Hi, Guest

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - richardjohn22

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8
Awesome looking jeans, and from good old Pronto too.  Would buy these in a heartbeat if the hem in 36 was an inch smaller, otherwise they're boot only for me.  Otherwise, almost perfect!  (3/4 inch more rear rise wouldn't hurt ;) )

But fuck, a lot of people seem to love it.

For good reason, it's a brilliant cut, especially for a large percentage of Western physiques.

As I can't sleep (the joys of changing continents), I measured my 1955S jeans again, and the thighs have stretched out to 14.5 after 200+ wears (tag 36), suggesting these 888S should stretch a little too.  My inferior brand jeans I know I stretched out from 13.5 to 14 inches, and now look like they're painted on when I sit down. Damn you, racket sports and gym work....  :'(

Trust someone to reply before I finished editing the darn post  :D

If you pull up the jeans a tad more, and wear the belt higher, then that'd keep the crotch at the same height as a lower rise pair.  If you went for an, ahem, "urban" style with them nearly falling down, it'd be a different experience.

With my 1955S even if I pull them up, they will slide down a couple of inches to where all jeans naturally sit on me, thus lowering the crotch and giving even more room for thighs.  Mine came with 14.2inch thighs, btw!

So does anyone want to comment on if the extra rise cancels out the smaller thigh?

IMO, no it doesnt.  I feel like I need pretty much the same thigh measurement no matter what the rise.  It's the waist measurement that changes dependent on the rise, unless I'm missing something.

Rise in itself does not matter... however if the high rise makes the crotch of your jeans sit lower as a result, then yes, you could get away with smaller thigh measurements than usual.

And to the guys saying "please don't make the thighs bigger", lets consider that you can probably fit in a wide variety of Iron Heart jeans, and lads with larger thighs can wear perhaps two or three cuts.....  Have some sympathy  :(

.3 inches on the thigh, on this, or a variety of this cut, would be amazing. Even 0.2 inches...

Here's the current list of IH indigo jeans that in waist size 36 (within 1/2 inch) fit minimum 13.5inch thigh and 16.0inch rear rise, aside from this pair:
PIH10ANS -      13.8 thigh, 11.9 fr, 16.1 rr, 9.6 hem
IH-634S-XHS -  13.8 thigh, 11.5 fr, 16.5 rr, 9.5 hem
IH-1955S -       13.9 thigh, 13.4 fr, 16.6 rr, 8.8 hem

For comparison:
IH-888S -         13.5 thigh, 12.3 fr, 16.6 rr, 8.5 hem

In the lower leg, the 888 is the most slim and modern cut.  The 634S-XHS would be tremendous if not for the lack of comparable taper, and the difficulty getting that fabric tailored. 

I hope Pronto reconsider and get these in stock, it's got to be one of the very best Iron Heart cuts

Yep, Gav and I requested that....

Brilliant! Delighted to hear it :)

13" is the minimum I shoot for on my thigh measurements and the 888 in a tag size 34 shows a 12.9" thigh so I'm thinking I should be good.

Oh...I didn't realize the measurement table had been updated again. A 35 might actually be better for me.

Oh yes, so it has.

It's interesting looking at that table, how the front rise creeps up proportionally higher than the rear rise as the sizing goes up.

By the way, the jeans look excellent in your pictures, guys!!

..I'm a bit iffy on the thigh too...
G did the thigh come out smaller than planned on these?
I didn't get one from this run because of the thigh as well; I was hoping for a little bit larger.
I didn't get a pair because of the thigh. It was smaller than expected...

Unfortunately this describes my feelings exactly!

Enjoy ya addiction!
Add me too.  Only just barely squeezing my thighs in isn't ideal. (tag 36)  Chuffed to hear the next run may improve this!

