what the heck is up with clothing measurements these days

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by glocke12, Mar 2, 2011.

  1. glocke12 macrumors 6502a


    Jan 7, 2008
    I've always pretty much have had a 30" length (or inseam I guess) when it comes to pants. The waist has changed, but I have neither shrunk nor grown taller.

    The past few years it seems like whenever I buy pants that have a 30" inseam, they are always at least 2" too long. Im not talking fancy dress pants, but regular old khakis (dockers, savanne, etc)...

    Anyone else notice this??
  2. Don't panic, Mar 2, 2011
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2011

    Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Jan 30, 2004
    having a drink at Milliways
    haha, yes
    it has been going on for a while actually.

    plenty of marketing studies have shown that people tends to purchase more garments if they are of the size they have convinced themselves they wear, or the would like to wear.
    this is especially true for women's garments and i detest it because it makes it particularly difficult to shop clothing for the wifey.
    a dress that was size 6 10 years ago today is size 4 or even 2, so the ladies don't have to face the fact that they grew bigger. pretty sad.

    the inconsistencies between brands are unbelievable, and even within the same brand at different times the 'size' has become completely useless.
    not to mention the small/medium/large system where they don't even try to have any sort of industry standard

    measures used to correspond to actual measurements, but not anymore.
    now they are all relative and allow much more marketing leverage.

    that said, man's pants sizes have remained much more consistent (for example levi's sizes haven't change, i don't think), but not all size 30 have the same waist length.

    edit: here is a link on 'vanity sizing'
  3. rdowns macrumors Penryn


    Jul 11, 2003
    I've had a 30" inseam for as long as I can remember. I have no issues with pants being too long.

    I do have an issue with Old Navy. I have worn a medium boxer brief for years. Bought some new ones and they were tight. Old medium was for 32-34" waist, new medium is 30-32. WTF?
  4. OutThere macrumors 603


    Dec 19, 2002
    The only issue I have with finding a good fit with a 32-33" inseam is that different brands have a different idea of where the pants should hang. Since I tend to wear my pants at my hips, more traditional pants will look really bad. I have noticed that different brands use different rulers in making waistbands—32" at one store is a 30" or 34" at other places. This is particularly true for women...my girlfriend sometimes has trouble finding small enough clothes, as size 0 has been slowly expanding so as to not offend fat American waistlines.
  5. enjoyHeyo macrumors newbie

    Sep 2, 2010
    I believe sizes of clothing should be as standardized as gallons and liters.
  6. iJohnHenry macrumors P6


    Mar 22, 2008
    On tenterhooks
    Thank you. :)
  7. Silencio macrumors 68020


    Jul 18, 2002
    Inseam length is not a big deal. Hemming pants is about the simplest alteration you can get at a tailor. That way, your pants are the exact length you want them.

    Me, I'm amused at the wholesale redefinition of the basic "Small", "Medium", and "Large". I'm 6'2" and slim, and I always used to buy Large button-down shirts and t-shirts 20 years ago and they generally fit me right. Today, I swim in Large garments, and I have to be careful about buying Mediums because they too are often way too big for me. Now I pretty much start with Small and work my way up, if necessary. One designer button-down shirt I even had to buy in a XS! Craziness.

    I guess it doesn't help that 20 years ago I preferred baggier clothes, and now I like garments that fit well or run even slightly small. Fashion does evolve.
  8. Mousse macrumors 68000


    Apr 7, 2008
    Flea Bottom, King's Landing
    It's nice to know it's not just me. For years I've thought my legs have been getting shorter.:p

Share This Page