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

Kent Wang - Affiliate thread - Page 78

post #1156 of 4476
I just bought a KW polo in medium. I have some complaints: Why are the armholes 7 1/4" across, when on the site it says they are 6 3/4"? I know it's only a small difference, but why not publish correct information? A 15" neck fits well, but, because it is a soft fabric, I could have gone to the 14.5", I think. Like others have mentioned, KW calling this a slim fit is misinformation again; it's so baggy in the body/waist and arms--it's unreal! I am quite skinny, which, of course, is affecting the fit, but why call it slimmest of the slim, when it clearly isn't? (I'm gonna have, to take it to the seamstress.) What I love about the polo is the fabric, the collar, the fact that you can choose a neck size (relatively) and the buttons! I just wish it was tapered, and that KW put the actual sizes online. I haven't washed it yet, but I don't think it's gonna make a hell of a difference.

I know it probably means 'to fit' a 38" chest--not literally--but my medium has inches (4-ish) of extra fabric, and I'm a 37" chest!
Edited by JapanAlex01 - 8/14/12 at 4:27pm
post #1157 of 4476
Thread Starter 

If the measurements diverge significantly from what's posted, then it might be cut defectively. Please email sales@kentwang.com with your order information and we'll look into it.

post #1158 of 4476
Is it safe to assume that the fall fabric set includes flannels? How about solid worsteds in the neighborhood of like 340 grams (as opposed to the current offerings that max out at 280)?
post #1159 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAlex01 View Post

I just bought

I can't speak for exact measurements or comparisons to other polo brands since I don't own any, but with respect to what is a "slim fit":

I ordered a polo based off the advice in the measurement charts under which I would've been an XL and have returned it for an L (which I anticipate I will certainly need to get tapered). It was a bit too big in the shoulders, and the body was blousy.

I agree that I certainly wouldn't consider them "slim fit" as described.

For me, to be "slim fit" the half-waist and waist measurements of the shirt must be significantly smaller than the chest measurement, perhaps 4cm each side i.e. this requires the seam to be curved (or else to have darts put in).

On my XL polo, this was certainly not the case (and you can see in the product image that the polos essentially have a box shape ie straight down from the armpits to half waist to waist: http://www.kentwang.com/polos/polo-navy.html).

IIRC, getting a curved side seam done on a garment significantly adds to the cost vs a straight seam, which is probably why KW and other manufacturers don't go down that route for OTR garments.

I guess this is where the MTM polo program will be useful.

Still, I liked the fabric and collar enough to order one while knowing I would have to spend extra to have it tapered!

to illustrate my point by way of a poorly drawn and highly exaggerated picture, most garments and the KW polo are more like the one on the left , whereas what you really want is the one on the right:

post #1160 of 4476
Thread Starter 

"Slim fit" is relative. As is written on the website, it's certainly slimmer than many brands like J. Crew, Lacoste, and most fits of Ralph Lauren. It's comparable with H&M and Zara, which most people would describe as having slim fits.

post #1161 of 4476
Don't worry, japanalex just sucks.
post #1162 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang View Post

"Slim fit" is relative. As is written on the website, it's certainly slimmer than many brands like J. Crew, Lacoste, and most fits of Ralph Lauren. It's comparable with H&M and Zara, which most people would describe as having slim fits.

I agree, I think I like my stuff slimmer than most. Compounded by the fact that I have to order things while having a relatively thick nick neck and wide shoulders in mind but a trim waist.
post #1163 of 4476
Quote:
Originally Posted by JapanAlex01 View Post

I just bought a KW polo in medium. I have some complaints: Why are the armholes 7 1/4" across, when on the site it says they are 6 3/4"? I know it's only a small difference, but why not publish correct information? A 15" neck fits well, but, because it is a soft fabric, I could have gone to the 14.5", I think. Like others have mentioned, KW calling this a slim fit is misinformation again; it's so baggy in the body/waist and arms--it's unreal! I am quite skinny, which, of course, is affecting the fit, but why call it slimmest of the slim, when it clearly isn't? (I'm gonna have, to take it to the seamstress.) What I love about the polo is the fabric, the collar, the fact that you can choose a neck size (relatively) and the buttons! I just wish it was tapered, and that KW put the actual sizes online. I haven't washed it yet, but I don't think it's gonna make a hell of a difference.
I know it probably means 'to fit' a 38" chest--not literally--but my medium has inches (4-ish) of extra fabric, and I'm a 37" chest!

"misinformation"? Oh brother.

KW's polos are as slim as explained above and on the site. You are tiny.

post #1164 of 4476
OK, so apparently the post I just made disappeared. I am 37" chest and a 33" waist--hardly tiny. If someone told you a pair of trousers measured 30" across, and were 35", you'd call that misinformation!
post #1165 of 4476
Sounds like you sized wrong and should have went with a size "small"
post #1166 of 4476
slim does mean skin tight...

If you had a 37" chest, and the chest of a polo measured 37" you wouldn't be able to move..Also I see your other post fine. Don't know what you keep hating on these polos, he already offered to resolve this over email.
Quote:
If the measurements diverge significantly from what's posted, then it might be cut defectively. Please email sales@kentwang.com with your order information and we'll look into it.

plus the pic of the polos laid flat + measurements is pretty clear how it's cut =\
post #1167 of 4476
If you find that an accurately cut Kent Wang polo in your proper size is not slim enough, you need to reconsider how you want your clothes to fit rather than post a whiny missive on a message board.
post #1168 of 4476
Well, just found out from Kent himself--thanks, Kent, you have been very diplomatic--the polo I received is an XL with a 15" neck. I apologise, Kent, if you didn't want me, to share that, but these troll comments are irksome.

Considering that a XL is two inches wider in the chest/waist/etc and larger in the sleeve, I think a properly sized medium would fit me well! Like I said, the fabric/collar are impeccable; it was just, the fit which was strange--gladly vindicated! smile.gif
post #1169 of 4476
.
post #1170 of 4476
I have a 42" chest, 32" waist and 16" neck and I bought a Large polo first. After multiple wearings it ends up loose fitting, especially around the waist.

A Medium for my build is very close fitting and what I prefer and recommend. Polo quality is fantastic and don't have ostentatious crocodiles on them.

Hope this helps someone.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Kent Wang - Affiliate thread