or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Baggy Trousers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Baggy Trousers

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
So I'm thinking about experimenting with some trousers that would be a lot baggier than the SF-approved standard. As a bigger fellow, not only do I find them cooler (temperature not attitude) and more comfortable, but I think they work proportionately better as well. We're not talking oxford bags obviously, which would be so outrageous as to be costumey, but there is a historical precedent for looser trousers:

PHslf.jpg

not to mention virtually every Apparel Arts illustration (though, of course, I recognize their limitations).

But of course, the devil is in the details here... HK bespoke is an option for me, but is there any practical advice, from tailors or others, on how to accomplish a looser fitting look with trousers without descending into caricature or just simply poor fit?
post #2 of 10
you need to be careful here dougie. there is a range of what one would consider classic fitting dress trousers and I think you can be very comfortable with a trouser that falls within this range rather than going the way of your pic. I undertand your dislike of the very slim trouser but you can do a higher rise, classic fitting pants that will look great and be very comfortable. I remember Mr.Pink posting some fishtail back calssic fitting trousers from Chan which looked good, tailored, comfortable but not sloppy or baggy.

Keep in mind that the looser cut clothing you typically find on smaller framed men, to add volume to their physique. Very loose pants on a larger man might not work they way you think they will.
post #3 of 10
The only thing I would suggest is to be sure to coordinate it to an entire outfit where the scale of the lapels, the shoulder width, size of shirt collar, tie width, are all in harmony. Historically when fashion has made the transition from narrow to wide to narrow, when people mix elements of the two it never quite looks right.

That being said, I just bought a pair of jeans with very full cut legs. I think we will see a reaction to the skinny fit sometime. That is the world of fashion, isn't it?
post #4 of 10
I'll be watching this thread with interest, as I am in the position of having some trousers made that are more comfortable/baggier than what is SF approved, and I have the same concerns as you. I'm not sure what you mean about being "bigger", but if you simply meant taller, I think like most things, height tends to be forgiving. As pointed out above, when going with a matching jacket, I think similar proportions are important.
post #5 of 10
Here's a more specific "how to" answer. Measurements used for the leg are knee and bottom opening circumference. Measure your seat, lets say it measures 44". Make the knee circumference half of the seat measure or 22", 11" for the half measure. This will give a classic proportion of the leg to your hip and the knee measure helps to control how full the thigh area will be.

Adjust the bottom opening to the size of your shoe and then have a good line to the knee. Decide how much taper you like from the knee down to the hem.

Fuller trousers are fine but they still should have a good line and shape. Make sure the balance is right so you don't get wrinkles under the seat.

If your seat measure is larger or smaller than averages you have to adjust accordingly. This formula is a generalization and a point to start from. If it is too big you can reduce but may not be able to increase the width of the leg.
post #6 of 10
Just another note - perhaps someone can chime in here. One thing I grapple with is that with baggier pants and bigger openings at the bottom, I think you have no choice but to go with a full break. An SF trained eye sees this as a pool of extra fabric when standing still. Perhaps worse, you feel it flopping every which way at your ankles whilst walking. Maybe it takes some getting used to, but it certainly doesn't feel like a well fitted garment.
post #7 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renault78law View Post

Just another note - perhaps someone can chime in here. One thing I grapple with is that with baggier pants and bigger openings at the bottom, I think you have no choice but to go with a full break. An SF trained eye sees this as a pool of extra fabric when standing still. Perhaps worse, you feel it flopping every which way at your ankles whilst walking. Maybe it takes some getting used to, but it certainly doesn't feel like a well fitted garment.

yuo can have the hem cut on a bias so that they front does not pool so much and the back covers the shoe down to the top of the heel and you wont get the flapping about.
post #8 of 10
Technical problem. Please excuse.
Edited by oldog/oldtrix - 8/24/12 at 1:12pm
post #9 of 10
Douglas, you might want to check out some Zanella OTR. They make some fuller cuts that are quite nice in excellent fabrics. And, while these pants require some break, I don't believe a full break is necessary.
post #10 of 10
From an old baggy pants thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldog/oldtrix View Post
















New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Baggy Trousers