The Definitive Guide to T-Shirts - Page 10

These are the best shirts around, made in the USA as well.
http://www.goodwearusa.com/servlet/StoreFront

BOOYAH!!! I finally found the PERFECT shirt for me. I am 5'6" 130, sz 28 waist. I have really broad shoulders and a thin waist so finding a shirt that wasnt too baggy or too long was a bitch. I think I bought and returned at least 5 different shirts (H&M, AA, Lounge Vintage, alt.at perfect, and some other ones I can't remember.

I finally got an Alt. Apparel basic crew shirt and washed it before I wore it, because the tag said so. Just got it out of the dryer and it fits awesome and is really soft.

I really recommend this shirt for you short/skinny guys out there. Second best was H&M. Their XS was perfect in length and width but the shoulders were too narrow. The small was good in shoulders but too wide and long. Hope this helps someone.

There's a lot of talk about American Apparel, but no one seems to have mentioned their 50/50 T-shirts specifically. As another member of the skinny guys with broad shoulder club, they're my current favorite, as they fit slimmer than their regular t-shirts. Plus, they're super-soft and don't shrink because they're a blend, so what you try on in the store is what you get.

Hmm, good tip. I'm assuming a small 50 50 is smaller than an unshrunk 2001, or likely same size as a shrunk 2001? Or are you saying the actual cut of the 50 50 is slimmer? What area is slimmer, stomach or shoulders?

I don't remember which of them is smaller before and after shrinkage. However, the cut of the 50/50 is slimmer in the stomach.

T-shirt that fits a tiny mofo like me perfect I get at AC Moore Arts and Crafts for $3. Its a Haynes Heavyweight 50/50. Here's the measurements for a small after *shrinkage:

pit to pit: 17"
shoulder= 17"
length (from where the shoulder/neck meet to bottom) = 26.5"
Top of sleeve= 7.5"
Bottom of sleeve= 4.5"
sleeve width @ body= 8.5"
sleeve hem= 6.5"

Im 5'5" 130lbs

The quality is decent for a cheap ass shirt. The cashier told me all the Sheriffs wear these under thier uniforms. They come in a variety of colors.

*they are labeled 50% pre-shrunk cotton/50 poly but they do indeed shrink after a warm wash/hot tumble.

Dont know if this has been up, it probably has, but how are the South Willard tees? Shrinkage etc.? This Margiela (in L) has a really good fit on me. South Willard seems somewhat similar but I'm afraid they go a little smaller, which then would be to small.

I'm the type of guy who sweats a lot. Is a 50/50 blend cotton/poly tee going to be better for me than 100% cotton?

Anyone try the Gap, Old Navy "tall" going down a size from what you usually wear to get it slimmer? They aren't available in our local stores, but are from the online stores. I'm interested in the sleeve and tail length after washing.

probably not, You can't beat natural fibers. I dont sweat alot so I don't have a problem.

Yes, cotton/polyblends or 100% synthetic shirts will dry faster than 100% cotton shirts. That is why most athletic under shirts (eg Underarmour, etc) are almost always made of 100% synthetics.

I've been trying out various undershirts. I really like the ones from Duluth Trading Company...

http://www.duluthtrading.com/store/c...ture=product_7

They are a 60/40 cotton blend. They are very soft and actually quite trim fit. Their size small fits about the same as my J.Crew XS t-shirts.

www.wickers.com is another place that sells 100% synthetic undershirts. I've tried those too but they did not feel as soft and fitted as the Duluth shirts.

Isn't this a different application? 100% synthetic wicks water away from the body where cotton absorbs water. When I play tennis I wear a shirt that dries quickly but as an undershirt I want cotton otherwise the sweat just gets absorbed by the outer layers. And I thought cotton breathes more and in general makes one sweat less than say polyester.

thanks for both of your replies. the idea struck me when i put on my 100% polyester undershirt as a baselayer for skiing. i guess a blend would be an ideal compromise by both wicking away sweat from the body and still holding some so it does not go through to your outer layers?

and kontai, would the duluth undershirts be wearable on its own in the summer or does it look too obviously like an undershirt?

Yeah, I see what you mean. I would think that if one sweats profusely, the cotton undershirt would tend to get saturated and therefore would become uncomfortable (wet cotton against skin).
To be honest, I'm not sure of the difference between an undershirt and a regular t-shirt (latter not as fitted?). Nonetheless, the Duluth is quite long (designed to be worn tucked) and only comes in white or gray, so I personally don't think it makes for a good stand alone shirt. I also want to add that the Duluth shirts appear to be very well made.

However, Duluth looks like they just came out with some new shirts (100% poly) in many different colors. Wickers also sells 100% polyester shirts in different colors.

Does anyone else have a problem with wrinkles/creases at the seams of the sleeves/waist of these "better" t-shirts (which, from what I understand, is a sign of poor sewing)? I'm talking about the kind that is always there, can't be ironed away.

I just got a basic crew from Alternative Apparel and it fits great, but the damn sleeves and waist are so wrinkly that the whole appearance just isn't right. Meanwhile, some of my old Hanes/Gildan t-shirts have great fit and don't have the wrinkles around the sleeves/waist (although they aren't as soft).