or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Non Iron Slim Fit Dress Pants - Do they exist?!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Non Iron Slim Fit Dress Pants - Do they exist?! - Page 3

post #31 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie22 View Post

Very true.

Please do report back. 

What are your thoughts on modern tailor? Thinking of giving it another go with them.

Never tried anything from them so can't comment, sorry.
post #32 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimelesStyle View Post


With BB, you've got to go with extra slim in order to get a fit similar to RLBL or TPSF. Even the extra slim tend to be a bit bigger around the waist than I like. Recently ordered some CT tailored fit, will report on those when they arrive.

I've tried both the BB extra slim and the CT tailored.  40R, 31 waist.  The CT tailored still has a little extra waist area also, but more importantly for me, the chest area on the CT is large enough unlike in the BB extra slim which is less tapered.

post #33 of 49

I've been hearing a lot of positive feedbacks on BB's milano fit.

post #34 of 49
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimelesStyle View Post


I would second the idea of BB Milano. They also have a few pairs with some stretch (Lycra) in them that should hold their shape very well. Theory also does some cotton/stretch pants but they'll be more expensive and personally I've always found the fit a little weird.
As to the shirts, your measurements mirror mine almost exactly and I just ordered some of the CT tailored fit shirts after trying them in the NY store. So far they seem to be one of the better OTR fits for me, in addition to RLBL and some of Barney's house brand stuff.


I called Charles Tyrwhitt the other day, and their sizes seems to be huge!

I have a 15.5" Neck, so the collars on my shirt is usually 16".

The CT shirt with the 16" collar size has a 44" chest! That's way too big. How did yours fit if you have similar measurements to mine?

Their waist measurements seems quite big as well, although it does mention it is measured 20 cm below armhole.

 

I'll be going to BB today to check out the Milano Chinos.

post #35 of 49
Incotex. All other pants are for fatties.
post #36 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kappuccino View Post


I called Charles Tyrwhitt the other day, and their sizes seems to be huge!

I have a 15.5" Neck, so the collars on my shirt is usually 16".

The CT shirt with the 16" collar size has a 44" chest! That's way too big. How did yours fit if you have similar measurements to mine?

Their waist measurements seems quite big as well, although it does mention it is measured 20 cm below armhole.

 

I'll be going to BB today to check out the Milano Chinos.


Any reports on how the Milano chinos fit around the waist/crotch? I found that the fitzgerald chinos run a size smaller around the waist/crotch and I had to go up 1 size from 31 to 32

post #37 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjmakai View Post

I've tried both the BB extra slim and the CT tailored.  40R, 31 waist.  The CT tailored still has a little extra waist area also, but more importantly for me, the chest area on the CT is large enough unlike in the BB extra slim which is less tapered.

I suppose this was my experience too, because the reason my BB extra slim are a bit big around the waist is that I had to size up to a 16 on them, while I could do a 15.5 on the CT tailored.
post #38 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kappuccino View Post


I called Charles Tyrwhitt the other day, and their sizes seems to be huge!
I have a 15.5" Neck, so the collars on my shirt is usually 16".
The CT shirt with the 16" collar size has a 44" chest! That's way too big. How did yours fit if you have similar measurements to mine?
Their waist measurements seems quite big as well, although it does mention it is measured 20 cm below armhole.

I'll be going to BB today to check out the Milano Chinos.

Well remember, there's always a little room; you don't want things skin tight. I also tried them with a shirt underneath, since I don't want them to be too snug with an undershirt on. If you have a 40in chest I'd assume you'd want the shirt itself to measure at least 42in. I also wear a 15.5 in CT, so I think those will be a little smaller.
post #39 of 49
Thread Starter 

So I made a visit to BB yesterday to test out these Milano Advantage Chinos.

 

Tried on a 32 and a 31.

- The rise on these pants are quite low, a decent surprise at first.

- The 32 is a bit baggy in the legs (but still satisfactory), and a bit of extra room in the waist.

- The 31 is a bit tight in the waist, but the legs are perfect. Not to a point that it is considered "skinny", but well trimmed.

- The deal killer: When sitting down, the fabric in the rise just bunch up like mad. It is very uncomfortable. The 31 gave me a "camel toe" (yeah I know, ouch), and although there is a bit more room with the 32, it's still quite uncomfortable. I would have to constantly adjust my pants when sitting down if I were to wear these, which would be extremely annoying and uncomfortable since I sit in the office like 9 hours a day.

 

I've come to a conclusion that the cause is due to a combination of the cutting in the waist band and the low rise. I own 2 low rise jeans that are even skinnier than these chinos, but they're never this painful in the crotch area (they're actually pretty comfy). This is because the waist band on these jeans are curved, which prevents a lot of the fabric in front of the pants bunching up together, while the back of the pants remains contoured to the seat. The waistband of the chinos are just straight across.

 

I guess the hunt continues.

I might end up trying Bonobos, since all their pants have a curved waistband. The only gripe I have is that they are a bit too roomy in the legs for my liking.

 

Edit: Just to add, I did try out the Fitzgerald Chinos as well. They are way too roomy in the legs. They're actually like the pants I currently own.


Edited by Kappuccino - 5/11/12 at 2:09pm
post #40 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kappuccino View Post

s, since all their pants have a curved waistband.
All pants' waistbands are curved.
post #41 of 49
Thread Starter 

*forum error double post"


Edited by Kappuccino - 5/14/12 at 6:19pm
post #42 of 49
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trompe le Monde View Post


All pants' waistbands are curved.


Not sure if serious, but if you mean that they are in a circular shape, then yes, yes they are curved...

 

This is what I meant by straight waist bands:

0RWpo.jpg

 

And this is what I meant when I said the waist bands are curved:

pFJdB.jpg

post #43 of 49
Have you tried the classic khaki (slim fit) from GAP? To me they fulfill all your requirements. And they are cheap enough that I won't feel sorry if something happened to them when I work in lab.

http://www.gap.com/browse/product.do?cid=67225&vid=1&pid=757376
post #44 of 49
Check out The Gap's slim fit non-iron pants for comparison.
post #45 of 49
I wear Hugo Boss slacks and suits. They are all tailored and fairly fit. They are wool and thought the crease stays for about 4-6 wears, I like to run an iron over them after each wear to make it look better. But wool burns easy- I have a handkerchief over the iron so I don't get the wool too hot.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Non Iron Slim Fit Dress Pants - Do they exist?!