10 ms·
Are your pants lying to you? An investigation
- DanielStraight 16y agoThat was enlightening. I guess it's something I should've known, but never thought of. I think what the author dismisses as an impossible solution, however, is exactly the right solution: a government mandate.
- gte910h 16y agoCommercial standards are an excellent use of government. Ever since Sumerian law standardized the size of weights, standardization has been a very important government function.
- wmf 16y agoHeck, we have truth in labeling for monitor and TV sizes, so why not pants?
- flatline 16y agoThe elasticity of the waistband could present problems in some cases, but I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't still be do-able.
- oiuygtfrtghyju 16y agoSo abandon actual inches and just do small/medium/large. But then just like Pizza went from SML -> L/XL/XXL without physically changing then clothes will do the opposite. S/M/L will become "Normal/Small/Thin" -> "Thin/looking good/petite" -> "Petite/elfin/starving" .....
- Maciek416 16y agoThis could present a significant barrier to reliable online shopping for clothes. It'll be interesting to see in the coming years, as more of these retailers offer online ordering (GAP is finally offering their catalog to us Canadians, for example), whether fitting will be normalized somehow, or whether each retailer will instead stick to a specific size translation table as I've seen some places. Either that or someone will have to build a website or tool that aggregates the investigative work for us. I know I'd pay a small premium to eliminate the guesswork. (EDIT: I wish there was a way to OpenID-ify personal body measurements for this purpose so every clothing site I visited could automatically select the best-fitting clothes for me. GAP small/medium t-shirts are wildly different from Threadless' small/medium American Apparel Ts)
- sprout 16y agoIt's hard enough to find well-fitting clothing when you can try it on. I'm not going to be ordering over the net anytime soon.
- grhino 16y agoMany online clothing stores offer a liberal return policy to allow you to try them on.
- sprout 16y agoIf I have to mail it back, I've already wasted more time than I would have just going to a specialty store within 45 minutes of me. Soon I'll be more like 4 hours from the nearest retailer of any sort, so that may change. But I'm somewhat unique in that regard.
- steveklabnik 16y agoMy friends' startup is tackling this issue for shoes, using lasers: http://shoefitr.com/ http://shoefitr.com/ The interface is really, really well done, check out their sample page: http://shoefitr.com/mock_checkout.php http://shoefitr.com/mock_checkout.php and click 'let Shoefitr help you choose the right size.'
- nathanh 16y agoPro pants wearer tip: hold a buttoned pair of pants by the waist and wrap the waist around your neck. If the two ends meet (and you can still breathe), the pants will fit your waist. PS: doing this will get you some weird looks.
- mikecarlucci 16y agoThat just blew my mind.
- jdietrich 16y agoIt's a headrush to think that vanity sizing may be leading men to underestimate their waist size, potentially to the detriment of their health - taken to a logical conclusion, vanity sizing may be killing people. We live in a very strange world.
- Qz 16y agoReplace 'men' with 'women' and it's already true. It's not really that strange, we just like to think that certain things are innocuous, when really almost nothing is.
- jdminhbg 16y agoI'm not sure I see the connection between vanity sizing and health. I don't think men think to themselves "34 inches is healthy" -- they pretty much only care how they measure in comparison to other men. You can call it 34 or 40, it doesn't impact the question of "am I fatter than my competition?" Put another way, I don't think men would be likely to go on diets if you immediately renumbered pants sizes, as long as they were still in the same place relative to other men.
- blahedo 16y agoThis is why it keeps getting harder for me to find a pair of pants that fits me. I have a 28-1/2" waist (and I'm a guy), and most stores' listed sizes only go down to 30. The good news is, since few people wear their pants at their waists anymore (even "conservative" non-saggy styles usually put the waistband halfway between true waist and hip), the size of a waistband really should be a couple inches larger than your actual waist measurement. Just not six inches. (At least, not on most men. Women on average have much more differential between their waist and hip measurement, but the popular fit is also all different, so I'm going to sidestep that for now.)
- elblanco 16y agoSerious question, have you tried looking in the teen/young adult section? I think the biggest size there is around a 28".
