Denim Jackets - New or Vintage

A couple of things. a question and a factoid.

I'm realizing that I prefer triple stitch seams, which I associate with old farm wear that was common when I was a child. What brands/makers, vintage and new, are favorites with the triple stitch seams? Recommendations appreciated.

I had no idea that a single pair of jeans requires around 7000 liters/1800 gallons of water, and it wasn't clear whether that was even the entire process from growing the cotton to consumer's hands.

Ernest P Shackleton said:

a single pair of jeans requires around 7000 liters/1800 gallons of water

Click to expand...

This was exactly what was pushing me years ago towards denim that I can wear for years or pass on to others in used state where I know they can serve some more years. After I tore nearly all of my mall jeans in less than one year and I saw a documentary about labor conditions, poisoned rivers and other environmental and health problems in the major clothes manufacturing countries, I had enough. Luckily there are more and more alternatives now. My black german carpenter's pants (Zunfthose) have triple stitching, but are corduroy with the double zipper fall front. I also would love to know about denim pants with triple seams!

pmx-berlin said:

This is my Lee 101 Storm Rider.

Click to expand...

Good choice, good fit on you! Good match of collar and pants! White denim shirt and blue selvedge denim vest worn underneath? Boy you love denim!

Edward said:

First time I saw jeggings was on Shooting Stars with Vic and Bob, when they announced it was International Jeggings Week. I thought they were a joke - it was a couple of years later I discovered they were actual clothes.

Click to expand...

Bushman said:

I'm pretty sure the first time I ever saw Jeggings, they were being sold as "Pajama Jeans"

Click to expand...

Aren't those for girls up to seventeen years and 100 pounds only? Are there men who wear those? I must confess, I bought some stretch denim pants - so unbelievable comfortable now that I can't seem to get rid of my covid belly.

CatsCan said:

This was exactly what was pushing me years ago towards denim that I can wear for years or pass on to others in used state where I know they can serve some more years. After I tore nearly all of my mall jeans in less than one year and I saw a documentary about labor conditions, poisoned rivers and other environmental and health problems in the major clothes manufacturing countries, I had enough. Luckily there are more and more alternatives now. My black german carpenter's pants (Zunfthose) have triple stitching, but are corduroy with the double zipper fall front. I also would love to know about denim pants with triple seams!

Click to expand...

This is possibly for another thread, but there are companies trying to change the textile ballgame. PBS news recently did a piece on a Dutch denim manufacturer trying to develop new techniques that specifically have water use and waste in mind. I can't remember the name. Patagonia is dedicated to new manufacturing processes and fabrics. An example is them adding a small percentage of dyneema to their denim for strength and wear. Kevlar is 5Xs stronger than steel, and dyneema is said to be 15Xs. You do pay a premium for their R&D though, and their warranty is crazy.

everyone was lying to him/ herself for the past decade when talking about how buying 100% cotton raw jeans, hard wearing pants was because it uses less water, save the planet, buy less clothing but high quality, minimalist wardrobe, all those BS, and then proceed to wear their jeans to do stuff that would tear apart cotton pants within a year or two.

and end up having "minimalist" wardrobe with 10 or more jeans in various state of wears, 10+ high quality boots, 10+ 4mm thick belts, 10+ denim and leather jackets that would take multiple lifespans to wear through, let's be honest it was just a fashion, another fashion hype.

honestly if you want to safe the planet then do the exact opposite buy nylon pants instead of cotton, proven that plastic last longer they dont disintegrate from bacteria or mold or being stretched, they slide better not getting snagged on twigs or rough surfaces, quick drying you can wear wash wear the same pants again since they dry quick from dripping wet to wearable damp within 15 minutes and then your bodyheat will totally dry it within minutes, I wash my house pants in shower hang it outside the shower cabin, after I'm done showering and mop dry the shower cabin, that freshly washed pants is ready to wear. They look the same years after years through multiple washes, nylon pants is also odorless, there is no real reason to discard them and buy a new one. downside is unless they are camo print, they look really boring and take no creases or fade pattern, they do fade in the sun eventually like my national flag, but as pants they don't make sick fade, no abrasion related fade. my camo pants worn as daily pajama in house pants, looks exactly the same 10 years later, I flip up the pocket flap the color still match with the rest of the pants.

