Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A healthy discussion about pants leg break

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Vovan
    replied


    Great thread!

    I found that for my slim legs (and slightly curved inside at the bottom) no break to 1/4 break works best Anything longer, and the pant starts to break TO THE SIDES of my legs which looks as if my legs were broken - pretty ridiculous look, I tell ya.

    It took me a while to figure this out but I found my break.


    I agree with most posts here - it is a matter of personal preference - if you are young - go with the current trends - you can probably pull it off; if you are an older gentleman - a fuller and more conservative break will most likely be your choice...

    At the end of the day, wear what suits you best!

    Leave a comment:


  • LesserBlackDog
    replied


    Appropriate break is also tied to pant style. No break looks best on slim, tapered pants, but looks totally wrong on a straight leg pant. Straight leg looks best with a half break, in my opinion. Slim pants with anything more than the slightest of breaks look pretty off, too.


    The fact that your socks show is not an indication that your pants have too little break, however. It's perfectly acceptable to show a little bit of sock, especially when you are moving or sitting down.


    I tend to get my suit pants and dress trousers with a medium break. I find that the medium break is cleaner looking than a full break, but still conservative and not too "fashionable." A few of my casual pants have no-break... my jeans all have a half break.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sigtweed Corduroy
    replied


    Some great posts here.


    I keep thinking to myself in 3 years once the ankle bearing fad has died down you'll have a massive collection of men with a ton of pants hemmed to lengths which would be considered too short.

    Leave a comment:


  • kenneth
    replied


    @NC - That was pretty much what the commenter said, that casual pants provide for more break and that dress trousers call for less.

    Leave a comment:


  • nicholascrawford
    replied


    Anyone is welcome to sing the praises of short pants, but as has already been mentioned, it's a look that will only impress a handful of other men and will strike everyone else as high water pants that you outgrew. If that's a trade-off you're willing to make, so be it. I'm up for it sometimes.


    Only thing I would disagree with in this thread is the comment that casual pants get more break and dress pants get less. It's totally the reverse. Casual provides for looser fits and more break. Formal requires sharp tailoring and the finely targeted break that goes along with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ursus
    replied


    I learned the guardsman hem when I first was taught to hem my own trousers. About a third of my trousers have been hemmed this way (by me). They have the slightest of breaks, 1/2 I suppose, but the slant saves me from constantly worrying that I might be showing an indecent amount of sock/ankle. I'm also 6'5." So, showing too much ankle just makes me feel as though my trousers are too short.

    Leave a comment:


  • BB
    replied


    I think there's a big difference between "negative break" and "no break." Negative break will likely look ridiculous in a decade or less. No break for slightly tapered pants won't.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cause Moe
    replied


    "with the caveat that if you haven't been paying close attention to clothes for long, then what you're comfortable with may be different from what looks best."


    I'd correct that to "what looks current." What looks best is an individual decision, and some of us prefer a classic timeless style rather than what is currently in fashion. In the early 1970's, huge flares at the angle 4" lapels, and 5" breastplate ties were in fashion, yet now, photos from that era don't necessarily look the best. Ten or fifteen years later, 1" ties, and sportcoat sleeves pushed up past the elbows were in style. Today, that looks as dated as the 1970's look.


    In my opinion, the current trend for high-water pants, showing 4-6 inches of bare ankle, is something I'm not willing to take on for myself. I believe that it will look as ridiculous as other temproary fashions, in retrospect.


    One of the reason for the "break" is so that the hem of the trousers rests on the shoes, avoiding swaying back and forth in the breeze while walking. Of course, with the current fashion of pants as tight as tights, there's no swaying. There's also the issue of how much sock to flash (or in today's fashion, how much ankle).


    To some, this is a generational thing. The younger men are always more attacted to the latest fashion, while older gentlemen tend to be more timeless. For me, ever since I was a young teenager, I've tried to take my inspiration from the past fifty years or more of fashion, as well as the look of men of all ages. If you're trying to imnpress other men (not that there's anything wrong with that), you may disagree. But I've always found that ladies are more attracted to timeless style than to fleeting fashion.


    So for me, the "everything's coming up Milhouse" flood pants look like a passing fad. I like my trouser hems to rest on my shoelaces.

    Leave a comment:


  • akosmowski
    replied


    I am a ful break type of man. Then again, as I am tall, I am a little self-conscious at times about my height.


    (Please remove this repeat!)

    Leave a comment:


  • akosmowski
    replied


    I am a ful break type of man. Then again, as I am tall, I am a little self-conscious at times about my height.

    Leave a comment:


  • zerostyle
    replied


    I've struggled with the same question OP:


    My pants right now are probably somewhere between no break and quarter break (though closer to no break). The "no break" picture there is kind of hard to see because he is wearing boots instead of a balmoral.


    As you mentioned, if you're not moving, no break is perfect. However, as soon as I start walking a tiny amount of sock will show. I think this is acceptable, but quarter break is probably the best thing to aim for.

    Leave a comment:


  • Standard_Deviance
    replied


    I'm in the go with what you're comfortable with camp, with the caveat that if you haven't been paying close attention to clothes for long, then what you're comfortable with may be different from what looks best. Kind of like when guys switch from relaxed fit jeans to 514s they think the 514s are nut huggers: they feel uncomfortable because they don't have the context for understanding that seems, comparatively, tight is actually quite normal-fitting and better looking. Not saying that's necessarily happening in your case, but it's something to be mindful of if it applies.

    Leave a comment:


  • hornsup84
    replied


    I'd stick with a quarter, personally. I like flashing a little sock when I'm moving, sitting down, crossing my legs, etc. Right now, quarter is probably the "most" you want from your fashion trend guys (thus the comments you mention above), but honestly go with what you're most comfortable with.

    Leave a comment:


  • jose_jackson
    replied


    Alright that helps a lot. These are quarter break pants. I'm thinking about getting them let out .5-1.0 inches to perhaps a half break.

    Leave a comment:


  • hornsup84
    replied


    This has a good explanation of pant break terminology (without hitting on the "negative break" (nice term for it, btw, Kenneth)):


    http://www.primermagazine.com/2012/l...nciples-of-fit

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X