Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[REVIEW] Charles Tyrwhitt Pants/Trousers: a review for posterior posterity.

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

    #16
    The 34" waist pants arrived this morning and I just had a chance to try them on. The 34" waist is snug, but the increase in waist size has made the calves and thigh loose. The 34" from Tyrwhitt is snugger than the 32" from every other brand that I own. The trousers are also an inch shorter than my other 30" inseam chinos.

    In short, the trousers marked 34"x30 actually measure 32"x29".

    PS: Ass-shots to come in the morning when the morning light can due justice to my posterior.
    Last edited by bruschetta; April 3, 2013, 05:00 PM.

    Comment


      #17
      Update #2: I exchanged the slim fit pants for "classic fit" pants with the same waist size. The waist of these pants is 1-2" wider than the waist of the slim fit pants, and the leg is very baggy. On the plus side, the inseam of these pants was accurate for the first time. My ass looks less fantastic in these, but I am going to keep them and have my tailor fix that.

      In summary: Charles Tyrwhitt pants are sized poorly, but of decent quality for the price. My advice would be to size up 2" in the waist and add 1" to the length. Go for the extra slim fit if you want the chino equivalent to jeggings. Chiggings? The slim/tailored fit is a good option for men with absolutely no ass. The classic fit is for people who want to pay their tailor to shape the pants (me).

      Comment

      Working...
      X