or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Kent Wang - Affiliate thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kent Wang - Affiliate thread - Page 74

post #1096 of 4476
Hello. I am a customer of many of Kent Wang's merchandise.

I originally bought a medium polo. The piqué fabric was nice/soft and the MOP buttons were a nice touch as was the spead collar.
However, medium was too large.

I ordered a second polo in another colour. This time size small. A little stiffer fabric than the previous one unfortunately. Same nice collar and buttons, though.
It fit in the shoulders and arms, but it was not as advertised in terms of slim fit. Laying the polo flat, it is a box fit. It does not taper in, and while wearing it billows quite a bit in the waist and lower back. I had measured against two Ralph Lauren Polo polo shirts before ordering.
The reason I went with medium originally was both that Kent Wang advertises to size up from your regular size and that Kent Wang advises that his polos are slimmer than Ralph Lauren Polo Custom Fit, which is too tight for me in size small.
I find you do not need to size up for Kent Wang Polos and they are instead true to American regular fit sizing.

Both my purchases are at the alterationist.

To to poster above, measure a well fitting Polo or T-shirt and give custom measurements to Kent Wang. It costs much less than the alterationist's price.

Advantages to Kent Wang polos are that they are logo-less, better buttons, better collar, mid-bicep arm length, and an even hem (no extra length on the backside like Ralph Lauren.

I will continue to order from Kent Wang, but was unable months ago to find proper fit picks of the polos with sizing mentioned. I realize I could have helped with that issue before sending them off to the alterationist. I am curious also if it is measurably true that Kent Wang small is slimmer than RLP Custom Fit small.

Edit: Just to clarify. The polos are definitely slim on top and in the sleeves. Just not below in the belly.
Edited by AB01 - 7/9/12 at 5:56pm
post #1097 of 4476
^ Are you saying the listed measurements aren't accurate?
post #1098 of 4476
http://www.kentwang.com/about/polos

Here are my issues. Chest for small says 18. Which means 36 chest, though it says fits 34-35.
I also believe small fits a 15" neck, though the site suggest smaller.
The chest and the hem are the same size. The shoulder is smaller than both. It only tapers a half inch in the waist.
This is a box fit that is sized down in the shoulders. Not a slim for polo. Just a smaller polo.

I workout my shoulders and chest and keep a flat belly. You can imagine how this fits. It's tight up top and baggy below. I would assume slim fit is the other way around.
post #1099 of 4476
Thread Starter 

My experience with J. Crew, Ralph Lauren, etc. is that their hem is wider than the chest. Mine is equal, and H&M and Zara tend to be the same. I think it's reasonable to call this slim fit. I've never found a brand with smaller hem than chest.

post #1100 of 4476
Does the polo fabric loosen up and stretch out with some wear?
post #1101 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang View Post

My experience with J. Crew, Ralph Lauren, etc. is that their hem is wider than the chest. Mine is equal, and H&M and Zara tend to be the same. I think it's reasonable to call this slim fit. I've never found a brand with smaller hem than chest.

nah..my PRL custom fit polos in M measure 21 p2p and tapers to a 19 at the hem.
post #1102 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraMagnetical View Post


nah..my PRL custom fit polos in M measure 21 p2p and tapers to a 19 at the hem.


I have a L RL custom fit that measures 23" at the chest and right around 22" at the hem. My Banana Republic "Vintage T" in L measures 22 and 21.

post #1103 of 4476
These things are definitely a slim fit, I'm a M in RL, XL in KW (though its a bit big around the neck)
post #1104 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by hookem12387 View Post

These things are definitely a slim fit, I'm a M in RL, XL in KW (though its a bit big around the neck)

Is that RL a regular or custom fit?

post #1105 of 4476
FWIW a medium custom fit RL polo is much, much bigger on me than a large Kent Wang polo. That to me suggests that the Kent Wang is cut way slimmer than custom fit Ralph Lauren, Lacoste or undeed any other polos I own.
post #1106 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Froosh View Post

Does the polo fabric loosen up and stretch out with some wear?

This isn't quite what you're asking, but before I put my KW polo on each time I tug on the chest and underarms a bit to stretch it out (it's a bit snug after all those goddamn push-ups). It always reverts to its original shape in the laundry.
post #1107 of 4476
Got my first two polos from KW a couple days ago.

All the warnings on the site about how slim they were had me freaking out. I got paranoid, and went with the XL. In retrospect, I probably could have gone for the L.

Really nice stuff though. My new polo shirt go-to I think.
post #1108 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by msulinski View Post

Is that RL a regular or custom fit?

For me, PRL Custom fit in M is perfect after a few washes. I've only tried the KW in XL and after two washes it is almost perfect... a bit big around the neck as someone else has said. I've thought about trying the KW large but I already have more polos than I wear regularly.
post #1109 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by erk View Post

For me, PRL Custom fit in M is perfect after a few washes. I've only tried the KW in XL and after two washes it is almost perfect...

What the...? I wear RL custom fit S and Kent Wang S was too big on me.
post #1110 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by jko View Post

...and Kent Wang S was too big on me.
having a few KW polos in L, this is another confirmation that I am obese ... laugh.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Kent Wang - Affiliate thread