# Orivs khakis



## Commander Caractacus Pott (Oct 9, 2009)

I recently picked up a pair of Orvis Ultimate Khakis and have found them to be very well made and generously cut. I would recommend them to all that appreciate quality casual trousers. They are priced at $79.


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

Just bought two pair, have not worn them yet. Also right now they are 2 for $99. From other threads the only negative I have heard is that the buttons are not secured very well. I asked Orvis to have the tailor secure them better when they are hemming the pants. We'll see.


----------



## Commander Caractacus Pott (Oct 9, 2009)

Thanks for the heads up on the buttons.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

In a recent thread concerning the new Docker K1 Chinos I wrote this about my two new pair of Orvis Ultimate Khakis. ) (still two pairs for $99.-)

If you hadn't been so specific I'd say they have a more traditional rise. I wouldn't call it long but it's darn sure not a short rise,...

I'm wearing a pair today and the top aspect of the pant is touching the inferior aspect of my umbilicus. (Belly button) For me, if I worn them opne inch below my Belly button it might look like I'm carrying a "Load" in my pants from behind!

But as I've mentioned the weight of the 100% cotton, (9.2oz) and the details of the construction are top notch, every bit as good as Bill's, if not slightly better.

Again, I just wish the leg openings were one quarter to half an inch wider.

Good luck,


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

127.72 MHz said:


> ...
> But as I've mentioned the weight of the 100% cotton, (9.2oz) and the details of the construction are top notch, every bit as good as Bill's, if not slightly better.
> 
> Good luck,


+1. The fabric of the Orvis Ultimate Khakis is every bit as hardy as that used in the Bill's Anniversary Twills, which I paid (IIRC) $155 a pop for. At two pair for $99, what a value! :thumbs-up:


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

I have two pairs of Orvis Khakis, one in khaki and one in sage green ( pleats were sewn one way on left side and t'other way on the right side on the green pair!)

However I think they're great and good value for money. The cloth and the stiching are the best in a pair of Khakis I've seen. I'd definitely buy them again.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

I just noticed in a new Orvis catalog that their "Ultimate Khakis" are back up to $79.- a pair.



I'll buy more if they ever go back down. (2 for$99.-)


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

Still 2 for $99 online until Feb 21.


----------



## Naval Gent (May 12, 2007)

I'm a fan of Orvis Ultimates as well. I have two pair -bought at different times for full fare. My quibbles are the green buttonhole stitching and the funky little clip in the pocket. That clip thing is easily disposed of, though. 

I like the way they are a bit roomy through the crotch and seat, but not billowy in the leg.

Scott


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

Funny you mentioned the little metal clip inside the pocket. I didn't complain about it because I cut it out prior to washing them. They should not have added that feature. It will wear/tear through fairly quickly. (just like a little metal "D" ring did on my fourteen pocket Orvis poplin safari toursers)

Best,


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Naval Gent said:


> I'm a fan of Orvis Ultimates as well. I have two pair -bought at different times for full fare. My quibbles are the green buttonhole stitching and the funky little clip in the pocket. That clip thing is easily disposed of, though.
> 
> I like the way they are a bit roomy through the crotch and seat, but not billowy in the leg.
> 
> Scott


Love the green buttonhole stiching though:icon_smile:

I thought the clip in the pocket was to put your keys on thus saving your pocket?


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

That *is* what the little clip is for but while it may or may not serve it's purpose it definitely will, in time, rip off damaging the pocket.

It also will, with laundering, quickly begin to show through leaving a mark clearly visible on the frount of the trouser.

I've had bad luck with Orvis clips and "D" rings ruining clothing.


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

Just got mine back from hemming. Length is slightly long to allow for shrinking but I really hope the waist doesn't shrink because they are perfect right now and the next size up made me look like I had a load in my pants. I'll report back on the shrinking in a few hours. Thank goodness for the 100% return policy.


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

Does anyone know if last years Ultimates where a heavier weight? Mine say 9.5 ounce in the tag and where priced at $69. The current ones online say 9.2 ounce and are priced at $79. I also remember that in the store when I asked for the 2 for $99 they couldn't find match up the stock number for the ones in the store with the ones online. Hmmm... all other features are the same (green stitching, key hook..)


