or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Cuffs on Suit Pants - no break?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cuffs on Suit Pants - no break?

post #1 of 44
Thread Starter 
If i'm cuffing flat front suit trousers, should I have no break? Going to go to the tailor in the coming days and wondering. You see a lot of Thom Browne, Tom Ford, etc with no break. Should I have a slight break?

Would love to see some photos of you all and your cuffed trousers, or your opinion.

Finally, still trying to decide which suit to keep - RL Black Label or Brooks Brothers Fitzgerald. If i'm into more of a trad (i hate using that word) look, but still fitted, is RL the wrong way to go? Should i keep brooks? Only thing that i don't like about the Brooks is that the chest pocket on the jacket is a bit low (for reference, i'm 6 foot and 145lbs).
post #2 of 44
I like a break. Will take pics later.

I agree about the Fitz pocket being too low (I'm 6'3").
post #3 of 44
A bit of a break looks good because we're not always standing in a pose for a photograph. When pants are in motion while walking down the street, I like to see a bit of coverage at the cuff.
post #4 of 44
^^^Similar to the amount of break I tend to have.
post #5 of 44
A complete lack of break is a fantastic and very American look. I have to say that to my eye, it only works in a collegiate style context.

My pants generally have the slightest of breaks, but the preppiest stuff might be a tad higher.

The most important thing? Is it you or not? If it's not you, don't do it unless you move among styles with ease. If you do, you probably don't post interogatively on SF.


- B
post #6 of 44
For pants with narrower leg openings I like a minimum amount of break. There's gotta be some, otherwise you run the risk of looking like you're wearing one size too small.
post #7 of 44
And the higher the hem, and the less break (or no break) the narrower the pant leg needs to be, and vice versa. So it's not just as simple as deciding "break or no break". More billowy trousers that would look great with a solid break could look a little off if they hung straight and you were walking. At least this has been my experience.
post #8 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunman42000 View Post
If i'm cuffing flat front suit trousers, should I have no break? You see a lot of Thom Browne, Tom Ford, etc with no break. Should I have a slight break?

i'm 6 foot and 145lbs
It's a great look if your name is Tom or Thom and you want to look clueless. Some find it an endearing look (male designers, especially).
post #9 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frodo View Post
And the higher the hem, and the less break (or no break) the narrower the pant leg needs to be, and vice versa. So it's not just as simple as deciding "break or no break". More billowy trousers that would look great with a solid break could look a little off if they hung straight and you were walking. At least this has been my experience.

good point.

how much of a hem....1.75"?
post #10 of 44
No break or higher (negative break?) is a specific look that you need to be comfortable with. I can't do it, myself. It reminds me of middle school when I grew about six inches in a year and my pants never fit me.
post #11 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunman42000 View Post
good point.

how much of a hem....1.75"?

If you mean cuff, then this is up in the air and completely in your court. There is a SF meme that favors 2" cuffs. I always specify 1 1/2". Looks best to my eye. Any time I hear "that's what they're doing now" I get a rash.
post #12 of 44
I'd go with a half-break. No break only works with fitted and tapered pants in my opinion, and even then it's not always a winner. I'd say that it's run-way look that doesn't carry over well to real-life.
post #13 of 44
Tailors seem to want to create more of a break, but I request a slight break with 1.75 cuffs.
post #14 of 44
With so much discussion on this forum about trouser break, I'm surprised that more folk don't mention the once-standard tailoring trick of the slanted cuff. Almost all my nicest vintage 30s cuffed trousers have bottoms with around a .5" difference between front and back. (a technique which now tends to be relegated to the occasional hemmed pantleg). It allows for comfortable ankle coverage without the inelegantly large break that comes usually comes with it.

You see this work again and again in old photos and movies. Don't let any tailor tell you it isn't possible!
post #15 of 44
FWIW what you see as break whence looking down is an aberration. One needs a full-length mirror to correctly ascertain breakage.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Cuffs on Suit Pants - no break?