or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Gitman Brothers Vintage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gitman Brothers Vintage - Page 198

post #2956 of 4063
My point is for the amount of money you're spending on a shirt, it better fit close to perfect. This is SF isn't it? Box pleat is an eye sore. I haven't tried the other brands such as wvg, BOO or epaulet.

To each his own.
post #2957 of 4063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbear View Post

WvG, if you desire a very slim and cropped cut, like interesting fabrics and MOP buttons.  That is, if you want to shell out the initial cash to become a member, where you are basically locked in to buy a few shirts with a discount.  The discount really just brings the shirt to the normal price.  I can't imagine anyone buying it at full retail and that's sort of the point.  The construction of the actual shirt isn't as good as GBV.  

As for GBV, GB has been around forever, but the vintage line is fairly new.  They basically took the shirt and refined the cut to be more modern (slim), but they still retained the box pleat for movement, but it causes the back to be billow, which is undesirable.  So they went only 1/2 way on the slimness.  Also, they retained the white or chalk buttons because, as they put it, "they're cheap!" and clearly they have a lot of them.  The fabrics are really top notch.  It's really the shining star of the line.  They have the ability to source interesting and nice fabrics.  It's the vintage part of it.  They will go into their archives and pick a year and look at all the fabrics and use that as a springboard for each season.  Although other companies are catching up and are able to source similar fabrics nowadays.  

I've owned several WvG shirts and 10+ GBV shirts.   Sold a lot of them over time, kept a few of my favorites.  Just my opinion on these brands, no dog in the race, as I am very doubtful I will buy any shirts from either brand ever again.

Why is that?
post #2958 of 4063
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7_rocket View Post

My point is for the amount of money you're spending on a shirt, it better fit close to perfect. This is SF isn't it? Box pleat is an eye sore. I haven't tried the other brands such as wvg, BOO or epaulet.
To each his own.

 

I'm curious. Why do a lot of people hate the box pleat? Does it cause it to be too poofy at the back or something?

 

Also is this only a problem for the GBV when they're tucked? Or do they still have the poofy/billowing effect when worn untucked?

post #2959 of 4063

The point of the box pleat, as described by GB was to allow greater range of movement.  This was a design of Gitman Bros like several decades ago.  Their target audience was factory and blue collar workers, not fashion or modern or anything like that.  

 

Yes, it makes it more poofy, less poofy if you tuck it in, but more still poofy than a shirt that doesn't have the pleat.  The vintage line slimmed everything down, but the pleat was retained, as it's one of their "signatures".  

post #2960 of 4063
Quote:
Originally Posted by althanis View Post

I don't get the hate for the basics - I think it makes a lot of sense to spend $100 to get good quality staples that you can wear lots of times hopefully over a couple years, if not more.

On the other hand, how many times can you really wear a hideous llama or pinup shirt without people thinking you only have 1 or 2 shirts? So then why spend $150 on it? If you want a crazy, really out there print that you can wear a couple times before it becomes last season's shirt, then it makes more sense to me to get something that costs less.

Why would I care if people think I only have one or two shirts because I might wear a llama shirt once a week or so? Newsflash!: No one gives a shit about the stuff you wear and the intervals in which you wear them. Everyone wears the same clothes over and over, so they don't really give a shit. The "last season" comment is dumb, and I'm sure you can figure out why I'm saying that.

Here is the pitfall of Gitman basics: they're not that great. They're not made of carbon fiber. They don't breathe better than other oxfords. There is not a major difference in construction to put it above others for the price ($147 retail, $100 on sale white oxford). The fit isn't anything amazing. What does it have going for it? It has the name Gitman Vintage, which has been hyped all over heritage/j. crew prep/hip lumberjack blogs and shit for the past few years.

My argument is that you're deluding yourself into thinking that Gitman is oh so much better than all other shirt makers when really they aren't. Seriously, you can buy 5 basic oxfords or stripes or whatever at Uniqlo for the price of 1 Gitman if you're wearing this shit for work. Uniqlo isn't going to magically disintegrate in your hands or in the washer or even over the course of a year. If you haven't tried Uniqlo basics, I would suggest you head over to the thread and check them out. The Uniqlo oxfords aren't just "passable"; it's probably the best thing on the market right now for basics.

For the record, I own a bunch of Gitman prints, and have owned a lot of Gitman basics in the past as well as WvG, Band of Outsiders, Thom Browne, Epaulet, etc. Sold them all cause it wasn't worth the money, now it's Uniqlo for oxfords.
post #2961 of 4063
Quote:
Originally Posted by marmottan View Post

Hi there,

 

How would you compare a GV (OCBD) sz. Small to a Brooks Brothers Black Fleece or standard BB?

