# New Fit from Jack Donnelly



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

For those of you who felt that the rise on the JD slim fit was a tiny bit too low, but wanted something trimmer than the regular JD fit, they now have a third fit, which is in between the two. The rise is slightly higher than slim fit and the leg is slightly fuller. Appropriately, it is called the hybrid fit.



I am ordering a pair today, I will report back as to how they compare with Bills and the like.


----------



## halbydurzell (Aug 19, 2012)

Sonofabitch! Does JD do returns on already tailored pants?


----------



## tocqueville (Nov 15, 2009)

I don't see the need for this fit. Or, rather, of all the ways JD could expand its line, this is not one that would be high on my list.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

Hmm... I've been needing a new pair of chinos.

I'd also be interested in seeing some fit pics any of their cuts on someone in the 38" waist range.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

Good grief, the model photos on that site make the trousers look llike run-of-the mill department store Dockers at best. Such odd poses that seem intent of adding a heavy break and a bow-legged look to every pic.

I'm hard pressed to tell their current fits apart, so I must agree that this is an odd choice of priorities.


----------



## mjo_1 (Oct 2, 2007)

This is a good thing. My first go at JDs were the slims, which were promptly returned. The leg opening was awfully small, and it sort of gave me the tiny leg/giant shoe look. I now have 2 pairs of the regulars, which I love, but I'd also like to try these new ones.

I feel like they ought to ditch the slims and stick with these and the regulars. I suspect this will happen eventually anyway as the "slim" look goes out. (this must be coming soon, as I see plenty of slim suits/pants in downtown OKC. By the time any trend reaches us, there's usually something newer on the horizon) 

I do think they should look into other fabrics, etc. I have JDs for my nicer chinos, and the fabric selection and colors are the only things keeping me coming back to Bills.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

mjo_1 said:


> This is a good thing. My first go at JDs were the slims, which were promptly returned. The leg opening was awfully small, and it sort of gave me the tiny leg/giant shoe look. I now have 2 pairs of the regulars, which I love, but I'd also like to try these new ones.
> 
> I feel like they ought to ditch the slims and stick with these and the regulars. I suspect this will happen eventually anyway as the "slim" look goes out. (this must be coming soon, as I see plenty of slim suits/pants in downtown OKC. By the time any trend reaches us, there's usually something newer on the horizon)
> 
> I do think they should look into other fabrics, etc. I have JDs for my nicer chinos, and the fabric selection and colors are the only things keeping me coming back to Bills.


Yeah, that's sort of my take.

I found the rise on the slim fit (although higher than Bills M3) to still be too low for my taste. I also found the tapering to be a little too much.

I am hoping that these will be the perfect cut, so to speak. The regular fit are a little too full in the seat and thigh for me, although I like their rise.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tilton said:


> Hmm... I've been needing a new pair of chinos.
> 
> I'd also be interested in seeing some fit pics any of their cuts on someone in the 38" waist range.


There is a pic of me wearing the slim fits somewhere in the WAYWT thread, and probably complaining about them. I found them to be kind of short in the rise, although not as short as Bills M3.

I will post some pics once I get these.


----------



## tocqueville (Nov 15, 2009)

I guess I'm happy enough with my slim fits, esp. since the rise is higher than on my Bills M3.

I intend to buy one of the lighter fabric blue pants for this summer. I do like JD very much.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

L-feld said:


> There is a pic of me wearing the slim fits somewhere in the WAYWT thread, and probably complaining about them. I found them to be kind of short in the rise, although not as short as Bills M3.
> 
> I will post some pics once I get these.


1400 pages, man. At least give me an approximate date or something.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tilton said:


> 1400 pages, man. At least give me an approximate date or something.


hahaha, sorry. I really have no idea when I posted it. Let me do a few more Lumosity games and get back to you on that.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

Found it, page 1318. Don't look half bad - not as skinny as I expected. What is the leg opening on your slims and what is the listed size?


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

https://tapatalk.com/tapatalk_image...vZC8xMy8wOS8xMy9vcmlnaW5hbC81YXNlOXk2eS5qcGc=
https://tapatalk.com/tapatalk_image...vZC8xMy8wOS8xNC9vcmlnaW5hbC9hZ2E0YXFhcS5qcGc=


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tilton said:


> Found it, page 1318. Don't look half bad - not as skinny as I expected. What is the leg opening on your slims and what is the listed size?


They're definitely not skinny. The seat and thigh are pretty perfect., but the rise was a little low for my taste. The one in the pic are size 40, but I've dropped another pants size since then, so I'm ordering 38's this time around.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

Is the sizing consistent with, say BB Advantage? I haven't had Bills in a some time but I seem to recall them being a bit snug - whether that was by design or by courtesy of Bosch, I don't know.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tilton said:


> Is the sizing consistent with, say BB Advantage? I haven't had Bills in a some time but I seem to recall them being a bit snug - whether that was by design or by courtesy of Bosch, I don't know.


