1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

What does "relaxed fit" mean today?

Discussion in 'Streetwear and Denim' started by Sprezzatura2010, Jul 13, 2009.

  1. Sprezzatura2010

    Sprezzatura2010 Senior member

    Messages:
    765
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    Yesterday, my Chimala buckle-backs came in from the Farinelli's flash sale. (They were on my doorstep on Saturday, but I was not home.) They are very nice jeans. I like the detailing and the fit.

    Chimala advertises these jeans as "relaxed fit." Yet, when comparing their measurements, I find they are the a little smaller than Nudie RRDS's with the same size waistband, and have about the same rise. (I expect, like the RRDS's, they will stretch out a bit.) The KMW 1950 and Earnest Sewn Fulton.50 are also similar in size above the knee. Likewise, a made-in-1998 (and heavily worn since then) Helmut Lang "Vintage Classic Denim: Boot Cut" have a similar rise and measurement through to the knee. (The 'Mut "Boot Cuts" taper more from the knee to the hem than the newer jeans!) When I bought those HL's, they were considered skinny jeans!

    Jeans to jeans, they are also considerably smaller/tighter than the other jeans I bought, in PRPS's "Impala" fit. (Farinelli's did not have measurements for those.) Those jeans, along with Rogan Original cut and others, are more my definition of "relaxed fit."

    I work out a little, but not much. Are the KMW 1950, vintage Helmut Lang, Earnest Sewn Fulton and such really considered "relaxed fit" today, or did Chimala lose something in translation?

    NOTE: this post is not a "complaint." The measurements were there, after all, and the jeans are great. They fit me as well as many of my other favorites do! [​IMG] And chances are they will stretch a bit all around.

    But "relaxed fit," subjective though it may be, does not seem appropriate to me.
     
  2. AR_Six

    AR_Six Senior member

    Messages:
    10,770
    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
  3. Davidko19

    Davidko19 Senior member

    Messages:
    2,411
    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Depends who you ask. Here, I think relaxed fit means just a wider leg than normal but not much. Pre-SF relaxed fit for me meant big and baggy. But now a relaxed fit means extra room but not sloppily so.

    I gots big legs and its all subjective. The 2010s I have are my favorite jeans and would consider them "average" for me. The RRDS I have finally stretched out to the point they are comfy but they were nut tight for a while around the ass and thighs - those I woulda called skinny jeans for me. So yea, I dont know what baggy would be for me...
     
  4. ppllzz

    ppllzz Senior member

    Messages:
    4,315
    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    i have a pair of sevens that were relaxed fit but were fairly tight, iirc

    i would say it varies from brand to brand, "slim fit" from brooks brothers is probably not even as slim as the looser fit from boo (can't remember whati ts called... f body?)
     
  5. Sprezzatura2010

    Sprezzatura2010 Senior member

    Messages:
    765
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
  6. eckblk

    eckblk Senior member

    Messages:
    3,469
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    Location:
    San Antonio
    No, 1950.
    http://www.denimbaronline.com/store/...PARTMENT_ID=38

    I bought them at a sale on contextclothing.com sometime in 2008.


    I think JD was saying 2010 would be considered relaxed.

    +1 on the KMW 2010 as a relaxed fit, PRPS impala too.
     
  7. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member Admin Moderator

    Messages:
    33,466
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    "Fit" is all relative. I have tons of jeans archived, and what would have been considered "lowrise" in 2003 would be considered "regular rise" in 2009, and what would be called "slim fit" in 2003 would probably be considered "regular" or even "relaxed" in 2009. This is not limited to jeans and casualwear. I have a suit that was considered slim back in 2001, that I just can't wear now because I feel that it fits like a sack (though really, Helmut Lang never cut any sack suits,) because of the current trend for very slim suits with very short skirts. I remember in the 80s and 90s looking at old pictures of singers from the 70s and late 60's and thinking that they must be ridiculously uncomfortable.
     
  8. Babar

    Babar Senior member

    Messages:
    549
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    Norway
    I had the same experience when trying on my old Helmut Lang Turn Up Cuts (from when the jeans were from a separate Helmut Lang Jeans line) the other day. Back when I got them I felt they were incredibly slender and was pretty unsure of the tapered legs, but now I'd say the fit is more like a repro cut or something.. Back then I'd probably consider my current 19cm Diors to be like a girls jean in comparison, but now I don't even think those look particularly skinny.
     
  9. ppllzz

    ppllzz Senior member

    Messages:
    4,315
    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    on wiki it says helmut use to be known for jeans. is this true?

    edit: everything on wiki is true, what i meant to say is, can one of the people who posted in this thread and have experience with pre theory helmut tell me what it was like?
     