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
Perhaps purchased by Orvis under two different purchase orders?


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

I don't know, but I wore them for the first time today. Very little shrinking from the washer/dryer. Very comfortable and wonderfully heavy. I'm in the Navy and they remind me of my "wash khakis" weight wise, except these are nice and soft .


----------



## Exquisite Decay (Dec 22, 2009)

chacend said:


> Still 2 for $99 online until Feb 21.


I just ordered two and noticed that the 2 for $99 offer has been extended to May 24, 2010."


----------



## Enron (Feb 16, 2010)

After reading about how awesome these khakis were, i headed out to the Orvis store in Buckhead yesterday to try a pair on. The fabric was awesome and they were VERY well constructed, but.........

They. Are. Huge.

As in the most enormous pair of pants that I have ever had on in my 30+ years of life on this planet. MC Hammer huge. Bobby Brown danced around in these in one of his videos from the late 80s, i think. I was quite disappointed. Been looking for some nice khakis in a shorter inseam that weren't garbage like the ones i used to wear from the Gap or JCrew, and the two great khaki hopes I had were Orvis and Bills and it seems that both are just far too roomy.


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

If you think these are huge stay away from Bill's. I own both and fine these fairly slim.


----------



## burton (Nov 11, 2007)

^^
Are the Orvis khakis closer to the fit of the Bills M1 or the M2?


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

Definitely closer to M2.


----------



## Taken Aback (Aug 3, 2009)

I have a few, and I love them, but I see myself thrifting another than buying outright. Even $50 a pop seems a lot when the ones you have still look so good.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

What is the rise like on the Orvis khakis?

Now that I've discovered the comfort of long rises, it would be tough to go back to a short one.


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

Definitely not a low rise. I wear mine right about the bottom of my belly button. They don't look right worn any lower. Also don't think you could wear them much higher than right at the belly button.


----------



## Enron (Feb 16, 2010)

So I finally got around to the one place in atlanta that carries Bill's today and tried on a pair...Chacend, you told me a lie! The Bills M2s are nowhere near as huge as the Orvis were! The M2s legs were far slimmer. I had originally intended to try them on there and then buy 'em off the 'bay if they fit, but the salesman was so helpful that I felt that it would have been wrong not to reward him with a sale.


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

If that's the case then one of these two companies has some quality control issues. My Bill's are much roomier than my Orvis.


----------



## kamper (Apr 11, 2010)

*Orvis Khakis...pleated or not?*

Hello to all! I am a new member to the Forum, but have enjoyed lurking for the past several months.

I came across the Orvis khakis at my local store and have pretty much decided on picking up two pair while they are on sale. With that said, I have to admit that I am a HUGE fan of Bill's, with a preference towards the pleated models. The pleats in the Orvis khakis did not seem very deep. What seems to be the preferences regarding the pleated version for those of you who have purchased the Orvis khakis?

Looking forward to future conversations!

Best regards...


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

They're may be a few, but most of us on the Trad forum prefer plain front.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

There are people on this forum who OWN pleated pants?!

I have a couple of suits with them actually, but that's about it. 

I kid because I love.


----------



## kamper (Apr 11, 2010)

OK, OK, I guess I'm the weird one! Actually, my dresss slacks for both suits and sportcoats are pleated. I think it gives a nicely finished, draped look when used with finer fabrics. When it comes to heavier khakis, etc., I think you guys are right. These fabrics do not lend themselves to pleats very well. 

I think I'll live life on the edge and go with the plain front Orvis. 

Thanks for the responses and enjoy your week!


----------



## Joe Tradly (Jan 21, 2006)

I got my first pair of two (ordered at the same time, sent separately) about two weeks ago. Arrived with the specified 1 3/4" cuff (which I did through customer service). 

I can say definitively my search for khakis is over. I love these trousers. They are exactly what I've been looking for. My complaints are I wish they had a slightly sturdier waistband and I wish they had an adjustable waist so I could more easily take them in and out with the, ahem, seasons.

Other that that, fit is perfect for me, weight and color of the fabric, perfect. I love them.