navetsea said:

everyone was lying to him/ herself for the past decade when talking about how buying 100% cotton raw jeans, hard wearing pants was because it uses less water, save the planet, buy less clothing but high quality, minimalist wardrobe, all those BS, and then proceed to wear their jeans to do stuff that would tear apart cotton pants within a year or two.

and end up having "minimalist" wardrobe with 10 or more jeans in various state of wears, 10+ high quality boots, 10+ 4mm thick belts, 10+ denim and leather jackets that would take multiple lifespans to wear through, let's be honest it was just a fashion, another fashion hype.

Click to expand...

There is a lot of truth in your words.
Buying more just because it is presumed to have less impact is contradictory and stupid.

I experienced a huge drop in my own consumption of jeans and generally in my wardrobe, however.
I haven't managed to tear my Pike Bros denim pants in the last four years although I wear them as often as I did my mall jeans in the past. They definitely last longer. I wore my first pair of them for 6 years (until I sold them totally faded to someone who liked them this way). My wardrobe has shrunk remarkably since I have settled down on these. I pay more attention to what I really want and what I really need. I have two hiking pants (nylon) I use for holidays and of course hiking. And two denim pants at the moment. And I only own three pair of shoes (one casual and two hiking/multisports) plus one pair of winter boots (you need them when you work outdoors during winter in this corner of the world).

About nylon as a planet saver: while nylon lasts longer, which is a benefit, it will also take longer time to deteriorate as waste, which is it's downside. Plastic spoils our planet already too much. When we wash our nylon more often than we would our denim, it is hard to see how nylon reduce water consumption in the final outcome. I used to wear a lot of polyester fleece sweaters. I only use them when hiking now. Boy, they can stink! I try to restrict them in my wardrobe. I read a good study about how washing poly fleece plays a role in the drainage of micro plastics into the oceans.

I fully agree with you: we all have to think how many items we really want and really need, and we have to reduce our consumption generally. But as long as clothes are traded for apples and eggs in huge malls, people will consume them without thinking twice, often without really needing or wearing them, and tossing them into the waste bin when they find their drawer needs to be emptied out to make space for the "this year's fashion".

I tend to hope that people who are willing to buy raw denim for high prizes think more about their impact on the environment than the avarage mall shopper. At least I do so. Those who only have them because they think of them as a must have only have stepped into another consumption trap, which is equally bad for our planet.

So let me repeat, there is a lot of truth in your words. There is a tendency to lie to ourselves and "greenwash" our own consumption. It would be a huge step forward when we acknowledge this.

CatsCan said:

There is a lot of truth in your words.
Buying more just because it is presumed to have less impact is contradictory and stupid.

I experienced a huge drop in my own consumption of jeans and generally in my wardrobe, however.
I haven't managed to tear my Pike Bros denim pants in the last four years although I wear them as often as I did my mall jeans in the past. They definitely last longer. I wore my first pair of them for 6 years (until I sold them totally faded to someone who liked them this way). My wardrobe has shrunk remarkably since I have settled down on these. I pay more attention to what I really want and what I really need. I have two hiking pants (nylon) I use for holidays and of course hiking. And two denim pants at the moment. And I only own three pair of shoes (one casual and two hiking/multisports) plus one pair of winter boots (you need them when you work outdoors during winter in this corner of the world).

About nylon as a planet saver: while nylon lasts longer, which is a benefit, it will also take longer time to deteriorate as waste, which is it's downside. Plastic spoils our planet already too much. When we wash our nylon more often than we would our denim, it is hard to see how nylon reduce water consumption in the final outcome. I used to wear a lot of polyester fleece sweaters. I only use them when hiking now. Boy, they can stink! I try to restrict them in my wardrobe. I read a good study about how washing poly fleece plays a role in the drainage of micro plastics into the oceans.

