# What is everyone's inseam and height?



## tman87 (Oct 23, 2009)

I'm just curious what the inseam of pants vs height ratio is for everyone here. I'm 6ft and my inseam is 32.5in


----------



## pkprd869 (Jul 7, 2009)

My height is 5'7" and inseam is approx 29". Based on body build, trouser rise, cut, and break style, even fellas with the same height will likely have different inseams. I use a military (or West Point, guardsmen, slanted) break, so the back is about 1/4"-1/2" longer than the front.


----------



## tman87 (Oct 23, 2009)

is a military break common outside of the military? Never thought about that.


----------



## Scoundrel (Oct 30, 2007)

5'10½"
31.5" (No break)


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

I'm 5'9" and my inseam is about 30" with little break.


----------



## boatshoe (Oct 30, 2008)

6'3" and an inseam of 32". Shocking.


----------



## LanceW (Jun 2, 2009)

6'2"; 32".


----------



## ExpertiseInNone (Nov 5, 2008)

5'9. 31"


----------



## paul winston (Jun 3, 2006)

The inseam varies with an individuals preference - no break, slight break, full break - and an individuals anatomy - long waisted, short waisted, standard. There is no absolute ratio.
Paul Winston
Winston Tailors
www.chipp2.com
www.chipp2.com/blog/


----------



## tman87 (Oct 23, 2009)

Yes I agree, I guess I just want some feedback to get a general ideal of average answers.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

boatshoe said:


> 6'3" and an inseam of 32". Shocking.


Me too, basically. I'm maybe 6'3 & 3/4".

But my pants range in inseams from 31.5" to 34". It all depends on cut, type, rise, etc. As I grow older (and more inclined to the style of the trad forum), I prefer less and less break.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

6'2" height

30" inseam


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

6'1"

32"


----------



## harvey_birdman (Mar 10, 2008)

6'3"
33 inseam.


----------



## 82-Greg (Apr 13, 2008)

6'2"
32"


----------



## flatline (Dec 22, 2008)

Hrm, judging by the replies above, either the population of AAAC is abnormally tall, or mostly just tall folks want to come into a thread like this.

(Incidentally, I am 6'2" with nearly a 33" inseam. Stupid small torso.)


----------



## The Louche (Jan 30, 2008)

Scoundrel said:


> 5'10½"
> 31.5" (No break)


5'10.5"
29.5"
Slight military break


----------



## CuffDaddy (Feb 26, 2009)

5'9", 30". I have stubby, penguin legs.


----------



## tman87 (Oct 23, 2009)

Do you'll tend to wear jeans the same way in terms of break? Or lower on the shoe. (Or higher) Alot of people wear jeans touching or barely off the ground and I want opinions on that. I'm deciding whether to wear my jeans (inseams 33 or 34 usually because of brand) like that, purposely shrink them to about 32 inseam, or have them hemmed to about 32.


----------



## Cardcaptor Charlie (Jul 7, 2008)

5'9"
31 1/2" (slight break)


----------



## Dr. François (Sep 14, 2008)

6'2"
31 inseam (slight break)

Obnoxiously long torso.


----------



## zandago (Apr 14, 2009)

5'7"
29" inseam


----------



## flatline (Dec 22, 2008)

tman87 said:


> Do you'll tend to wear jeans the same way in terms of break? Or lower on the shoe. (Or higher) Alot of people wear jeans touching or barely off the ground and I want opinions on that. I'm deciding whether to wear my jeans (inseams 33 or 34 usually because of brand) like that, purposely shrink them to about 32 inseam, or have them hemmed to about 32.


Not sure what kind of response you're going to get from most of the membership here, but to me, jeans aren't trousers, and I don't wear them as such. They are almost always worn lower on the hips, and I don't think they look good with little/no break. I generally like a decent break.

Too much break:

Too little break:

Right amount of break:


----------



## alex87tkd (Jun 12, 2009)

5ft 8in, 31in, with no break
46" chest and 34" to 36" waist (jeans and dress trousers respectively)


----------



## gumball509 (Oct 12, 2008)

CuffDaddy said:


> 5'9", 30". I have stubby, penguin legs.


LOL

I am 5'8" and 28, I must have shorter stubbier penquin legs.


----------



## rich_202 (Jun 20, 2009)

6'0 

32"


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

6' 0"
31" inseam provides a very slight break.


----------



## Thom Browne's Schooldays (Jul 29, 2007)

paul winston said:


> The inseam varies with an individuals preference - no break, slight break, full break - and an individuals anatomy - long waisted, short waisted, standard. There is no absolute ratio.
> Paul Winston
> Winston Tailors
> www.chipp2.com
> www.chipp2.com/blog/


No doubt true, but this interests me, mainly because I'm self conscious about having short legs.

What does short/long waisted mean exactly?

I'm 6'3", and favor little to no break, my inseam ranges from 32.5", to 35", but I normally buy 34" inseam pants.


----------



## Sufferable Fob (Aug 26, 2009)

I'm 5'7" and would say about ~29-31", but that's not a scientific survey.


----------



## Kenneth Hill (Aug 31, 2008)

5ft. 8 1/2in. 30 in. inseam 1 in. break


----------



## Blueboy1938 (Aug 17, 2008)

Height: 71"
Inseam: 32"
Ratio: 0.45


----------



## cdavant (Aug 28, 2005)

5'6", 28.5". I remember when my waist and inseam were both 29". I think Nixon was President.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

5' 10"

30" inseam (no break)


----------



## coynedj (Jun 1, 2008)

5'11", with a 33" inseam with moderate break.


