Best jeans under... $100? $80? $60?

[justbrowsing]

J, you might want to stop by Express. They started their summer sale today, so most sizes should still be in stock. I stopped by and some of their jeans are on sale for $20-30. Most of them were low-rise with a boot cut, lots of vintage washes. I did find a pair that's a pretty natural looking worn-in light blue in normal rise with a straight leg, though.

 

[Lomezz]

I picked up two pairs of Diesel Rabox jeans for a total of $170, which is about 50% of retail, at the Diesel outlet in Woodbury commons (NY).

If you have no Diesel outlet in your area, may I suggest ebay? BTW, Diesel run a bit larger than, say, Levi's.

 

[imageWIS]

I picked up two pairs of Diesel Rabox jeans for a total of $170, which is about 50% of retail, at the Diesel outlet in Woodbury commons (NY).

If you have no Diesel outlet in your area, may I suggest ebay? BTW, Diesel run a bit larger than, say, Levi's.

$87.50 for jeans is a rip-off. That is way too much money to spend on jeans. And if they were originally $175, well that's just gullibility. There is nothing that separates a $40 jean from $175 jeans that is substantial enough to justify the price difference.

Jon.

 

[johnnynorman3]

Quote:

(Lomezz @ 29 June 2004, 1:28) I picked up two pairs of Diesel Rabox jeans for a total of $170, which is about 50% of retail, at the Diesel outlet in Woodbury commons (NY). If you have no Diesel outlet in your area, may I suggest ebay? BTW, Diesel run a bit larger than, say, Levi's.
$87.50 for jeans is a rip-off. That is way too much money to spend on jeans. And if they were originally $175, well that's just gullibility. There is nothing that separates a $40 jean from $175 jeans that is substantial enough to justify the price difference. Jon.
I think you conflate two points, ImageWis. $87.50 is a lot to spend on jeans, but I disagree that the 40 dollar jeans and 175 jeans don't have substantial differences between them. Would you say the same thing about slacks? Of course not. You may just think that the differences aren't functional -- perhaps you look at jeans as lounge pants or work pants. Others of us practically live (or lived) in our jeans. During school, I lived in one pair of American Eagle jeans, and damn if I now don't wish I would've just invested in some Paper Denim. If you wear jeans often, going higher end has advantages. They fit is better (particularly in the rear -- good jeans fit in the rear without ALSO being super tight in the legs); the cotton is softer but also sturdier, and the washes are better. Now, that said, 87.50 is too much to spend because I can find Diesel's on Ebay or at outlets for about $50 - 60. But, all in all, is that last 30 or 40 bucks a big deal when you wear them 5 times a week? No, I don't think so. I love Gap jeans, as several here do. But I can say that they are categorically inferior to PDC and Joe's, at least. I personally don't like Diesel and would wear Gap way before Diesel.

 

[LA Guy]

$87.50 for jeans is a rip-off. That is way too much money to spend on jeans. And if they were originally $175, well that's just gullibility. There is nothing that separates a $40 jean from $175 jeans that is substantial enough to justify the price difference.

There are substantial differences - it's a matter of whether the consumer values those differences sufficiently to pay the premium for them. I think that you'll find that most people will think the same thing about hand details on high end suits and shirts or bespoke shoes. At least in the case of jeans, suits and shoes, it is immediately obvious to the observer whether you are wearing a higher quality (and unfortunately more expensive) product. On the other hand, except under close inspection, and then it may be particularly difficult because a shirt is generally worn under a jacket, it is difficult to tell the difference between a Charvet MTM shirt and a Brooks Brother special - and the price difference between the two is at least 5x, compared to the 3-4x price difference between the jeans. And then there are watches - which puts the idea of functionality and durability as a measure of value on its head. The difference in performance between the best automatics and a simple quartz movement are miniscule - but the automatic is a work of art.

Let's stop the argument about whether something is a waste of money or not and accept one another's aesthetic judgements.

 

[MilanoStyle]

2004 Hugo Boss jean collection has very pretty fit to it. I personally love lower raise waste, straight legs pants .. also Hugo jean is way cheaper than Armani Jeans.

I paid my jean $175+TAX CDN.