- kes 16y agoI also have this problem, but I'm too tall for that. I'd end up with 6-8 inches of ankle showing if I did that.
- Brashman 16y agoI'm in a similar situation to you. I'm skinny and also short. This might explain why I noticed that shirts I found at The Gap seemed to fit better (were smaller) than ones I found at Old Navy.
- jules 16y agoConsider yourself lucky. My waist size is 26. There are only a couple of pants that are wearable without a belt (I hate belts). I have found the stores sizes to be pretty consistent and accurate. Here's a tip: try on the kids pants. They are often a bit too short, but the waist size is much better. The worse thing is t-shirts. They often fit like dresses as opposed to t-shirts.
- anigbrowl 16y agoI have the same problem - unusually skinny, baggy clothes make it look worse. Levis fortunately fit me, and European brands like H&M are fairly reliable. Protip #1: try clothes in store, buy online via Gilt or one of those discount shopping websites. When they have something you want, the discounts are often amazing, though you have to make quick decisions because small sizes often sell out fast. Most of these sites are very good on reporting the sizes correctly or helping you convert US-EU. Protip #2: you can't wear jeans and a nice-fitting black top your whole life unless you're Steve Jobs. And designer menswear can get very pricey...but a good tailor can make an something with an average fit look absolutely perfect. Buy sizes that fit comfortably where you're largest (eg my neck wants a 38 shirt even though my shoulders and chest aren't) and then pay a few $ extra to have the garment altered. This might add $30 or $40 to the price of a shirt, but suddenly you'll have access to a world of things that don't exist in your size, and it will actually be worth looking at what's on sale. the discounts will easily pay for the alterations, and after a while you have a bunch of stuff in your closet that fits well, whether casual or business. Dressing actually becomes enjoyable instead of a chore.
- elblanco 16y agoSome of this is also due to poor QC at the manufacturers. I went out pants shopping just this past weekend and tried three of the same pants of exactly the same size and all three fit drastically differently, from absurdly small-couldn't-get-it-over-my-thighs to so ginormous they looked like clown pants and had a hugely saggy crotch. And it wasn't a cheapo store either. But I had to mindful that there was a reason I was able to find decent work slacks for $20. Pant sizes should really just be "guidelines" unless you are getting something custom tailored.
- pfeyz 16y agoApparently the men's measurement in US standard clothing size corresponds to chest size in inches, so the waist measurement was intended to be smaller than the listed size. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_standard_clothing_size#Men http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_standard_clothing_size#Men
- btilly 16y agoI've wondered about this. I've worn a 34"-34" pant for the last 20 years, and I know my waist has expanded over that time. It just didn't add up. On fixing the meaning of the sizing, I'm reminded of someone I knew who took a sewing class in highschool. They started with patterns from the 1950s, and despite the teacher warning the students how different the sizings would be, virtually nobody managed to make clothing that they could squeeze into. Personally I think the best solution is to make it a matter of law that the sizing be accurate. Everyone would hear that the sizing changed dramatically, there would be a brief transition, and we'd soon get used to accurate sizes. Drawing it out gradually would force people to keep on relearning their size, and overall would be more disruptive.
- city41 16y agoNot to mention it might be a bit of motivation to lose some weight.
- AndrewHampton 16y agoI really hope something this trivial doesn't merit the time of Congress. Unfortunately, I wouldn't be surprised if it did.
- tomjen3 16y agoTrivial? It might seem so, but it does actually fall well within the area the founders gave congress (surely this is both weights and measurements and interstate commerce). "Fixing" the standard size would be fraud, as they don't sell the actual product that they claim to sell.
- dantheman 16y agoWould you mandate your system or sizing? What if they just changed their form of measurement? Or they said recommended size? Is this a problem you are constantly facing? I don't have any difficulty buying pants - why do we need a law?
- 16y ago
- tel 16y agoThat graph is seriously misleading! At first glance I was tempted to conclude that Old Navy was selling pants twice as big as advertised (instead of merely 14%). I'll forgive the gaudiness, but it's important to note the human tendency to compare ratios of sizes and so to always include 0 in bar graphs.