JB


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

Joe,
Recommend reenforcing all the buttons sooner rather than later. I had this done by the store when they were being altered and mine have held up well. Lost buttons is the only common complaint about these wonderful khakis.


----------



## MacT (Feb 16, 2008)

After a month, I can say I really like these chinos. The button stitching seems solid on mine. I bought online after trying on a pair at a retail store, and the 2 pairs I received seem less baggy than the ones I tried on. Just right, IMO, though the variation makes me think there is more than one supplier for these pants. Like Joe, I used the online chat to specify cuff size, and they hit the mark. After one wearing, I cut out the left pocket D-rings-- they just seemed superfluous & in the way. Even though the fabric is pretty substantial, they breathe well, and have been comfortable on hot days. 

The 2 for 99 pricing was extended again to July 12, so there's still time to take advantage of that deal. I think most of you will like 'em.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
With five months of wear time, during which the Orvis Ultimate Khakis have been worn perhaps 12 to 15 times and been through six to eight wash/dry cycles (not including the three washes, to address shrinkage prior to hemming the legs), the trousers have yet to show any wear...they still look almost new, fresh out of the packaging!


----------



## MacT (Feb 16, 2008)

Good to hear, Eagle. They certainly seem built to last. As if I needed more chinos, I would get a couple of pairs in olive, if they made them in that color.


----------



## twon12 (Aug 30, 2010)

Over priced.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
Not if purchased on sale at two pair for $99. Premium khakis at less than $50 a pair seems pretty reasonable to me. After being in service for a bit over seven months now, mine are just beginning to show signs of some minor fading. However, their is no fraying to be noted on either pair, as yet! :thumbs-up:


----------



## chacend (Mar 4, 2008)

twon12 said:


> Over priced.


Compared to what?


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

twon12 said:


> Over priced.


At two pairs for $99.-? Who makes your favorite pair of khakis and what do you pay for them?


----------



## Dragoon (Apr 1, 2010)

I keep meaning to buy some of these pants. They keep extending the 2 for $99 offer but it may be gone after today.


----------



## MidWestTrad (Aug 14, 2010)

I've bought these before and just picked up a two more pairs at the 2 fer $99 price. My thighs are pretty stout so I appreciate the roomy aspect, makes them that more comfortable for casual wearing. In the past I've found that they do shrink a bit over time so I sized up a touch on this last purchase.


----------



## fishertw (Jan 27, 2006)

Just finally decided to pull the trigger on a couple of pair and found that they seem to be no longer offered at the 2fer$99 price. Saw them in San Francisco in April and just kept delaying the buy. Snooze and you loose.
Tom


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

twon12 said:


> Over priced.


What isn't. Very little.


----------



## Dragoon (Apr 1, 2010)

fishertw said:


> Just finally decided to pull the trigger on a couple of pair and found that they seem to be no longer offered at the 2fer$99 price. Saw them in San Francisco in April and just kept delaying the buy. Snooze and you loose.
> Tom


Their site says through Sept. 7. If it won't give you that price on the online checkout, call them.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

As much as I don't want to revive a dead thread, this is the place to do it.

Could someone tell me, roughly, what is the rise on the Orvis ultimate khakis? (Just subtract your inseam from the outseam.) I'd like to order a few pair, but I'm not especially near a store.


----------



## Walter Denton (Sep 11, 2011)

I'm a real fan of the Orvis Ultimates. They are a near perfect fit for me and excellent quality fabric. I measure the rise at 11.5".


----------



## MKC (Sep 10, 2010)

Walter Denton said:


> I'm a real fan of the Orvis Ultimates. They are a near perfect fit for me and excellent quality fabric. I measure the rise at 11.5".


I don't own a pair, but a year ago the Orvis online assistant said the rise was 10.5 on a 38 waist.


----------



## MKC (Sep 10, 2010)

MKC said:


> I don't own a pair, but a year ago the Orvis online assistant said the rise was 10.5 on a 38 waist.


I just queried again and got this reply: The Ultimate Khakis, item 73X2, have a front rise of 10 1/2" and a back rise of 17 1/4" in the size 38.