I fully agree with you: we all have to think how many items we really want and really need, and we have to reduce our consumption generally. But as long as clothes are traded for apples and eggs in huge malls, people will consume them without thinking twice, often without really needing or wearing them, and tossing them into the waste bin when they find their drawer needs to be emptied out to make space for the "this year's fashion".

I tend to hope that people who are willing to buy raw denim for high prizes think more about their impact on the environment than the avarage mall shopper. At least I do so. Those who only have them because they think of them as a must have only have stepped into another consumption trap, which is equally bad for our planet.

So let me repeat, there is a lot of truth in your words. There is a tendency to lie to ourselves and "greenwash" our own consumption. It would be a huge step forward when we acknowledge this.

Click to expand...

Yea... nylon doesn't biodegrade, so it is bad in the end, I have 3 raw denim all heavy and I know I won't need another in my lifetime if I wear these pants normally, I still have other pants, even mall jeans from my highschool 27years ago.

Even the heaviest of raw denim if I wear it to plaster wall and somehow half the grey cement got embeded in my jeans by happy accident, or to crawl under the car to replace oil and then rub dirty oily hands allover my pants because manly men don't reach for rag to clean their hands they just rub it allover their raw jeans like they don't care... right lol, or somehow going for a hike in the rain on muddy terrain in their best jeans or whatever other "manly" weird new hobby raw denim wearers do to purposefully yet discreetly ruin their cotton pants all in the cause to get sick fades ASAP, then a 21oz raw will get ruined within a year. If that's the case why not just buy predistressed jeans if they hate the state of dark blue raw so much.

because in the end they spend $150-300 yearly on jeans, true... mall jeans would disintegrate much sooner when used in the same manner... but the thing is, when they have just mall jeans or predistressed jeans, then they won't be doing all these weird nonsense activities to begin with, so the mall jeans will last as long in the end just a lot cheaper, and they save time to do other useful productive activities than spending hours in to do useless thing with the sole purpose just to discreetly distress their raw denim.

navetsea said:

everyone was lying to him/ herself for the past decade when talking about how buying 100% cotton raw jeans, hard wearing pants was because it uses less water, save the planet, buy less clothing but high quality, minimalist wardrobe, all those BS, and then proceed to wear their jeans to do stuff that would tear apart cotton pants within a year or two.

and end up having "minimalist" wardrobe with 10 or more jeans in various state of wears, 10+ high quality boots, 10+ 4mm thick belts, 10+ denim and leather jackets that would take multiple lifespans to wear through, let's be honest it was just a fashion, another fashion hype.

honestly if you want to safe the planet then do the exact opposite buy nylon pants instead of cotton, proven that plastic last longer they dont disintegrate from bacteria or mold or being stretched, they slide better not getting snagged on twigs or rough surfaces, quick drying you can wear wash wear the same pants again since they dry quick from dripping wet to wearable damp within 15 minutes and then your bodyheat will totally dry it within minutes, I wash my house pants in shower hang it outside the shower cabin, after I'm done showering and mop dry the shower cabin, that freshly washed pants is ready to wear. They look the same years after years through multiple washes, nylon pants is also odorless, there is no real reason to discard them and buy a new one. downside is unless they are camo print, they look really boring and take no creases or fade pattern, they do fade in the sun eventually like my national flag, but as pants they don't make sick fade, no abrasion related fade. my camo pants worn as daily pajama in house pants, looks exactly the same 10 years later, I flip up the pocket flap the color still match with the rest of the pants.

Click to expand...

There are other aspects to it.

Aside from forming completely negligible part of the entire clothes market, people who can easily afford 100% cotton raw jeans will usually get to the point of having their denim reaching its natural death around the same time as nylon wearers. That is, if you can pay for that stuff, I'm sorry buddy but you're rich. Rugged workwear guys count for nothing so even buying 10+ raw denim jeans, shirts, etc. still doesn't amount to anything and while I agree it's a fashion hype, to be honest, 10 nylon pants less in this world is always a good thing. That junk will some day literally form an entire geological layer.

