1947's are much slimmer through the thighs to the point of being uncomfortable for someone with muscular thighs depending on how you size. They are also probably a tad bit shorter in waist height but the difference (if any) would be so minor you wouldn't be able to tell without a measuring tape. Maybe 0.5" at MOST.

I wore the 1947's for about a year and a half before blowing out the crotch area due to excessive wear. Oddly enough my 501 STF's (both size 34) have lasted 2 years and are still going strong. Cut is everything. I see no reason to spend the extra on the reproduction lines, unless that selvedge strip matters to you a great deal, though I've never seen a pair of jeans rip on the outseam...selvedge or not. And with regard to added outseam strength being the selling point of selvedge denim, I'd say it's a marketing point at best. The STF's will not disappoint you from a function perspective. With regard to fades and other fashion related needs, they leave something to be desired.

 

[fiftyforfifty]

1955 and 1966 are awesome, even i do like the 1890 one. Great jeans