- lincolnq 16y agoFurthermore they're trying to use the "measuring tape" metaphor, but it doesn't apply (the tape is not actually measuring the belt pictured, making the graph hard to understand). The belt pictures are not useful in this case (since it's not a ratio graph) and they're just distracting.
- rlivsey 16y agoI've just measured all my pairs of 34" jeans and they are consistently 36". I only buy Paul Smith these days because I've come to know that they will fit me well without having to shop around. Last time I was measured for a suit I came out at almost exactly 34", but then the fitting for suit trousers is much more snug than those for jeans. I wear a belt with my jeans whereas I'd expect trousers to hold themselves up. So on that basis, I'm not too surprised that jeans made to fit a 34" waist are an inch or two larger, but more than that seems a little crazy.
- handelaar 16y agoConversely, when we visited the US in January I bought three pairs of jeans whose inside leg measurements were understated by an average of 4 inches. My 30"-leg trews turned out to be no less than 34" long from the inner seam. I can't for the life of me figure out why a US customer would want to pretend they're shorter than they really are. (Mostly I'm annoyed because getting them fixed at home adds 50% to the price, negating the entire reason for purchasing them in the first place. And yes, two of the three were bought at Old Navy.)
- jdminhbg 16y agoGiven the general quality at Old Navy, I wonder if the vast over-sizing of the waist and your observed under-sizing of the inseam are really just artifacts of sloppy work. I've personally gotten pants from the them that were much skinnier than the same size at other stores. I'm not sure how big a sample size Esquire used, but maybe Old Navy just suck at QA.
- electromagnetic 16y agoIt's artifacts of sloppy work. I regularly hit the inseam problem, I have to push for a 28" inseam, when in tailored pants I'm a 32". However I noticed waist size can frequently vary by as much as 4" as well, but sometimes I get a pair that fit perfect again. I did notice that costco's Kirkland pants are regularly 2" narrower in the waist than Old Navy (for anyone who cares). I think the problem is that pants are being labelled as a 36x36 when they're actually more a 40" waste, causing the inseam to be made closer to a 40" too.
- blasdel 16y agoThere was a trend recently for rolled cuffs on jeans, started because people wanted to show off the inside seam of their $200 'selvedge' denim. It helps me out a lot because my inseam really is that long.
- leif 16y agoHeh, heh. "FatMax"
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- bootload 16y agoRED LEADER Keep up your visual scanning. With all this jamming, they'll be on top of you before your scope can pick them up. [0] As purchasers the sellers don't want you to know what size you are. It's in their interests not to tell you. Forget what the labels are telling you. Wear the same belt. If you're a belt-watcher like myself you'll see any changes in weight like rings on a tree over time. [0] Star Wars IV script "leader telling squad to ignore the scopes & use your eyes instead" ~ http://corky.net/scripts/StarWars.html http://corky.net/scripts/StarWars.html
- J_McQuade 16y agoAs somebody who has recently shed a large amount of weight - and has thus been forced to undergo a wallet-shattering number of wardrobe-replacements - this does not surprise me a bit. A drop of eight inches in waist over about 9 months means that, at any one point, you just never really know what size you actually are, which leads to the useful habit of trying everything on before you buy it - and boy, did I notice a difference in the sizing between various brands and outlets! A couple of months ago, for instance, I bought two pairs of trousers on one day - one pair from a department store where I could use the changing rooms provided to ascertain that I needed a 34", and one from a more "discount warehouse" type place that was having a rather cracking sale. Having tried the first pair on in the department store, I was chuffed - "Great, I'm in a 34!" - and so automatically bought the same size in a pair of jeans from the second place (with no changing rooms), because the price was right. They were at least two inches too big. I'd just bought two pairs of bottoms, in identical sizes, that had clearly been designed with two totally different ideas of how tape-measures actually work. I learned my lesson and swore never to pay for anything I haven't tried. I also bought a tape measure of my own - and learned how to bloody well use it!
- CWuestefeld 16y agoI bought two pairs of trousers on one day - one pair from a department store ..., and one from a more "discount warehouse" type place I've found that even within a single store, looking at the same model of Levi's jeans, I need to try each individual pair. I always wear the same thing: Levi's 505 34W 30L. But I find that individual specimens with this exact tag can be as much as an inch different in every dimension: waist diameter, inseam length, and even leg diameter at the hem. So this isn't just vanity. It's also a question of horribly loose tolerances in manufacturing.
