• 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!

short break in pants - feels weird

billyhoyle

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2007
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
anybody switch from a full/medium break to short/no break? i'm walking around and seeing my socks for the first time as i move. is this bad?

i wear slim fitting suits and was going for the real precise, clean look. maybe i look foolish. is short break only good for baggy pants?
 

satorstyle

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
689
Reaction score
6
Cuffs or no?, if no cuff the tailor should put a slight angle front to rear. That should keep the hem from raising as much.
 

billyhoyle

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2007
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
yes, she did, but i still see sock on the sides. this bad?
 

grimslade

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
10,878
Reaction score
60
This is a question of personal style. I prefer a bit of break, myself. Do what you're comfortable with, although I don't spend a lot of time watching my ankles while I walk. seems dangerous.
 

teddieriley

Distinguished Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
9,256
Reaction score
1,100
I think pants with wider leg openings look better and should have more of a break than their skinnier leg counterparts. In fact, I think if the wide leg bottoms have no break, it looks rather ridiculous. But if your pants are slim fitting, it's fine.
 

dagenham

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
176
Reaction score
0
Originally Posted by teddieriley
I think pants with wider leg openings look better and should have more of a break than their skinnier leg counterparts. In fact, I think if the wide leg bottoms have no break, it looks rather ridiculous. But if your pants are slim fitting, it's fine.

+1. I think anything more than slight to no break on a slim fitting suit looks out of place, but thats just my personal taste.
 

a tailor

Distinguished Member
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jul 22, 2006
Messages
2,855
Reaction score
130
wider bottoms come down lower because they clear the instep. then a small break is all you need.
narrow bottoms hit the instep and thats up higher. thats why your sox are on display.
as a rule garments that are fitted tight have a tendency to ride up.
those that are loose will ride down.
 

Despos

Distinguished Member
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
7,955
Reaction score
3,999
Are you wearing slip ons or lace ups? Loafers tend to sit lower and show more sock.

If you think you made the trouser too short, add a little length. No big.
 

warlok1965

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,547
Reaction score
3
I've been going more toward minimal/no break for a while now and I occasionally feel a little strange. But then I check it out in a full length mirror and it still looks good. I doubt I'll be in Thom Browne territory anytime soon.
 

Sartorian

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
1,080
Reaction score
2
Originally Posted by warlok1965
I've been going more toward minimal/no break for a while now and I occasionally feel a little strange.

Though it's not common, I've come to think it's kind of like longer jacket sleeves: everyone does it, but that doesn't mean it looks odd not to do it.

My suitmaker heavily urged me to have a slight break (rather than none) on my slim-fitting trousers, but I've been thinking I'd prefer even less. I actually find it disconcerting to see exactly the same break every time I happen to catch my reflection. You're walking around, so no one else notices, but it always jars me a bit. I'd personally rather just embrace my 'inner sock'. This works for me though: with my personal style, I tend to throw in splashes of color around a more neutral base (i.e. charcoal), so seeing sock doesn't seem like a negative to me.
 

billyhoyle

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2007
Messages
152
Reaction score
0
true, but if you are wearing slim pants w/ no break, chances are you're jacket is showing noticeable shirt cuff. so the two together, although perfectly okay, might seem a little pee-wee herman like to normal business folks who have sleeves to their knuckles and pants bunched at their feet.
 

Thurston

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Messages
1,177
Reaction score
1
I was having a few pairs of unfinished chinos hemmed at Nordstrom. The tailor told me I am too young to wear my pants as short as I instructed him to make them. He said you need to be at least 90 to wear no break.
On the other hand, when men wear their pants as long as many alterations tailors tell them to, especially Asian tailors for some reason, they not only look sloppy they look shorter, heavier and dumpier too.
 

sartort

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
1,497
Reaction score
3
i think the responses about hem diameter are spot on. I adjust according to the width of the pant leg at the hem. Regardless I go for no break, but the slimmer the pant, the higher up it goes, whereas a pant with a larger opening will rest further down on the shoe, despit it not having a break. i too felt weird at first with the litte break, but I liked the look so much in WAYWN thread to the point where I always ask for no break now. pretty soon I might have have 2" cuffs.
 

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by

Featured Sponsor

Favorite Shorts Length

  • Above the knee

  • Knee length

  • Below the knee

  • None of the above

  • Mid-thigh ("short shorts")


Results are only viewable after voting.

Related Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
461,592
Messages
10,015,823
Members
208,384
Latest member
illieany
Top