I had lunch yesterday with an old friend who's retired from the textile industry. We started discussing sorry state of today's blue jeans. His company was a major supplier of denim to Levi Strauss before Levi shifted everything overseas.
Levi's former denim was made of twisted yarn. The current product is a bundled yarn that is prone to develop small holes that become big holes. Or so my friend says.
The old denim is once again being produced in Greensboro, NC, and perhaps elsewhere. That's good, but a pair of jeans from this fabric will cost around $150. I don't know if Levi's uses it for high-priced jeans or if someone else does.
Would you pay $150 for a pair of (probably) long-wearing jeans?
I would not pay that for jeans
But I have paid over that for really hard wearing work trousers from these guys Cactus Equipment
Specifically I like these
Not cheap, but I think it was money very well spent, and I'm supporting a local industry
What irritates me about today's jeans is that every time I buy a pair they have fewer belt loops and shallower pockets than my previous pair. Maybe they know I have less and less to put in them, but my hands don't even go halfway in before they hit bottom. :pissed:
I'd definitely try a pair if I was in the field full time; my son's jeans would be destroyed within a few weeks when he was working pipeline.
If the overall value has been shown to be equal, then yes. Also I have read that several people recommend never (or rarely) washing blue jeans. Seems weird, but plausible. They definitely wouldn't be work pants, though.
For field work, at the prompting of someone on the old board, I switched to 5.11 tactical pants. They provided a link to LA Police Gear. They were having a sale for $15 per pair. I bought three pairs and they lasted almost four years.
A lot of storage pockets, rip-stop material, partially elastic waistband, and the crotch has a diamond-shaped gusset (my favorite feature and most likely why I got such good use out of them). I am 6'2" 250lbs, and can wear out a pair of pants in a hurry (usually blow out the crotch because they get picked by barbed-wire fences).
And the zippers seem to get shorter with each new pair. It's to the point I have to undo my britches just to take a leak.
$15 is a buy, I just paid almost $50 for some 5.11 but they are very nice.
Pay $150, probably not.
I can vouch for many things mentioned in this thread thus far:
- small holes become big holes
- shorter zippers
- 5.11 tactical gear
My 5.11 shirts have Blackwater logos which have drawn some question, interesting looks and few offers to buy them off me. Blackwater USA was a "security contractor" firm during the Iraq war.
Regardless of that, the shirts have 5 rather large capacity pockets. Bet I could carry about the same stuff in them as I can in my safety vest.
No never would pay that kind of money for jeans.
I have found that almost ALL of the pants I guy, are slightly loose fitting when they are new and shrink up before they ever wear out. Occasionally you will get a pair that never shrinks...don't know why.
I've been wearing Prison Blues jeans lately. $25 a pair and they have double lined knees. Much more impressed with them compared to wrangler.
I liked the George Straight edition of the wranglers..they fit good, but they are too expensive for me.
No way. I don't wear jeans in the field, they are too heavy. I get tough lightweight pants from Ex Officio.. still cheaper than 150 blue jeans. and probably last longer.
I wore jeans today for a meeting in town, but forgot I had a quick field project to close up on my way home. I thought I was going to pass out.
Short zippers- I forgot that one. :pissed:
I've been a Wrangle fan for many years. Still am.
Recently been wearing C. E. Schmidt work jeans. They are ideal for summer because they have a thinner and lighter material on some models.
They are more tear resistant and little holes stay little longer.
😉
> I had lunch yesterday with an old friend who's retired from the textile industry. We started discussing sorry state of today's blue jeans. His company was a major supplier of denim to Levi Strauss before Levi shifted everything overseas.
>
> Levi's former denim was made of twisted yarn. The current product is a bundled yarn that is prone to develop small holes that become big holes. Or so my friend says.
>
> The old denim is once again being produced in Greensboro, NC, and perhaps elsewhere. That's good, but a pair of jeans from this fabric will cost around $150. I don't know if Levi's uses it for high-priced jeans or if someone else does.
>
> Would you pay $150 for a pair of (probably) long-wearing jeans?
I've worn Levis since 1947 when they were readily made available after the war. They were hard to get up until then and the stores that did sell them only sold them to the few elite people that wanted them or they could get them in for. I think that there were only three stores that had the franchise to sell them in the town, which is the way it was with Levis for a long time. When I first started buying them, they were $2.50 a pair, were way better material than they are now. They've cheapened them up and jacked the price up about 25 times higher than they should be. In the early to late 1960's, I think they were $5.00 a pair, and in the early 70's started climbing in price when all the hippies started wearing them. I don't know what would make them cost $150.00 for a good old fashioned pair, being that they are made in some other country where the labor costs are way down the totem pole.
I'd pay more, but not $150. Half that would be my extreme limit. And they better be seriously good jeans for that money.
I remember that my grandmother told me that Levi's were VERY stylish with the cow girls in the early days because nobody could get them. This was in New York in the 1940's. I believe they were fairly expensive compared to making your own (which she did).
In the old days if your pants were short....
If they were too long....
My great grandfather wore them both ways.
I believe the kids set this trend because they always got hand me downs that didn't fit worth a darn.
You do know why the zippers are short don't you?
The only way I spend $150 on jeans is if I get to pick who I put them on 😉
Or if they came with a $100 bill in the pocket....
> In the old days if your pants were short....
>
>
> If they were too long....
>
>
> My great grandfather wore them both ways.
>
> I believe the kids set this trend because they always got hand me downs that didn't fit worth a darn.
You'll notice in the bottom picture with the rolled up cuff, on the outer seam, the unique stripe which was a feature only Levis had (501 button fly, shrink to fit) for years. They haven't had this feature for probably 10 to 15 years now. This is is now done with some kind of crossstitch with threads now on the outer edges of the stripe. They also had a unique rolled and single stitch inseam that was only found on Levis. This feature also went by the wayside since the garments being made out of country. In the old days, after soaking a pair to shrink them to fit and once worn and shaped to your legs, you could stand them in a corner since the material was stiff enough allow you to do this.
This was long before all the other hippified garments that they started making, and only the 501 shrink to fit was what they produced and were made in the USA.
In 1954 a clothing store in Billings, Montana had a Levis, double breasted suit in a window display, complete with the Levis buttons. Seems like the price was around $30.00 for the coat and pants. Levis were $2.75 a pair at that time.