As far as waist size goes, I think JD's usually measure 1" more than the stated waist size. So a size 38 will measure 39". I can measure the size 40 slims when I get home if you like.


----------



## Charles Dana (Nov 20, 2006)

L-feld said:


> As far as waist size goes, I think JD's usually measure 1" more than the stated waist size. So a size 38 will measure 39".


This is consistent with what Gregg Donnelly told me a couple of months ago.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

The slim fits in size 40 measure 41" in the waist and 17" in the leg opening.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## Himself (Mar 2, 2011)

Tilton said:


> Is the sizing consistent with, say BB Advantage? I haven't had Bills in a some time but I seem to recall them being a bit snug - whether that was by design or by courtesy of Bosch, I don't know.


I have a pair of each, JD Slim and BB Advantage Clark Fit. The JD Slim are quite a bit slimmer, especially in the leg, but have a taller rise by about an inch. Each is an inch bigger in the waist than stated.

Also -- Advantage cloth is unyielding, and restrictive even with the roomier fit, while the JDs are flexible and even a little stretchy.

Bills snug? They're more true to size, or less oversized than most in the waist. But they're pretty big everywhere else!

True to size meaning how they measure, not how they fit compared to others labeled the same size.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

Yes, I meant that as Bill's being true to size in terms of measuring exactly what is stated, but I think the Bill's I've had were all pretty well shrunk down 1" by the time I ever measured them.

The note about the waists being pretty much equivalent to BB Advantage is what I was looking for. I have pants that fit similarly in my closet ranging from 36-41 (interestingly, the outliers on both ends being from the same brand: PRL), so I'm always a bit apprehensive when ordering pants online and generally prefer to buy pants in-store.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tilton said:


> Yes, I meant that as Bill's being true to size in terms of measuring exactly what is stated, but I think the Bill's I've had were all pretty well shrunk down 1" by the time I ever measured them.
> 
> The note about the waists being pretty much equivalent to BB Advantage is what I was looking for. I have pants that fit similarly in my closet ranging from 36-41 (interestingly, the outliers on both ends being from the same brand: PRL), so I'm always a bit apprehensive when ordering pants online and generally prefer to buy pants in-store.


Yeah, I think Bills adds an inch to allow for shrinkage. The Bills m2 cords I bought recently in size 38 definitely measure 39" in the waist.

JD also has guidelines which imply their khakis will shrink if not dry cleaned.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Got the khakis today. Fit is amazing. I'll try to post some pics before I take em to the tailor.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## halbydurzell (Aug 19, 2012)

Awesome. I emailed Gregg and he said I can send in my already hemmed slim fits to be exchanged for these hybrids. That's customer service above and beyond. Looking forward to these pants.


----------



## HerrDavid (Aug 23, 2012)

halbydurzell said:


> Awesome. I emailed Gregg and he said I can send in my already hemmed slim fits to be exchanged for these hybrids. That's customer service above and beyond. Looking forward to these pants.


Wow, that's fantastic! Good on him. Can't wait to see the pics, L-feld; these sound like they'll be right up my alley.


----------



## Tilton (Nov 27, 2011)

L-feld said:


> Got the khakis today. Fit is amazing. I'll try to post some pics before I take em to the tailor.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free


waiting with bated breath....


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tilton said:


> waiting with bated breath....


Hah, sorry. Haven't gotten a chance. I promise I will do it when I get home tonight.


----------



## Mike75 (Jul 18, 2013)

I've been wanting buy some more pairs of Donnelly's (Dalton plain front), but the selection on the website is very thin. Anyone know what is going on?


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Sorry for the blurriness of the photos. It's late and my wife is asleep, so locations for selfies are slim. I think you can get an idea of the fit nonetheless. All of these are size 38.

First off, here are the JD hybrids. These are basically everything I want out of a khaki. The rise is fairly high, but just a hair lower than Bills M2. They are trim in the seat and thigh, but not overly so. And they fall straight from the hip, without a ton of tapering. I am excited to get these hemmed.

Next, here are the All American Khakis. Great deal for the price, as they tend to run around $80ish including cuffs, either from your local men's shop or Beau Ties Ltd. I got these from Eddie Jacobs, but I am pretty sure they are the same fit everywhere. These particular khakis are a slightly finer twill than the JD's, but they also are available in Cramerton Cloth, Poplin, Corduroy, etc. Rise is similar to JD hybrid, but thigh and seat are slightly fuller and the leg is slightly tapered.

