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

Kent Wang - Affiliate thread - Page 135

post #2011 of 4385
Quote:
Originally Posted by minervau View Post

Rise is just outseam minus inseam so yeah that would do it.

Makes sense.
post #2012 of 4385
Quote:
Originally Posted by minervau View Post

Rise is just outseam minus inseam so yeah that would do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyswatter View Post

Makes sense.

fyi: as someone who's tall and a bit higher waisted than most, I'm very particular about my rise measurements. So, I offer a grain of advice - outseam minus inseam is -not- the rise. The reason being that the front rise curves inward, to under your privates. That amount of curve takes up some distance that isn't properly accounted for unless you measure the actual rise (from the top of the pants to the seam of the crotch). In other words, you'll often find that inseam+rise is more than outseam, that's because once you're talking about the rise, you're dealing with a three dimensional measurement laid flat (where as inseam/outseam are two dimensional measurements). When you calculate it the way you described, what you're actually getting is the height of the rise when worn, which is not the same as the length of the material in the rise.

In my experience, this can be from .5"-1.25" difference. For a lot of people, it's unnoticeable, for me it's very important - the difference between a well fitting, wearing pair of trousers and not.

Hope that helps, carry on.
post #2013 of 4385
Quote:
Originally Posted by razl View Post


fyi: as someone who's tall and a bit higher waisted than most, I'm very particular about my rise measurements. So, I offer a grain of advice - outseam minus inseam is -not- the rise. The reason being that the front rise curves inward, to under your privates. That amount of curve takes up some distance that isn't properly accounted for unless you measure the actual rise (from the top of the pants to the seam of the crotch). In other words, you'll often find that inseam+rise is more than outseam, that's because once you're talking about the rise, you're dealing with a three dimensional measurement laid flat (where as inseam/outseam are two dimensional measurements). When you calculate it the way you described, what you're actually getting is the height of the rise when worn, which is not the same as the length of the material in the rise.

In my experience, this can be from .5"-1.25" difference. For a lot of people, it's unnoticeable, for me it's very important - the difference between a well fitting, wearing pair of trousers and not.

Hope that helps, carry on.

Ah yes, makes even more sense. I was measuring inseam/outseam of a well fitting pair of trousers last night and getting a difference of a little over ten inches. I was thinking that didn't seem right; seemed like too low of a measurement for the rise. Measuring the front rise from the seam to the top of the waist band gives a measurement of just under 11".
Edited by Flyswatter - 3/3/13 at 8:01pm
post #2014 of 4385
Hit the trunk show yesterday.

Very attractive presentation of all that is on the website, plus even more leather goods and shoes.
post #2015 of 4385
Thread Starter 

We can adjust the rise. And front rise and back rise independently.

post #2016 of 4385
Hi,
I have noticed you stock DC Lewis single monk shoes. If I am us 8 EE in AE PA which size should I order ?
post #2017 of 4385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al in Philly View Post

Here's a pic of me in it right out of the box.  It's what I am wearing in my wedding in June.  I would call it medium to dark grey. 

Disregard the under-clothing.  I got the suit and couldn't wait to get a fit pic.

700

Hey Al,

Have any more pics of this suit in action? I'm trying to get a better feel for the color of 102701, as it's what I'm leaning toward for my MTM suit. How accurate of a representation would you say this pic is? I have a couple fabric swatches coming, but I'm bored right now, hah. I wish there was a solid gray option somewhere between 102701 and 101037 in terms of shade.
post #2018 of 4385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyswatter View Post


Hey Al,

Have any more pics of this suit in action? I'm trying to get a better feel for the color of 102701, as it's what I'm leaning toward for my MTM suit. How accurate of a representation would you say this pic is? I have a couple fabric swatches coming, but I'm bored right now, hah. I wish there was a solid gray option somewhere between 102701 and 101037 in terms of shade.

I do not yet.  It's for my wedding and my fiance would kill me if I wore it before then.  I've had several requests for more pics of it and I will get at least ones of the jacket soon.  The pants need to be finished and then it will be GTG.  The shade looks very similar to the photo, but it has more dimension IRL.

 

I will try to get pics soon.  I still owe Moloch photos.

post #2019 of 4385

Has anyone else successfully navigated the MTM process with a trial suit that was too small?  I'm also curious what size trial suit to go with.  The 42 works for me for shoulders (18.75), but even the 44 is too small for me in the chest (need 44-45 inches in the chest).  I also need a long, which should make the trial suit pictures almost comical.

 

Kent, any recommendations on the trial suit size to start with?  Also, is there enough flexibility in your MTM process to account for the needed increase in chest size?

post #2020 of 4385
^ my trial jacket (size 40) was a little skimpy all around, and also too short since I needed a long, and I had great results with the completed MTM suit. I just added 1cm or so here and there, based on a combination of Kent's suggestions with my own ideas. I was even able to make the armholes a little bigger, because they were very tight in the trial jacket for me.
post #2021 of 4385
If you are having doubts about the process, don't let that stop you from ordering the trial suit and seeking out Kent's advice. I actually think the chest measurements listed are a bit smaller than actual, probably based on a difference in measuring technique.

Finally deciding to work with Kent was the best suit purchasing decision I have made. And after seeing the bench grade shoes at Kent's trunk show, I can say that purchasing a pair of those is going to be another great decision in my near future.
post #2022 of 4385

kent, would it be possible to order a MTM suit with a fishmouth or smalto collar?

post #2023 of 4385

Gentlemen, for those that have ordered items/trial suits/finished suit ect, have any of you had to pay customs/duty if you live in Canada? I'm very interested in perhaps some polo's and a suit down the road, but the customs + duties just kill me and would put the suit over $1000 (which it is worth, but it get's steep).

 

Thanks

Mario

post #2024 of 4385
My last order exceeded $400 and I paid no duty. That is not a 100% guarantee though, you never know. If it's made in the USA (which many of KW products are) there should be no duty as well.
post #2025 of 4385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cant kill da Rooster View Post

My last order exceeded $400 and I paid no duty. That is not a 100% guarantee though, you never know. If it's made in the USA (which many of KW products are) there should be no duty as well.

Cheers! Much better ordering things online because let's be real..the shopping in Toronto isn't that great.

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