|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 25, 2015 21:26:31 GMT -6
Not the 666s-21 either? Seems overall slimmer than the 633, but not pencil thin, and definitely more taper, which is mainly what I want. Make sure you're checking the thigh measurements on the 555, 666, and 777 whiskeyriver. Take the 666 21 oz for example...crazy small thighs. I would have to go 4" bigger in the waist for them to fit my thighs. Remember that IH measures their thighs at the crotch and not 2" down. True. Good point. |
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 25, 2015 21:35:06 GMT -6
whiskeyriver then how do your Oni 517xxBEs fit? Are they too tight in the thighs? I think the IH 633s and Oni517's are similar fits Noooo, the ONIs are muuuuch slimmer. Much. |
|
|
|
Post by ickes on Jun 25, 2015 21:44:45 GMT -6
whiskeyriver then how do your Oni 517xxBEs fit? Are they too tight in the thighs? I think the IH 633s and Oni517's are similar fits Noooo, the ONIs are muuuuch slimmer. Much. Are you sure you actually got a pair of 633s? Lol...seriously man something sounds off. The measurements on a pair of Oni517 and IH 633s are damn close...only off by a 1/4" on some spots if you compare the fit guides. |
|
|
|
Post by ickes on Jun 25, 2015 21:45:56 GMT -6
Either way, sucks they didn't work out for you whiskeyriver...bummer man. |
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 25, 2015 22:00:21 GMT -6
Noooo, the ONIs are muuuuch slimmer. Much. Are you sure you actually got a pair of 633s? Lol...seriously man something sounds off. The measurements on a pair of Oni517 and IH 633s are damn close...only off by a 1/4" on some spots if you compare the fit guides. Yeah Yeah it's weird. I measured existing jeans and compared them with the specs on the 633 before buying them. |
|
|
|
Post by bentin on Jun 25, 2015 22:01:56 GMT -6
Either way, sucks they didn't work out for you whiskeyriver...bummer man. What sucks is that he's short. 32" inseam, jeesh. |
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 25, 2015 22:17:36 GMT -6
Either way, sucks they didn't work out for you whiskeyriver...bummer man. What sucks is that he's short. 32" inseam, jeesh. Hey now! I'll jeesh YOU. Haha. I'm a very respectable 5'10", thanks very much. I do alright, sir.  EDIT: And I have to wear this pair without any cuff because of the 32" inseam. |
|
|
|
Post by Winterland on Jun 25, 2015 22:19:28 GMT -6
Yeah, I prefer a slim fit for sure. These just give me paddle legs. And I thought the fit would work, but it doesn't. I am gonna sell 'em. 555 or 777 is most likely the cut you'll want then. Both the 555 and 777 have been on my radar. Have had on eye out for a pair on Ebay etc. The sizing does vary between the different fabrics. Indigo, black, 21oz, 18oz etc. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 0:13:36 GMT -6
Damn...really? Far too baggy? You must prefer a super slim/skinny fit? Yeah, I prefer a slim fit for sure. These just give me paddle legs. And I thought the fit would work, but it doesn't. I am gonna sell 'em. 666 fit IS NOT slim..... |
|
|
|
Post by brentkuz on Jun 26, 2015 8:41:35 GMT -6
I would look at the 777 or 555's the 666 won't work for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 26, 2015 9:27:38 GMT -6
Yeah, I prefer a slim fit for sure. These just give me paddle legs. And I thought the fit would work, but it doesn't. I am gonna sell 'em. 666 fit IS NOT slim..... Yes, but are they slimmer than the 633? The specs make them seem like it. |
|
|
|
Post by ickes on Jun 26, 2015 10:46:40 GMT -6
I guess the definition of slim is open to interpretation. 666's are definitely slim in my opinion. IH has them listed as slim as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 26, 2015 10:49:05 GMT -6
The 777 and 555, with my thighs (and hindquarters haha), would be TOO slim, I do believe.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 11:00:18 GMT -6
The 777 and 555, with my thighs (and hindquarters haha), would be TOO slim, I do believe. What is your waist/thigh/calf measurements so that knowledgeable people can better help you? |
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 26, 2015 11:12:59 GMT -6
The 777 and 555, with my thighs (and hindquarters haha), would be TOO slim, I do believe. What is your waist/thigh/calf measurements so that knowledgeable people can better help you? I have 'em written down at home. I'll post 'em later. Thanks! But reviewing my measurements and comparing the fit of these vs. the fits of Gustin slims and my Oni 517xx and my PBJ xx-012, it seems like the 666s-21 would be the best fit for me. |
|
|
|
Post by brentkuz on Jun 26, 2015 12:07:34 GMT -6
The 666-XHS fit me pretty well but the cuff opening is pretty wide and generally not considered slim by any means
|
|
|
|
Post by brentkuz on Jun 26, 2015 12:07:51 GMT -6
Ickes is also a smaller waist size so proportions are different.
|
|
|
|
Post by ickes on Jun 26, 2015 12:18:20 GMT -6
Ickes is also a smaller waist size so proportions are different. Good point....I tend to forget that important tidbit. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2015 12:54:41 GMT -6
Slim in the waist and thighs.... From the thigh down is a loose straight fit
|
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 26, 2015 14:41:51 GMT -6
Slim in the waist and thighs.... From the thigh down is a loose straight fit Though the specs are smaller still in that regard than the 633. Definitely, according to specs, more "tapered" than the 633. |
|
|
|
Post by ickes on Jun 26, 2015 14:58:57 GMT -6
Slim in the waist and thighs.... From the thigh down is a loose straight fit Though the specs are smaller still in that regard than the 633. Definitely, according to specs, more "tapered" than the 633.  ? Dude...something doesn't sound right...to my knowledge the 633s fit has the most taper. I'm going to check the fit guides again |
|
|
|
Post by ickes on Jun 26, 2015 15:00:39 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 26, 2015 17:54:57 GMT -6
Ok, not more taper, but thinner thighs and legs. The taper is probably more dramatic on the 633s. But it starts wider. From Self Edge - (Don't have the 666s measurement on their site)
IH 633s-21Waist 36.5 Front Rise 11.7 Thigh 13.3 Knee 9.7 Leg Opening 8.3 Inseam 36.5 From Ironheart.co.uk - (Don't have the 633s measurement on their site)
IH 666s-21Waist: 37 Front Rise: 11.4 Thigh: 12.5 Knee: 9.1 Leg Opening: 8.5 Inseam: 36 |
|
|
|
Post by whiskeyriver on Jun 26, 2015 22:34:13 GMT -6
My 633s measure as follows:
Waist 36
Thigh 13.5
Knee 9.9
Opening 8.8
Rise 11.75
Inseam 32
They are definitely a little over spec. Hm. Odd.
|
|
|
|
Post by exophobe on Jun 26, 2015 22:37:05 GMT -6
My 633s measure as follows: Waist 36 Thigh 13.5 Knee 9.9 Opening 8.8 Rise 11.75 Inseam 32 They are definitely a little over spec. Hm. Odd. You could drive a bus through that hem! Keep in mind that being tapered to 32 is going to affect that number, though, since they typically run what, 34 or 36 on the inseam? It does seem to be a pretty drastic taper through the thigh, though. |
|