- kleevr 16y agoMy mother, who has worked as a seamstress, says that when they cut the fabric for the patterns, the pattern cut can vary as much as 2 inches depending on whether the fabric was on the top or bottom of the stack being cut. (Though I'm sure the error margin might be lower these days than they were before.)
- ww520 16y agoThey should have used a makeup system like size A-F. Then they can re-calibrate the actual size every couple years without people noticing. Indirect pointers have given programmers grief; think the general public is any wiser? Ha!
- ews 16y agoQuick side note since I am at work: In 2007 the Spanish Government ruled by law the clothing sizes for women aged 12+, as an attempt to stop anorexia and other eating disorders. They detected a trend among some high profile clothing companies to artificially 'shrink' the sizes of dresses and jeans, imposing an artificially skinny 'average body shape' The Ministry sampled several thousand of women ( http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1265873.ece http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article12... ) as an effort to find some average body shape and standardize clothing sizes. I don't know is that affected the spread of eating disorders in the country somehow. I don't live in Spain any longer and this is nothing I usually talk about with my friends from the other side of the Atlantic. I know that Americans are usually opposed to government intervention, but I consider that a central 'authority' has some value in setting standards in measuring units. (A mile is a mile, in California, Colorado, Liberia or Burma)
- blahedo 16y ago> (A mile is a mile, in California, Colorado, Liberia or Burma) I see what you did there. (nicely done)
- kreek 16y agoMy wife is a fashion designer and she's told me that although every woman wants to be a size six the average American woman is now a size 14. For all the stick fashion houses get about skinny models you'd be hard pressed to find clothes that even fit them at your local mall. Thanks to my high metabolism (I'm the most unfit fit looking person ever) I have a 32" waist yet if I buy 32" pants I'm absolutely swimming in them. Shirts are even worse it's impossible to get a 16" collar to someone my height (6'2"). I've thought many time of starting-up a clothing company for 'skinny & tall' guys. As others have mentioned the best bests are the European brands like H&M or Zara. The only real American choices are Calvin Klein or teen focused brands like Hollister.
- jodrellblank 16y agoI'm already too tall for ordinary height clothes, too thin and often too short for ordinary big&tall shops. If you start 'skinny and tall' shops please don't make me too fat for those by catering for only 32" waists! I've thought many a time of starting a clothing company for 'me'. 6 billion people in the world, there must be a market of me-shaped people somewhere?
- igravious 16y agoAhhh, inches. How quaint! Now there's a hacker's challenge. Finally get the US (and whoever) to get with the 21st century. Yes I know this comment is sort of off-topic, well ... kinda - the article is about measurement. But honestly this thought wanders through my mind like a lonely guy at a single's bar whenever I spy "old-style" units. I'm going to be provocative here, but I think all the excuses all bull (they're more natural, yada yada yada) - basically the US (and whoever) think they are Numero Uno and the rest of the world be damned.
- matrix 16y agoI was/am in the preliminary stages of researching and testing a product for dealing clothing fit issues. In the course of this, I learned far more about clothing sizing than any sane person should know. I can tell you that vanity sizing is something of a myth - it's really size inflation. What's happening is this: Consumers have an expectation of being able to buy the same size forever, and buy clothes accordingly. Size 34 waist 10 years ago? Just grab size 34 from the rack. Of course, people gain weight and should go for a larger size. But they don't - they still see themselves as a size 34 and keep buying it. And complaining or moving on to the competitor when it doesn't fit. The problem is even worse for women's clothing for reasons too lengthy to go into here. The only reliable solution is a system similar to the European standard, EN 13402. With this system, the fit tolerance (range of body dimensions it is designed for) for the item is listed on its hang tag. This gets away from issues like styles that are designed to have very large amounts of ease, or elastic fabrics. For those that are thinking of building a product in this space, another thing to keep in mind is that most customers just don't care that much about good fit. Sad, but true.