or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Definitive Guide to Slim Fit Shirts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Definitive Guide to Slim Fit Shirts - Page 7

post #91 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by drizzt3117 View Post
doesn't seem like they slim too much from chest to waist, maybe a boxy look?

Certainly not the \\/ look that all the bodybuilders here on SF talk about but correct me if I am wrong but they start out "slimmer" than all those on BJornH's list?

Maybe I am making a mistake, thats why I asked.
post #92 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIHTies View Post
Certainly not the \\/ look that all the bodybuilders here on SF talk about but correct me if I am wrong but they start out "slimmer" than all those on BJornH's list?


Maybe I am making a mistake, thats why I asked.

Well, those measurements are consistent with RTW stuff like Turnbull & Asser IMO, which isn't considered slim afaik, although they are certainly slimmer than say, RTW Ralph Lauren regular fit or something like that. Slimming 0.75" from chest to waist seems to not be very much, though.
post #93 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by csgrad View Post
The Bagutta shirts they currently have on Yoox are very good slim shirts to buy. The quality is very good for the 60-70 dollars you spend on one, single needle stitching, shell buttons, nicely shaped collars and cuffs. The fabric is very nice, very comfortable.
Good to hear.
post #94 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIHTies View Post
Certainly not the \\/ look that all the bodybuilders here on SF talk about but correct me if I am wrong but they start out "slimmer" than all those on BJornH's list?

Maybe I am making a mistake, thats why I asked.
Though they don't taper much, they are pretty slim in terms of neck size : chest size proportion, so they would be a better starting point than many shirts. I'd be interested to know the armhole sizes on them as well. Also, do they have back pleats? I've noticed that box pleats especially help negate any slim fittingness - they turn into 2"+ of extra fabric at the back waist.
post #95 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by j View Post
Though they don't taper much, they are pretty slim in terms of neck size : chest size proportion, so they would be a better starting point than many shirts. I'd be interested to know the armhole sizes on them as well. Also, do they have back pleats? I've noticed that box pleats especially help negate any slim fittingness - they turn into 2"+ of extra fabric at the back waist.
on a size 41, the armholes when tracing around the seam of the armhole was just under 11 inches when lying flat. By contrast a brooks brothers had just under 12 inches lying flat traced around the seams. An ascot Chang shirt I had was 12 inches. Is there a more accurate way to measure? No Box pleats on the back. Sent you a PM. Did you see it?
post #96 of 2397
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIHTies View Post

No Box pleats on the back.

Speaking of which, in my experience, not having any pleats in the shirt is yet another way of creating a slimming look, especially if rear darts are involved. Are my observations correct?

Jon.
post #97 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
Speaking of which, in my experience, not having any pleats in the shirt is yet another way of creating a slimming look, especially if rear darts are involved. Are my observations correct?

Jon.


Just to clarify, unlike the previous collection, these shirts do NOT have darts.
post #98 of 2397
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIHTies View Post
Just to clarify, unlike the previous collection, these shirts do NOT have darts.

Ah, sorry, maybe I should have been clearer: I was asking as a general question, not as a specific regarding the colleleciotn.

Jon.
post #99 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
Speaking of which, in my experience, not having any pleats in the shirt is yet another way of creating a slimming look, especially if rear darts are involved. Are my observations correct?

Jon.


Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
Ah, sorry, maybe I should have been clearer: I was asking as a general question, not as a specific regarding the colleleciotn.

Jon.

I understand but I thought that J answered that in this post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by j View Post
Also, do they have back pleats? I've noticed that box pleats especially help negate any slim fittingness - they turn into 2"+ of extra fabric at the back waist.
post #100 of 2397
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIHTies View Post
I understand but I thought that J answered that in this post.

I completely missed that. So, I guess it is true; pleats make the shirt less slim...

Jon.
post #101 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
I completely missed that. So, I guess it is true; pleats make the shirt less slim...

Jon.

Well... technically it makes sense. Much in the way that a pant with pleat allows for more fabric in the seat without giving that in the waist does a pleat do that in a shirt. Allows for more fabric in the body without giving it in the shoulders.

Now a dart on the other hand tapers in the body what is given in the shoulders/yoke.
post #102 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIHTies View Post
on a size 41, the armholes when tracing around the seam of the armhole was just under 11 inches when lying flat. By contrast a brooks brothers had just under 12 inches lying flat traced around the seams. An ascot Chang shirt I had was 12 inches. Is there a more accurate way to measure? No Box pleats on the back. Sent you a PM. Did you see it?
Thanks. The way I measure them (roughly, this is not an official method) is just to lay the shirt out flat and measure straight from the top of the armhole to the bottom. I think the H&M slim fits that I use as a guide for a shirt that fits me very well without binding measured about 10" this way.
post #103 of 2397
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
I'm not at that level, but I am a 36-37" chest with a 29-30" waist...and slim, at that. Finding shirts in the US that fit well is like

Jon.

hear hear, I am almost exactly that too, and polo slimfit is ok but shoulders are too narrow (finamore is also dreadfully too narrow in the shoulders by 2 inches or more). I've had decent success with AM, buying a few 15" sizes from lance, although neck and cuffs are tight.

Recently got another MTM suit from Zegna, and they also "threw in" (albeit no discount as I used to get) a MTM shirt, which funnily enough was tagged "slimfit", but fits very well (it better, since it's an MTM!) even though sized a 15.5".
post #104 of 2397
I would like to add Micahel Bastian shirts to the list. His shirts are cut ridiculously slim. I usually wear a 15.5 and even 15 in some shirts, but I needed a 16 in MB and I still have difficulty lifting my arms.
post #105 of 2397
I have a 36" chest and 29" waist, and the only OTR shirts I've found to fit truly slim in the midsection and sleeves are H&M slim-fits in size small. They pull too much at the shoulders/chest for buttoning up all the way but are perfect for casual occasions when I can leave a couple buttons undone.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Definitive Guide to Slim Fit Shirts