Are Incotex slacks "tighter" than a typical U.S. pair of slacks of the same size?

[ihavezippers]

I purchased some Incotex slacks NWOT from eBay, size 34x34. Once cleaned, I found them to be extremely tight---these pants fit more like a size 30x32, especially in the thighs (very 'slim'). Not sure if the seller was just trying to get rid of shrunken pants or if its typical of these pants to run smaller.

If they do run small, please advise what size you would recommend to get a typical US 34x34 fit (that is, a generous amount of room in the pants such that it isn't tight).

 

[Ich_Dien]

Yes

/thread

 

[betep]

My IT50 (US34) took a very long time to stretch out. They are very slim

 

[ihavezippers]

Thanks for the replies. Did your pants ever stretch out to a more typical U.S. fit and if so, how long did that take?

Or would you suggest buying bigger sizes? If so, what would you recommend for a typical 34x34 fit?

 

[ihavezippers]

To be clear, I have big legs, especially thighs---I bike a lot, and I'm unproportionally muscular in the legs. Slim fit pants are just too tight.

 

[Gus]

You bought the wrong pants for heavy thighs. Sell on B&S and move along to something else.

 

[Ich_Dien]



You bought the wrong pants for heavy thighs. Sell on B&S and move along to something else.

+1 million you shouldn't be buying Italian slim trousers unless you're a climber like me and not a sprinter.

 

[ihavezippers]

hah, ok...any recommendations for us Big Thigh freaks?

 

[Fred G. Unn]

I have several pair of Incotex (from Daffys) and the cuts are all very different. All are 34 waist but one pair is so tight it's not gonna look good unless I drop 15lbs and another casual distressed chino is certainly relaxed, almost too loose. I won't ever buy Incotex again without trying them on first or at the very least, having very detailed measurements. They just have too many varying cuts for a waist size alone to mean anything.

 

[chogall]

...

 

[yywwyy]

Howard Yount is more relaxed but still a slim siluette. So are Rudys from Epaulet.

 

[Costa]

hah, ok...any recommendations for us Big Thigh freaks?

Epaulet Rudy's. Just great, great pants.

 

[circumspice]

There is very little consistency in their sizing. I need to post in BS a pair of NWT tagged 34s (charcoal herringbone wool/cotton blend) which fit like 31-32s.

 

[sportin_life]

I have a slim muscular build (swim and run a lot, don't lift much anymore) and I wear Incotex regularly. What I found is that I need to size up to a 32 (my true waist is 29-30) so that the thigh area fits, then have my tailor take in the waist to a 30. This creates the perfect fit for me and one of the best silhouettes I've found from any pants.

The Howard Yount pants are also great. For those, I found they fit true to size for the thigh and don't need to size up.

Brooks Brothers Milano are okay but slightly on the looser side through the waist/thigh and I found sizing down creates a good fit.

Bonobos (don't laugh) also have a good athletic fit for their "slim" trousers, although the quality is lacking compared to Incotex/HY/BB.

 

[ihavezippers]

I was actually considering BB Hudson fit (which I understand is BB's loosest fit) slacks given my experience with the Incotex. You think Milano fit wouldn't be too tight for a guy with big legs? Up until now, I've worn Land's End slacks, and at least my LE slacks have a traditional/conservative, form-fitting fit to them I would say. They are a nice compromise between the parachute pants I love to wear but which look terrible and slim-fit pants which are lower body circulation-killers. I guess the BB Clark fit would be comparable to the Land's End slacks I've worn.