Wings + Horns S/S 2011

Almost everyone would do price adjustments especially in a 24 hour period if you let them know. Should support your local stockist though, so hopefully they won't.

Hey slack or anyone with experience (sorry if already posted), but how are the current season chinos sizing comparing to the last two seasons in terms of waist to tagged? I know the inseams have increased, but I have a pair from last season or two seasons ago I believe when tagged size matched inseam size and I'm a 30 tagged in most trousers/pants and the 30s in mine fit really well. Context lists waist size 30 as 30" but my 30s waist are larger than tagged. Are they running the same or have they truly gone down in waist? Also, how's sizing on these double layer crews? I'm generally a small in just about every brand except W+H from seasons past and Band where I wear a medium. Thanks in advance!

I'm interested in current season shorts waist to tagged if anyone knows. Especially the chino shorts.

Also, like I've mentioned.. I have last seasons chino shorts that measure around 33.5" in size 31. Ideally, I would like 1" or 1/2" less in the waist but I'm worried that if I size down any more that it will mess up how they drape. Maybe they are supposed to be worn loose in the waist? They're already fairly long shorts and wearing them down at the hip exaggerates this.

Does anyone own the bush pants? Yay or nay?

Originally Posted by tonio028

Click to expand...

Hey slack or anyone with experience (sorry if already posted), but how are the current season chinos sizing comparing to the last two seasons in terms of waist to tagged? I know the inseams have increased, but I have a pair from last season or two seasons ago I believe when tagged size matched inseam size and I'm a 30 tagged in most trousers/pants and the 30s in mine fit really well.

Context lists waist size 30 as 30" but my 30s waist are larger than tagged. Are they running the same or have they truly gone down in waist?

Also, how's sizing on these double layer crews? I'm generally a small in just about every brand except W+H from seasons past and Band where I wear a medium. Thanks in advance!



Tonio, the sizing is actually pretty true to size. Since moving the pants to JP they've been moving in that direction. A few years ago a size 29 would be swimming on me, but this time around they're more true. I would still say they may measure about half size larger than tagged, and a little room in the seat/butt -- but no crazy sizing issues. I would advise either getting the 30's for a relaxed fit (think tucking in a shirt...and also my suggestion to you), or the 29's for a more fitted look. And correct @ the inseams - They're about 31.5" - 32". They look great cuffed or rolled though.



The double layer jersey crew fits extremely true to size. If you are generally a small - no doubt, go small. No need to size up in this piece.

[/SPOILER]

Originally Posted by PaulYAY

Click to expand...

I'm interested in current season shorts waist to tagged if anyone knows. Especially the chino shorts.

Also, like I've mentioned.. I have last season’s chino shorts that measure around 33.5" in size 31. Ideally, I would like 1" or 1/2" less in the waist but I'm worried that if I size down any more that it will mess up how they drape. Maybe they are supposed to be worn loose in the waist? They're already fairly long shorts and wearing them down at the hip exaggerates this.

The shorts as I understand will be cut on the same block as the west point twills - meaning the advice above as given to Tonio should apply to the shorts as well. Now that they're MIJ, the sizing has gotten more true. Sizing down one from your normal waist size for a snug fit (maybe no need for a belt) or go TTS for more of a traditional fit. They will be available next week at Ac in olive and brown starting at size 28 (the brown is super cool).

Originally Posted by bawlin

Click to expand...

Does anyone own the bush pants? Yay or nay?

Yes - awesome pants. The waist is precisely true to tagged measurement. (my 29's measure 14.5" across). Slightly distressed fabric, light weight, very spring/summer appropriate. The fit is spot-on. Highly recommended.

Originally Posted by bawlin

Click to expand...

Does anyone own the bush pants? Yay or nay?

I wish, my local B&M has them in the navy, but only up to a size 34, I would need a 36, but they look awesome. Really nice lightweight/midweight feel, slubby/uneven hand to them, they look really slim.

Slack; those navy Bush pants look SICK.

Originally Posted by slack tide

Click to expand...

Tonio, the sizing is actually pretty true to size. Since moving the pants to JP they've been moving in that direction. A few years ago a size 29 would be swimming on me, but this time around they're more true. I would still say they may measure about half size larger than tagged, and a little room in the seat/butt -- but no crazy sizing issues. I would advise either getting the 30's for a relaxed fit (think tucking in a shirt...and also my suggestion to you), or the 29's for a more fitted look. And correct @ the inseams - They're about 31.5" - 32". They look great cuffed or rolled though.

The double layer jersey crew fits extremely true to size. If you are generally a small - no doubt, go small. No need to size up in this piece.

The shorts as I understand will be cut on the same block as the west point twills - meaning the advice above as given to Tonio should apply to the shorts as well. Now that they're MIJ, the sizing has gotten more true. Sizing down one from your normal waist size for a snug fit (maybe no need for a belt) or go TTS for more of a traditional fit. They will be available next week at Ac in olive and brown starting at size 28 (the brown is super cool).



Yes - awesome pants. The waist is precisely true to tagged measurement. (my 29's measure 14.5" across). Slightly distressed fabric, light weight, very spring/summer appropriate. The fit is spot-on. Highly recommended.

Everyone remember the Acrimony code which expires at the end of this month -- ACRvip15 -- for 15% off retail. Acrimony is awesome. Great option for state side people. No sig required, 2 day delivery in the US. I swear they get the packages to the post office 30 mins or less after you hit "submit". Good people...great owner....cares very much for her customers and their satisfaction.

Hmm, thanks for the feedback. If it is only running a bit larger than tagged, I might be better with a 31 then. I'm a 30 in trousers typically, b/c the waist actually measure about 31" or 31.5". I best fit waists of lower rises when they measure about 15.5-15.75" waist aligned.

I think acrimony listed the waist measurements for the chinos to be +1 the tagged size.

For example, both my chinos from this season are 32. But I'm a 33 waist.

I'm going to call Ac and confirm. They've got a lot of sizes in brown and khaki right now that should go with the 15%....will report back with exact measurements. All I am going to get is verification of waist measured flat on 30's and 31's. If anyone wants anything else please PM me..

Originally Posted by Dbear

Click to expand...

I think acrimony listed the waist measurements for the chinos to be +1 the tagged size.

For example, both my chinos from this season are 32. But I'm a 33 waist.

Nice. What size trousers/pants do you typically wear (Epaulet, Mabitex/Incotex, etc.).

Had them in the back with a tape measure -- we're seeing precisely true to size (waist) measured flat across:

Size 30: Exactly 15" laid flat
Size 31: Exactly 15.5" laid flat


Brown
Khaki

ACRvip15

I'm looking at picking up a pair of the anti-fit pants in size 33 but im worried that at 6'4" the pants wont stack at all and possibly even look cropped. For a casual pant like these i'd wear them lower on my hips but would they still be too short?

Originally Posted by 42LONG

Click to expand...

I'm looking at picking up a pair of the anti-fit pants in size 33 but im worried that at 6'4" the pants wont stack at all and possibly even look cropped. For a casual pant like these i'd wear them lower on my hips but would they still be too short?

at 6'4" you would wear them as they're intended -- sagged -- and I think they'll look cool, and if sagged right, there should be some stacking going on..

stockist measurements read 30.5" inseam, but being the inseam is "articulated" (& bow legged) , it's very hard to measure accurately. A 30.5" for me, at 5'8", should hit me with just a small break. However, I have to give these a full cuff (folded over completely once) and I still have a lot of stacking...when sagged - a ton -- and even stacking when pulled up to normal height..


in 33, 15% off...

for example, see how much loose inseam there is on these when still rolled...

Thanks Slack Tide that helped a lot!