And here are Bills M2's for reference. Obviously, they have a slightly higher rise and fuller seat and thigh than the above two.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## nycs10011 (Jun 19, 2014)

*Jack Donnelly Hybrid fit impressions*

I don't see much else about the Jack Donnelly Hybrid fit anywhere else. So I'm updating this older thread with a mini review of my own. I have to say I'm a big fan. I picked up brown cords and the new olive color in the Kickstarter campaign adding to the pair of british khaki I already had.

I usually have a hard time finding pants I like, rises are too low and the legs are too skinny, still I'm on the thin side and don't want full on classic cuts. The Hybrid fit is spot on for me, the material has a good feel, a cut above what I usually find at J. Crew, Banana Republic or Polo in a similar price range. These pants are well put together and should hold up well. I've had no issues with construction so far, though I get my pants dry cleaned so I've avoided a first wash.

At under $100, with semi-regular sales the price point is what I'm looking to spend for a wardrobe staple. I'd like to see some more fabrics and color options in the future. I didn't a lot of help but my interactions with customer service was spot on. I haven't compared the JDs with some of the higher end options like Bill's but I'm quite satisfied and should have all the chinos I need for a long time.


----------



## peterc (Oct 25, 2007)

Are the JD's brushed or napped on the outside? I prefer chinos that have NO nap or brushed finish on the exterior.


----------



## mjo_1 (Oct 2, 2007)

No, they're just normal khaki material. Pretty comparable to Bills original twill fabric.


----------



## peterc (Oct 25, 2007)

Good news indeed! Thank you!


----------



## mjo_1 (Oct 2, 2007)

No problem. Give them a try....I'm sure you'll like them. I feel they represent a better value than Bills, which I see have crept up to $145(!). Around the ~$100 mark is my cutoff for cotton pants.


----------



## Charles Dana (Nov 20, 2006)

peterc said:


> Are the JD's brushed or napped on the outside? I prefer chinos that have NO nap or brushed finish on the exterior.


Just to add to your options, I'll point out that O'Connell's khakis are also made from a non-brushed, non-napped twill. I'm wearing a pair right now, in fact. $99.00. No extra charge for hemming. $7.00 shipping. The only frown is that if O'Connell's does not have your size in stock, there's no telling when they will have it. Stock is replenished on a sporadic and unpredictable basis. I've been waiting several months for oyster-colored khakis in my size to hit the shelves again. I'm on the waiting list and will be contacted when that happens.


----------



## peterc (Oct 25, 2007)

The trouble I have with pants is that I have a 38" waist, but have narrow-ish legs and thighs. In simple terms, when I do not buy the right fitting trouser, I end up with volumes of material behind my thighs and very wide looking pants. For some reason, European manufacturers DO NOT cut trousers like this: I buy a 38 waist in Europe, and it fits me in the waist and is tapered down the leg. Fortunately, this weekend I did find a non Advantage Chino at BB (can't recall the model name, but it is the one with the seersucker fabric pockets and inside waistband). Very nice and well fitting. Used my 15% corp. discount card and with tax it was $91.05. A hair expensive, but they fit properly and look good and are NOT brushed on the exterior at all. Just nice twill. I also have a pair of RLPL Eaton model tan twill trousers that I bought on sale from polo.com. These will arrive shortly and I will advise. The RLBL twill James (I think, it is the one with side tabs) model trouser also fits me well and it should for $350.00 (!) which is the going rate, and I have 2, bought on sale of course. I can't imagine my reaction if I spilled coffee or jam on pants that cost $350.00.

Yes, I know about O'Connell's. Good stuff and vastly under-rated. Their trousers are not so baggy and they have lots of material in the waistband for letting out, so you can actually buy a size down and let out the waist, which works for me FAR better than buying my "correct" size and ending up with baggy pants. Proper baggy pants (like Clacton & Frinton in LA used to make) are, of course, another story. I'd buy pants like that by the 6-pack if I could get them.


----------



## August West (Aug 1, 2013)

Charles Dana said:


> Just to add to your options, I'll point out that O'Connell's khakis are also made from a non-brushed, non-napped twill. I'm wearing a pair right now, in fact. $99.00. No extra charge for hemming. $7.00 shipping. The only frown is that if O'Connell's does not have your size in stock, there's no telling when they will have it. Stock is replenished on a sporadic and unpredictable basis. I've been waiting several months for oyster-colored khakis in my size to hit the shelves again. I'm on the waiting list and will be contacted when that happens.


i have a pair of the OC's khakis, and several pair of JD's. My opinion is that the OC's are cut more like a dress pant, and have a more formal look to them. The OC's are my go to if I'm going to wear khakis with a blazer or sport coat. The JD material is softer and has a little bit more of a broken in feel to it out of the box.


----------