----------



## firedancer (Jan 11, 2011)

Have about 6 pair on eBay now and I measure the regular khakis at 12.5" and the rhino's at 13"

I'm not doubting that the lady told MKC 10.5" but I've never seen a low rise orvis khaki this short. 11.5" minimum I'd say.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

My 36" waist Orvis Ultimates measure in at just a hair under 11" for the rise in the front. They have been washed quite a few times, if that makes a difference?


----------



## Walter Denton (Sep 11, 2011)

I just checked a pair of my 36 waist flat front Ultimates again and they do measure an 11 1/2" rise in the front. They have been washed about 3 times and my measurements could be less than perfect. The rise feels very good for me. If anything another 1/2' might be perfect but they are definitely not low rise.


----------



## efdll (Sep 11, 2008)

I called Orvis and apparently they run about 1" wider in waist -- they said a 36 measures 37. But how about shrinkage? Anyone with experience on this?


----------



## MKC (Sep 10, 2010)

firedancer said:


> Have about 6 pair on eBay now and I measure the regular khakis at 12.5" and the rhino's at 13"


Which ones are yours? Maybe I should try a pair.


----------



## MKC (Sep 10, 2010)

firedancer said:


> Have about 6 pair on eBay now and I measure the regular khakis at 12.5" and the rhino's at 13"
> 
> I'm not doubting that the lady told MKC 10.5" but I've never seen a low rise orvis khaki this short. 11.5" minimum I'd say.


Mystery solved. A third chat with the very helpful Orvis online assistant -- this time it was Matthew C. -- revealed that the Orvis measurement doesn't include the waistband. The Orvis database didn't have that measurement, but he suggested .75" to 1.5" was common.

It seems a safe bet that takes the Orvis Ultimate rise to at least 11.5" and perhaps a bit more.


----------



## MKC (Sep 10, 2010)

MKC said:


> Mystery solved. A third chat with the very helpful Orvis online assistant -- this time it was Matthew C. -- revealed that the Orvis measurement doesn't include the waistband. The Orvis database didn't have that measurement, but he suggested .75" to 1.5" was common.
> 
> It seems a safe bet that takes the Orvis Ultimate rise to at least 11.5" and perhaps a bit more.


Nothing like a good investigation. A helpful sales person in the Dayton, Ohio, store (phone number provided by Matthew C., the Orvis online assistant) measured the waistband -- 1.5 inches. So on a 38 waist, at least, that makes the rise 12 inches.

For comparison:

Bill's M1, 12.5 inches. (That's what they promise; my experience post-washing has more often been 12.25.)
Jack Donnelly Khakis, 12.25 inches. (According to Greg at Jack Donnelly; I still haven't tried a pair.)
Bill's M2, 11.5 inches. (I'm an M1 person, but the Bill's site describes M2 as "an inch less through the rise.")

Anyone know of a brand that approaches the Bill's M1 rise?


----------



## firedancer (Jan 11, 2011)

Yeah I was going to mention the waistband myself as it was an afterthought. Technically the wb isn't part of the rise measurement but for all intents and purposes it really is. 

It's also been my experience that the waist runs 1" larger or true to size to actual listed measurement.


----------



## MKC (Sep 10, 2010)

firedancer said:


> Have about 6 pair on eBay now and I measure the regular khakis at 12.5" and the rhino's at 13"


Just found you on eBay. Nice tweed GTH trousers.


----------



## firedancer (Jan 11, 2011)

MKC, 
Pm me with your sizes and I can see if I have any more for ya. I'm not sure I do but I can check.


----------



## Saltydog (Nov 3, 2007)

I think the Orvis Ultimate Khakis are great...especially for the 2fer price. I don't think they have quite as long a rise as Bills M2s--but that is _somewhat _subjective in that I haven't measured and am only going on the way they seem to fit. I wish they were about 3/4" to 1" higher in the rise personally...but otherwise a superior khaki pant. I love the spectrum of browns and tans they currently have.


----------



## NicholasJenkins (Oct 2, 2015)

I just bought two pairs of OUKs. They fit my odd body just perfectly. I find the Bills M1s are cut too large, but that the fit of the M2s is too snug and that the rise is too short. The OUK is just right for me. They are a very well made pant, though not quite as well as Bills.


----------

