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.
Hey guys, dunno if this has been other people's experience as well, but I found the moleskin westerns to fit a full size smaller than the flannel versions.
View attachment 1705677
Hey guys, dunno if this has been other people's experience as well, but I found the moleskin westerns to fit a full size smaller than the flannel versions.
View attachment 1705677
Yes. In the moleskins, I tried two sizes and liked the size up in the chest (more slouchy), but the arm openings and length were wayyyyy too big. The TTS for me was "correct" but I found it a touch slim in the chest/shoulders for my current preferences. It's a great shirt though!
Any shrinkage to expect from the molsekins?
Bump. Anyone?
Bump. Anyone?
So Flannels = size down, molskines = TTS (or up).
Has anyone bought one of the herringbone work shirts yet?
Pretty sure it's flannels = size down and moleskins = TTS
"intended fit"
View attachment 1707333
Also, 18'' shoulder measurement for a size M, if this does indeed equate to a size L ("size down"), is pretty damn small imho.
Just saying what everyone else said at the top of this page. I think most people have sized down on the flannel and went TTS for moleskin.