I usually take BB1 (for Black Fleece) and Small or 15/33-34 for others shirts.

 

I'm afraid Small could fit too small or short (especially the sleeves).

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonio028 View Post


I am a BB1 in Black Fleece, small in Gitman Vintage, and 15-33 in the Extra Slim Fit BB shirts for comparison. The sleeves on Gitman are generally a tad on the short side, but since I generally roll up my sleeves I don't find it to be an issue. If you plan to pair it with suit or blazer, it could be more noticeable.

Thanks tonio.

 

For your information, the Small i ordered was too tight and the sleeves were ridiculously too short. I had to return it (thanks to Mr. Porter btw for their return policy).

I exchanged the Small one for a Medium. The Medium is perfect (sleeves, proportions, etc).

It fits me much better than BB1 (BB Black Fleece), Brooks Brothers "Small" or RL Purple label "Small".

I usually take 14.5/15 and 33/34.

Hope this helps.

post #2962 of 4063
Does anyone have measurements on an XS basic oxford?

IM 5'5 110lbs and was wondering if it would be too tight and long. Muji size S shirts fit real nice on me
post #2963 of 4063
Quote:
Originally Posted by computurd View Post

Does anyone have measurements on an XS basic oxford?
IM 5'5 110lbs and was wondering if it would be too tight and long. Muji size S shirts fit real nice on me

 

1000

post #2964 of 4063
Quote:
Originally Posted by computurd View Post

Does anyone have measurements on an XS basic oxford?
IM 5'5 110lbs and was wondering if it would be too tight and long. Muji size S shirts fit real nice on me

 

Collar 13.5", sleeve length 32", shoulder to shoulder 16.5", chest 17.5"

(via official GV website)

post #2965 of 4063

There are measurements on ContextClothing: http://www.contextclothing.com/item.php?id=3460

 

Hope that helps

post #2966 of 4063
As a guy who has tried lots of different shirts, I would say that I never have to tailor my Gitman Vintage shirts. I cannot say the same for J. Crew (way too baggy in waist and arm circumference), Woolrich John Rich & Bros, or any other brand. Correction, 18 Waits' cotton gauze shirts (so comfortable) fit well. The point is, more "mainstream" designer clothing lines have always needed a trip to the tailor to get them done right, whereas I can wear my Gitman Vintage shirts right off the shelf.

YMMV, but that's my experience.
post #2967 of 4063
I know this isn't the sales thread, but I just thought I'd put these out here for regulars before I put it on B&S. I have 2 plaid Size Small shirts from the My Habit sale, that are way too small for me. I am usually a size Small, but didn't know you had to size up for the plaid that looks like Blackwatch, so these are essentially size XS.

The photo is here:
http://ec2.images-amazon.com/images/I/91ln3SX8vzL._SY1600_CR0,0,1190,1600_.jpg

I live in Canada, so had to pay shipping and duties, so the price is higher than the $60 I paid for it. If anyone's interested, let me know, thanks.
post #2968 of 4063
Yeah my XS Plaid shirt just came in from my habit and its tiny even for me, also lol that is the same shirt I got. Im probably going to ebay it

Just looking at the measurements on context clothing. the XS looks quite similar to the XS plaid I received. if I get a white oxford should i just get a size S?

althanis do you generally wear S in other shirts or just in other gitman shirts?
Edited by computurd - 8/8/12 at 8:02pm
post #2969 of 4063
Quote:
Originally Posted by computurd View Post

Does anyone have measurements on an XS basic oxford?
IM 5'5 110lbs and was wondering if it would be too tight and long. Muji size S shirts fit real nice on me

I'm 5'7'' and 120lbs and XS fits me perfectly. If you are going to buy GBV, you have to go for XS, S would be too huge for you. 

Both of my GBV ends where the red line is, and for you I think XS shirts will stop at the green line. 

 

700

post #2970 of 4063

So after reading through this thread I'd think that a small would fit me well - I'm about 5'10, 145 pounds with shirts that measure around 28" in length.  

 

But I'm seeing some ebay listings that put the back length at 30"1/2 for a small flannel and the chest at 18".  Did they just get lazy with the measuring or does the sizing vary by that much?  

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Streetwear and Denim
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Streetwear and Denim › Gitman Brothers Vintage