 

[imageWIS]

Quote:

$87.50 for jeans is a rip-off. That is way too much money to spend on jeans. And if they were originally $175, well that's just gullibility. There is nothing that separates a $40 jean from $175 jeans that is substantial enough to justify the price difference.
There are substantial differences - it's a matter of whether the consumer values those differences sufficiently to pay the premium for them. I think that you'll find that most people will think the same thing about hand details on high end suits and shirts or bespoke shoes. At least in the case of jeans, suits and shoes, it is immediately obvious to the observer whether you are wearing a higher quality (and unfortunately more expensive) product. On the other hand, except under close inspection, and then it may be particularly difficult because a shirt is generally worn under a jacket, it is difficult to tell the difference between a Charvet MTM shirt and a Brooks Brother special - and the price difference between the two is at least 5x, compared to the 3-4x price difference between the jeans. And then there are watches - which puts the idea of functionality and durability as a measure of value on its head. The difference in performance between the best automatics and a simple quartz movement are miniscule - but the automatic is a work of art. Let's stop the argument about whether something is a waste of money or not and accept one another's aesthetic judgements.
I will concur that I did not express properly that those are my feelings toward the subject (I would have thought that was implied) and that to each his own (different strokes for different folks, etc...) Jon.

 

[kalra2411]

In my opinion the differences in high quality jeans, are about the same as the differences in high quality suiting.

Take a pair of Dior Homme jeans and put them next to a pair of Topman, or Next (UK High Street stores, like Gap, Express etc.) I assure you, you will notice the difference.

 

[Lomezz]

imageWIS - I beg to differ. I was from the school of "jeans should cost 29.99", but I tried Diesel once and became a convert.

I only buy a pair or two once every couple of years, so the expense is negligible, and I've found that Diesel is cut much better for me in terms of rise. I'd rather spend 87.50 on a single pair that fits me well, than buy three for $29 and never be completely satisfied, assuming quality differences are not an issue.

That said, I still can't bring myself to pay full price for a Diesel.

 

[Lomezz]

P.S. - as to what johnnynorman said about buying Diesel on ebay for $50-60: an excellent piece of advice, the problem for me is that I couldn't find the proper inseam measurement (30) and didn't want to buy say 31/32 and have it shortened to 31/30. I'm sure that had i waited long enough, something would've come up, but in this case I felt it was worth the extra $30 to get EXACTLY what I wanted when I wanted it.

 

[tricket]

I know it sounds silly but I desparately what to know your preference in fly closure. I personally prefer buttonfly jeans. I've been wearing '501s for 16 years and had 30 pairs of them made in different orgins like the States, the UK, France and Turkey. Guess what? They are all cut different.


Maybe I should start trying something other brands.

 

[ernest]

I think there is a difference of quality of fabrics, sewing and cuting between a jeans at 30 USD and as jeans in 150 USD.

I think there is no real difference between a Levi's at 70 USD and an desiner's jean at 150 USD. May be fabrics will be softer but the difference do not justify to double price (above all fabrics may be more fragile).

We can not compare jeans and suit as making a good suit involve a high level craft. Making a good jeans do not so much.

Conclusion : buying anything else than a basic Levi's, Diesel or some "jeans brands", for exemple Boss, Armani or Versace means you like paying just for a label.
Just to say "I can offer me a jeans at 150 USD", just to impress with money people may think you have because you wear such a jeans.

 

[j]

Wow, quite the response. I definitely have some looking around to do- thank you all. I guess if some of you approve, I will go into the Gap and check out their stuff. I haven't been in there... well... ever, to shop, and I never thought I would. Learn something new every day.

 

[MikeF]

I'll just chime in to say that Diesel offers by far the best bang for the buck. They last way, way longer than almost any other jeans out there, including Levi's.

 

[LA Guy]

For durability, you cannot, I repeat, cannot beat Diesel. I've worn everything from real cowboy jeans like Wrangler, jeans from real workwear brands (super heavy duty stitching and super heavyweight) to Levi's to premium (Paper Denim, Seven, Joe's) through super premium (45RPM, Dior Homme, Rogan) jeans brands, and nothing, and I mean nothing, has come close to the 5 year old Diesel Kratt's I'm wearing today. They are perfectly broken in but still not distintegrating after at least 200 washes. There is one tiny wear mark on the left leg wear I jumped a fence a few years ago. On any other pair of jeans, that mark would have ripped right away. Not on these babies. The denim is soft but crisp, and it's not hard to tell that the denim was woven from really high quality yarn. Not my favorite cut or color anymore - but definitely the toughest jeans I've ever worn - bar none.