As for discarding plastic clothes... It's going to happen regardless of the condition something's in. Everyone will grow bored with a certain piece and even if they're not into clothes, let alone fashion, people will frequently buy something new. So while I personally don't care for ecological aspect of raw denim, I'd much rather everyone wore clothes that actually degrades. And disappears.

Weight of the denim doesn't exactly coorespond to it lasting longer. I'd almost argue it actually makes the denim degrade faster because the weight of the creases puts a ton of strain on that section of the fabric. If your concern is long lasting denim I'd probably try and shy away from the repro scene and gravitate more towards like an Iron Heart which has some modern techniques (such as poly cotton threads) combined with extremely high quality selvage.

handymike said:

I like this!
View attachment 327265
View attachment 327266
https://www.fatboy-clothing.com/

Click to expand...

Oh, yes!

I've always quite fancied the idea of an Aero Highwayman in denim, as it happens. The Ace Cafe used to do a jacket not unlike it in black denim, with green stitching and a brushed cotton tartan lining. Looked fab, sadly they disappeared before I could ever buy one. No idea who made it, but a black denim HWM could be an excellent alternative. Something about a zip in a denim jacket that appeals to me.

Monitor said:

There are other aspects to it.

Aside from forming completely negligible part of the entire clothes market, people who can easily afford 100% cotton raw jeans will usually get to the point of having their denim reaching its natural death around the same time as nylon wearers. That is, if you can pay for that stuff, I'm sorry buddy but you're rich. Rugged workwear guys count for nothing so even buying 10+ raw denim jeans, shirts, etc. still doesn't amount to anything and while I agree it's a fashion hype, to be honest, 10 nylon pants less in this world is always a good thing. That junk will some day literally form an entire geological layer.

As for discarding plastic clothes... It's going to happen regardless of the condition something's in. Everyone will grow bored with a certain piece and even if they're not into clothes, let alone fashion, people will frequently buy something new. So while I personally don't care for ecological aspect of raw denim, I'd much rather everyone wore clothes that actually degrades. And disappears.

Click to expand...

The holy grail for me remains a genetically modified, worsted wool that wears better than a pair of nylon strides and is moth-proof.... Failing that, as soon as I get back to fighting weight (I say fighting weight, for me it was more like corset and eyeliner at Rocky Horror weight... ha...), I'll be off to Galashiels for half a dozen pairs of their best drill cotton trews.

I’ve just had a pair of my Pike jeans refurbed by the ‘Denim Doctor’: all rips and worn areas repaired / reInforced and new pocket linings added. Cost about half the price of a new pair to rescue these. On the way back to me, daily wearers for about 10 years so they deserve a little love.

Got one of these John Lofgren (Japan) denim jackets on my radar, tried one on at Eastmans Leather two weeks ago.

bn1966 said:

Got one of these John Lofgren (Japan) denim jackets on my radar, tried one on at Eastmans Leather two weeks ago.

View attachment 332403

Click to expand...

Imo, the best denim type 2 (apart from an original one) is the Levi's Japan version from the early 90s: Lot 71507

The Gap did a nice-looking black Type 2 a couple of years ago, though I never did see one in person, so I don't know if they screwed up the proportions by making it too long in the body as so many modern revamps of older styles do.

navetsea said:

or somehow going for a hike in the rain on muddy terrain in their best jeans or whatever other "manly" weird new hobby raw denim wearers do to purposefully yet discreetly ruin their cotton pants all in the cause to get sick fades ASAP, then a 21oz raw will get ruined within a year. If that's the case why not just buy predistressed jeans if they hate the state of dark blue raw so much.

Click to expand...

LOL, yes! I also find it weird to go after certain fades and distress a jeans to make them look "better". I use them like I would any other pant and "fades" will come naturally. I don't speed up things artificially.

