Thanks John Elliott!
Styleforum was one of the first digital communities to embrace John Elliott, and in recognition of that, John Elliott has extended to our comunuty a monthly discount to fans of the brand who engage here. Simply enter the code for SF-OCT-15
Check out all of their new arrivals here
STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
I have read that the hem should cover 2/3rd of the shoe - don't remember where, though.Is there a specific metric for hem vs shoe size?
I think there's a big difference between 8, 8.25 and 8.5. The problem is proportion and taper. If the top block gets bigger and the hem stays the same or gets smaller (S&M 34 contemporary used to be over 8 inches) then the taper does look comical. Natalino, for example, has some good pieces, but the wide thighs and sharp taper on their trousers looks ridiculous to me.It depends on your shoe size, and inseam. A shorter inseam will end higher up the taper and will have a wider opening.
for me, 8.5 would be ideal but half an inch less hardly makes it comical. It is in line with other RTW brands in this space, Natalino is just under 8, Cavour Mod 3 is 8, Anglo Italian 7.5, Drake’s 8.3. The only RTW brand making wider than 8.5 to my knowledge is Berg & Berg.
I'm a 34 inseam, so yeah, the leg does seem to taper a bit more than I'd like and I can't have it hemmed to a cuff OTR. I think the "carrot" look is being exaggerated by my bad camera angle and the mirror. It looks more straight to my eye in person. My main issue with the slim is the rise is just too low. I may try a 31 contemporary in MTO, but I want to be sure that will work for me before I pull the trigger on a non-returnable pair.I am 6'1" and pretty close to your weight and find the 1/2" extra in the contemporary fit leg opening doesn't make much difference to me. It looks more like a carrot silhouette to me.
Like you I find the seat to thigh a bit too roomy compared to the slim on my body. A shorter person may differ but at our inseam the hem taper is more severe. I assume you are in the 33" inseam range which only allows for a blind hem.
I too have just stayed with 32 slim as I only have to alter the hem. More narrow at the leg opening than I would prefer but until I find another alternative without a lot of alterations, 32 slim is my size.
I like the slightly higher rise of the contemp as well. I can't seem to find a quick and qualified alterations person locally. I have gone the MTO route successfully on a few classifications but not trousers. I should look at that as well.I'm a 34 inseam, so yeah, the leg does seem to taper a bit more than I'd like and I can't have it hemmed to a cuff OTR. I think the "carrot" look is being exaggerated by my bad camera angle and the mirror. It looks more straight to my eye in person. My main issue with the slim is the rise is just too low. I may try a 31 contemporary in MTO, but I want to be sure that will work for me before I pull the trigger on a non-returnable pair.
Looking for some feedback on how the grey trousers fit. They're the hightwist mid gray in 32 contemporary. I'm 6'3, 162 with a 32 waist, but I usually wear a 31 trouser.
I'm trying to break my wardrobe out of slim fit and incorporate more interesting cuts with some room to move. My fiance thinks they are too baggy around the thigh and seat area. My instinct is to agree, but I've been so pigeonholed into slim fit everything for so long that my eye may be fooling me.
For comparison, I threw on a pair of navy twist Cavour Mod 3 trousers in size 48 (31 US) that I think fit me close to spot on. Both pairs are still unhemmed but I tried to fold them to simulate the drape when hemmed. I wish S&M still stocked a size 31 OTR to compare. Sorry about the dirty mirror. I don't have a camera setup, but hopefully the images are clear enough to make out the fit of the trousers.
Looking for some feedback on how the grey trousers fit. They're the hightwist mid gray in 32 contemporary. I'm 6'3, 162 with a 32 waist, but I usually wear a 31 trouser.
I'm trying to break my wardrobe out of slim fit and incorporate more interesting cuts with some room to move. My fiance thinks they are too baggy around the thigh and seat area. My instinct is to agree, but I've been so pigeonholed into slim fit everything for so long that my eye may be fooling me.
For comparison, I threw on a pair of navy twist Cavour Mod 3 trousers in size 48 (31 US) that I think fit me close to spot on. Both pairs are still unhemmed but I tried to fold them to simulate the drape when hemmed. I wish S&M still stocked a size 31 OTR to compare. Sorry about the dirty mirror. I don't have a camera setup, but hopefully the images are clear enough to make out the fit of the trousers.
We've all been asking for wider trousers, this may be a problem specific to you.So I’m a longtime customer of S&M with 6 OTR suits from them. Today I received a suit from their most recent collection, and the pants are WAY wider than usual. My wife walked in the room and burst out laughing, which is never a good sign lol. Not sure what’s going on here, but I may be off the train this year.