  10. Babar

    Babar Senior member

    Messages:
    549
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    Norway
    on wiki it says helmut use to be known for jeans. is this true? edit: everything on wiki is true, what i meant to say is, can one of the people who posted in this thread and have experience with pre theory helmut tell me what it was like?
    Helmut Lang used to be one of very few designer brands with a great denim line, at a time where most designers either had a pretty uninspired jeans lineup or none at all (i.e Prada, Jil Sander, Gucci etc). He was among the first to do >$200 jeans and denim with intricate finishes, fabrics and washes (jeans with silk blends or polyurethane coating for instance). All the cuts were of course also available in raw and rinse versions that are really quite comparable to APC in terms of styling, but with a higher price tag to boot..
     
  11. lemmywinks

    lemmywinks Senior member

    Messages:
    1,404
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
  12. Rye GB

    Rye GB Senior member

    Messages:
    2,254
    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Location:
    Silverlake
    Relaxed to me is a jean with the following:

    10"+ front rise
    16"+ leg opening

    Hip and thigh measurements are relative to the size that you buy but 21"+ hip and 12+" thigh on a 32" waist I would consider relaxed.
     
  13. uhurit

    uhurit Senior member

    Messages:
    1,136
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Too often I ended up with baggy fit when in fact buying "relaxed" sight unseen. These days to achieve relaxed, I buy slim, sized up one or two. It does the job.
     
  14. modual

    modual Senior member

    Messages:
    701
    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Relaxed to me is a jean with the following:

    10"+ front rise
    16"+ leg opening

    Hip and thigh measurements are relative to the size that you buy but 21"+ hip and 12+" thigh on a 32" waist I would consider relaxed.


    These are pretty much the same measurements of my new standards tagged 28 after stretch
     
  15. Brian SD

    Brian SD Senior member

    Messages:
    9,760
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Relaxed fit to me just means non-constricting, AKA not skinny. That's why I don't trust the term "relaxed fit," because it means so many different things depending on who you talk to.
     
  16. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member Admin Moderator

    Messages:
    33,466
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    For me, if you can get on a bike, squat, and kick in your jeans without any fear that they will split, then they are relaxed.
     
  17. Sprezzatura2010

    Sprezzatura2010 Senior member

    Messages:
    765
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    "Fit" is all relative. I have tons of jeans archived, and what would have been considered "lowrise" in 2003 would be considered "regular rise" in 2009, and what would be called "slim fit" in 2003 would probably be considered "regular" or even "relaxed" in 2009. This is not limited to jeans and casualwear. I have a suit that was considered slim back in 2001, that I just can't wear now because I feel that it fits like a sack (though really, Helmut Lang never cut any sack suits,) because of the current trend for very slim suits with very short skirts. I remember in the 80s and 90s looking at old pictures of singers from the 70s and late 60's and thinking that they must be ridiculously uncomfortable.
    Interesting. I don't follow trends so much, and had no idea that the mean had gotten so much slimmer! So something like an RRDS is now considered "baggy?" Your suit comment surprises me. My cotton HL suit, maybe a 1999, is slimmer than anything I've bought recently. (Since then, most of the suits I've bought have been "work" rather than "fashion": Isaia, RLPL, Paul Stuart, Zegna, BB Golden Fleece, and so on.) The only things that date the HL's cut to me are the shoulders (almost like a fusion between J. Press and Brioni) and the length of the jacket skirt.
    on wiki it says helmut use to be known for jeans. is this true?
    Jeans and t-shirts were what HL did best. Outerwear was nice too. His sneakers (rebadged ReiterSports in HL-exclusive colorways) were really great. There was also a lot of odd fetish-inspired stuff.
    Hip and thigh measurements are relative to the size that you buy but 21"+ hip and 12+" thigh on a 32" waist I would consider relaxed.
    That goes along with what I was thinking. The size-32 (bigger than 32" waist) Chimala buckle-backs are 11" thigh and there's no hip measurement, according to the Farinelli's page. I was surprised at their cut when they came in. Again, I don't want to single out Chimala and I am not complaining, and had I done due diligence I would have known better how they fit by comparing the measurements Farinelli's provides with jeans I already own. They fit me well. But that's because they're cut a lot like most of the jeans I already own!
     
  18. rjacobs

    rjacobs Senior member

    Messages:
    186
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    I think it's about context. Macys's relaxed fit is much different than farinellis's. Farinelliseses.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by