Monitor said:

Aside from forming completely negligible part of the entire clothes market, people who can easily afford 100% cotton raw jeans will usually get to the point of having their denim reaching its natural death around the same time as nylon wearers.

Click to expand...

This is also my experience. And the raw denim wearers will be more likely to have their pants repaired than a nylon only wearer.

dwilson said:

Weight of the denim doesn't exactly correspond to it lasting longer. I'd almost argue it actually makes the denim degrade faster because the weight of the creases puts a ton of strain on that section of the fabric.

Click to expand...

True, the fanatical 21 oz denims will literally brake at the creases just because the fabric is too stiff and there is often too much starch.
There is a good reason, why a tiny amount of elastane (stretch) can increase the durability of denim.
When people avoid washing their raw denim, fine particles of sand dust will contribute to this, acting like micro knives cutting the fibers. Same with bacteria who breed on sweat and organic dirt when not washed out frequently. So from time to time washing helps. It is a matter of how we treat things we own and how we care for them. I am not rich. I try to take care of my clothes to avoid buying new.

bn1966 said:

I’ve just had a pair of my Pike jeans refurbed by the ‘Denim Doctor’: all rips and worn areas repaired / reInforced and new pocket linings added. Cost about half the price of a new pair to rescue these. On the way back to me, daily wearers for about 10 years so they deserve a little love.

Click to expand...

Would anyone do this with a cheapo mall jeans or a nylon pant? I guess no. Again, i tend to hope, that people who invest in a "good" pair of jeans, think more about sustainability and take more care of them, repair them rather than to toss them. I don't think that "raw denim wearers" (by the way, I don't wear raw denim, my Pikes are not "raw", they are sanforized) generally crawl through mud just to fit into the weird fade-friday community. The majority will be like you and me.

Monitor said:

10 nylon pants less in this world is always a good thing. That junk will some day literally form an entire geological layer.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more with this. I was once taking part at an archaeological exhibition project. Alongside a wall in the exhibition we placed the imaginary archaeological footprint formed by household waste of an average family of one year, beginning with the Mesolithic and ending in the 1990s. Every era had one meter in the length and space up to the ceiling which was in 6 meters height. For the Mesolithic we could not even fill the meter in length with one layer. Neolithic was covering the length of a meter. Medieval was piling 10 cm in height. The 16th century was at 50 cm. That was because of cheap mass produced pottery. It all started to explode in the end of the 1950s with one and a half meter height. Cheap mass produced glass and early plastic beverages came into wide spread use. The 1990s family reached the ceiling. That was impressive! A huge role played the deterioration qualities of the waste. The 1990s column was mostly filled with plastic waste! While we have knowledge about what had survived 10000 years (pottery, flint tools, some wood pieces or bone items) we can not really estimate, what would be left of the plastic after the same amount of time. It is an important question, though. What will be the best way to store it? Burning PE plastics lets CO2 out into the atmosphere but leaves only a small lump of carbon-compound to be buried. Storing it in a water logged mud will give bacteria the chance to eventually deteriorate the plastic over a long period of time. The best way will be to stop producing it in the beginning.

I wait for the moment, when people like Musk come up with the idea to transport our waste to a trash planet.

I disagree with the argument that heavy denim will break faster than light denim. I have my first pair of IH 21oz and they are 10 years old and I still wear them on a regular basis. I have blown out the knee/ crotch on countless pairs of Levis over the same course of time. I no longer own a pair of jeans under 21oz and won't ever again. I wash them regularly and hang them to dry. People who don't wash their jeans in search of some "sick fades" are the people whose jeans fall apart, regardless the weight.

Personally, I would sooner run a cheese grater over my balls and take a bath in hot sauce, than wear a pair of stretch jeans.

I'd argue that is more just Iron Heart. Their jeans last forever.

dwilson said:

I'd argue that is more just Iron Heart. Their jeans last forever.

Click to expand...

They do but my Unbranded 21's are hanging tough too. They just don't look as good.