----------



## 46L (Jan 8, 2009)

6'4"
34" w/ moderate break


----------



## tman87 (Oct 23, 2009)

These are for the most part 1-2 in shorter than I expected, I guess I wear more of a break than most. Gotta take a look at that in the future when buying pants.


----------



## deanayer (Mar 30, 2008)

5'11" with a 33.5 inseam.


----------



## HanSoo417 (Oct 24, 2009)

5'4" 27-28 in. inseam


----------



## caligula455 (Jun 3, 2009)

6' / 31"


----------



## Srynerson (Aug 26, 2005)

6'1" tall; 32" inseam with no break


----------



## Cardinals5 (Jun 16, 2009)

6' tall and 31" inseam (slight break)


Not to derail the thread, but wouldn't the outseam measurement on trousers/jeans be a more accurate (i.e. consistent) measurement to use in order to compensate for different rises?

For example, my trousers/jeans range from 30"-32" inseam, but my outseam measurement is always 42". The caveat with the outseam measurement is, of course, that you must always wear your trousers at the same place on your waist. Am I missing something or is the inseam measurement always going to slightly fluctuate?


----------



## Dhaller (Jan 20, 2008)

6'1" and anywhere from 32" to 34", depending on degree of break.

DH


----------



## Preu Pummel (Feb 5, 2008)

6'4" with a 32" inseam if I want little or no break.

32.5" inseam gives me, in my opinion, too much break. However, it seems the style these days to have ridiculous break and even Shar Pei skin below the calves. I like the clean line of the pants when there is no break: it gives a taller, leaner, cleaner figure. But it has to be done well so you don't look like you are in floods. There's a very particular sweet spot to hit, however, better to have break than floods.


----------



## rabidawg (Apr 14, 2009)

gumball509 said:


> LOL
> 
> I am 5'8" and 28, I must have shorter stubbier penquin legs.


Those are my stats as well. Stubby-legged folks unite!


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

Cardinals5 said:


> 6' tall and 31" inseam (slight break)
> 
> Not to derail the thread, but wouldn't the outseam measurement on trousers/jeans be a more accurate (i.e. consistent) measurement to use in order to compensate for different rises?
> 
> For example, my trousers/jeans range from 30"-32" inseam, but my outseam measurement is always 42". The caveat with the outseam measurement is, of course, that you must always wear your trousers at the same place on your waist. Am I missing something or is the inseam measurement always going to slightly fluctuate?


This, I'm finding, is more correct. Outseam measurements take account of rise, something inseam doesn't.


----------



## CTD (Aug 13, 2009)

6'3", 34" inseam

I went shopping with a female friend once who was shocked that I had ONLY a 34" inseam (which I consider pretty normal) given my height. She CLAIMED to have a 36" inseam at 5'6"--I was and am somewhat skeptical about that. I'm thinking she may have bought jeans iwht 36" inseam with which she regularly wore heels.


----------



## Mr. Golem (Mar 18, 2006)

CTD said:


> 6'3", 34" inseam
> 
> I went shopping with a female friend once who was shocked that I had ONLY a 34" inseam (which I consider pretty normal) given my height. She CLAIMED to have a 36" inseam at 5'6"--I was and am somewhat skeptical about that. I'm thinking she may have bought jeans iwht 36" inseam with which she regularly wore heels.


6'4

34" inseam

Your female friend is right, her inseam is probably longer depending on how tall she is. You're right about the heels part, but I think women's inseams are longer because they length from top the crotch to the top button is much shorter(cos you know there's nothing hanging out there ). So even if the woman is shorter she can have a longer inseam.


----------



## hq0002 (Oct 31, 2009)

5'11" -- 31"


----------



## Sufferable Fob (Aug 26, 2009)

Mr. Golem said:


> 6'4
> 
> 34" inseam
> 
> Your female friend is right, her inseam is probably longer depending on how tall she is. You're right about the heels part, but I think women's inseams are longer because they length from top the crotch to the top button is much shorter(cos you know there's nothing hanging out there ). So even if the woman is shorter she can have a longer inseam.


36" still seems really long to me, even for a woman wearing heels. When I worked at Macy's, most of the women's jeans were cut for heels, and 34" was the longest standard (apart from special styles) inseam we carried.

I also agree that inseam doesn't really say a lot without other information. I'm sure boxers vs briefs would make a difference, as well as where the pants were worn.

Also, it's funny - someone recently commented that my arms looked short - and they concluded that my arms weren't short, the proportion of my legs was long (so my hands didn't fall where they "should" in relation to my thighs, I guess) - so it seems there's quite a lot to factor in.

I never noticed that before, and I'm still confused and don't know what to make of it.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

5' 10"
31 1/2" inseam with moderate break.


----------



## johnpark11 (Oct 19, 2009)

6'2, 33


----------



## Blueboy1938 (Aug 17, 2008)

*OK . . .*

. . . now what are you going to do with all this raw data, and when?


----------



## tman87 (Oct 23, 2009)

lol, I really just wanted to get an idea of whether my inseam was about average or not. I just discovered my true inseam recently when I figured out the reason why I've been buying 30/30 pants is because I wear the seat like low rise when they are supposed to be worn higher. But for you.... I will calculate the average ratio of height to inseam, disregarding style of break of course...


----------



## mt_spiffy (Apr 12, 2008)

6'2", 32" with full break (hem touching the top of the shoe heel).

I usually buy my jeans with a 32-34" inseam.


----------