My ideal pair of Iron Heart jeans would be the 1955S without the high front rise... these are going some way towards that :)

1955S      888
36 tag     
35.5         36.2
13.4         12.3
16.6         16.7
13.9         13.6
10.3         9.4
8.8           8.6
36.5         36

The 1955S measurements have generally all fractionally diminished since two years ago.  Rise aside, the only big difference between the 888 and 1955S is the location of the taper, which I'm somewhat cautious of as 13.6 inch thighs are just barely large enough for me.  Having said that, the knee always looked big and baggy on the 1955S compared to other jeans I own, maybe this pair would be perfect!  I'd love to try these on somewhere, assuming they fit I'd choose them over the 1955S because high front rise doesn't work for me.  Sure, I'd choose a regular rise (11-11.5 inches in tag 36) given the choice, but I love the build quality and fabric so much I'd suck it up.

Sport / Re: Lifter problems
« on: June 22, 2017, 05:55:56 pm »
Count me among the bro scientists who thinks "ass to grass is bad for your knees" is a vicious communist lie. Go ass to grass, you'll be fine, your body will get used to it. Start light and build up.

Once your knees are shot, depth can become a problem, as I'm finding.  My sister-in-law is a surgeon who also lifts, and is convinced that below parallel isn't for everyone.  I studied biomechanics back in the day at university, and it's easy to see how some percentage of people would have difficulty.

Other Brands and Shops / Re: T-Shirts
« on: June 20, 2017, 08:37:16 pm »
Excellent purchase, Jordon .. congrats!

3sixteen dyed Pocket T edition  - purple, charcoal & olive .. ♥


Those look lovely! The slightly odd collars (look somewhat inside out) work well in these colours as opposed to plain white.

I just looked them up and they seem to be out of stock, not that it matters anyway... holy sh*t they're tiny!! The 2XL is considerably too small for me, which has a LOT more to do with their sizing than my torso.

Other Brands and Shops / Re: T-Shirts
« on: June 07, 2017, 12:53:44 am »

Lady Whites have arrived....arrived several days ago actually but I wanted to wash them once and wear them a bit before I gave some feedback. 

To keep it short and simple, they are very nice T shirts and I will be ordering more.  I ordered two white ones and the fabric  is very nice.  Midweight with an almost off white color.  The fit is a very good happy medium between a more fitted athletic T and some of the boxier Tubular knit T's. Not too tight but not too boxy.  They aren't the longest T's but they have some good length to them which is a big plus for me and others on the forum as well I know.  Overall, very happy with the purchase and I have to say that as of right now these are up there with my 3sixteens at the top of my favorites list.  The only difference being that the 3sixteens feel heavier and they are not tubular knit so they have a taper. 

I also want to note that after a cold machine wash and lay to dry cycle, they did not shrink noticeably at all.  I didn't actually measure but I actually think I gained a bit in the length which is a bonus.  I believe I read that these are supposed to shrink .5" in length and width but I did not notice that at all. 

I highly recommend these.

Sounds good... do you know if they taper from chest to opening?  Can just fold over on itself rather than measure if you go to check. Cheers mate!

I'm assuming since they are tubular knit that there is no taper from chest to opening and it also feels that way when I wear them, but I will double check tonight and get back to you.

You're right, if it's tubular it won't taper... in XL everything tends to need a seam, and usually tapers (which must be a bugger for the lads who have bigger bellies than chests come to think of it  :D )

Other Brands and Shops / Re: T-Shirts
« on: June 06, 2017, 09:09:44 pm »
What is everyone's take on sleeves for T's by the way... I see a lot of the ones talked about on here have the long (5") inside half of the sleeve, while most high street T's (and seemingly classic Levi's) have short (2-3") inside sleeves.  These are typical measurements with standard 8" sleeves (measured along the top of the sleeve when flat).

I own both, and generally like the look of the short inside as if it's long it just bunches up.  With a couple of exceptions the long inside sleeve is what I'd associate with boxy T's you'd buy either at a gig or in an Asian market, or a plain cotton sports t shirt.  Is there a technical reason I'm unaware of?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 8