# New LLBean Signature Line



## Dr.Watson (Sep 25, 2008)

https://www.llbeansignature.com/?nav=t1-hp

Reminds me of the recently launched LE Canvas. Thoughts?


----------



## slide13 (Oct 5, 2008)

I'll be curious to give a piece or two a try. I have enjoyed a few things from the Canvas line a lot. The Canvas chambrays are great as are their t-shirts, henleys, and crewneck sweatshirts. At the prices they sell for they really are steals IMO. Hopefully LL Bean can do the same thing that LE was able to do with Canvas.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

If L.L. Bean would return to their roots and offer *very* well made merchandise made mostly in the U.S.A. by American craftsman they would not need to go "upscale," and use models who look as though they've missed too many meals. The young lady they've used looks positively gaunt. L.L. Bean needs some more marketing people from Maine *and a maximum of one from Madison Avenue.*

Yes I'll look at purchasing something but this whole line stinks of marketing numskulls looking for long lost profits,...


----------



## Acacian (Jul 10, 2007)

The stuff itself looks pretty good, but its difficult to get past the models who look like they're from Amsterdam and on ecstasy.


----------



## Steve Smith (Jan 12, 2008)

Acacian said:


> The stuff itself looks pretty good, but its difficult to get past the models who look like they're from Amsterdam and on ecstasy.


My main impression is that they chose some odd looking models.


----------



## dshell (Mar 17, 2007)

Acacian said:


> The stuff itself looks pretty good, but its difficult to get past the models who look like they're from Amsterdam and on ecstasy.


Haha. They do rather have that look.

One interesting thing is that the boots in the inset slide show seem to have the original "hunting boots" label rather than the "bean boots" one that they have nowadays.


----------



## phyrpowr (Aug 30, 2009)

Okay, who'll admit to being old enough to remember when the Bean "models" were their regular employees?


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

phyrpowr said:


> Okay, who'll admit to being old enough to remember when the Bean "models" were their regular employees?


I'm not that old, but that sounds like a stunningly good idea in theory - and for people like us - but sadly "trendy beautiful (in someone's mind anyway)" models seem to sell better to people who don't usually buy from a company and "don't know they need it." It's sad to see LL Bean go that way...

Really though, interested to see how the Signature line turns out.


----------



## Mazama (May 21, 2009)

dshell said:


> One interesting thing is that the boots in the inset slide show seem to have the original "hunting boots" label rather than the "bean boots" one that they have nowadays.


FWIW, LL Bean continues to make their pacs with both the "Hunting Shoe" and "Bean Boot" labels, the former now available in only a slightly grained brown leather upper and 10/12/14" heights. My impression is that the Hunting Shoe also uses a slightly thicker rubber bottom (although Bean doesn't specifically say this) and in 10" height it costs $14 more than the Bean Boot version.

LL Bean describes the (no longer) new version thusly: "The new Maine Hunting Shoe has an improved bottom that is softer and more flexible, allowing the hunter to better feel the forest floor. The new sole grips better and lasts longer, too, for many seasons of reliable performance."

As for the Signature Line... I agree the 127.72 Mhz when he says "this whole line stinks of marketing numskulls looking for long lost profits".


----------



## chiamdream (Aug 7, 2009)

Mazama said:


> I agree the 127.72 Mhz when he says "this whole line stinks of marketing numskulls looking for long lost profits".


Hard to say until it really launches and we see what they're offering and what they're asking for it, but I'm excited to see what they do with this. I can't say that I sympathize with the critical tone. It's not like LE or LLB are scrapping their regular offerings; I think the decision to separate imprints to compete with J.Crew is a great development and I'm sure they'll get business from me if they continue to offer their unparalleled customer service with slimmer cuts.


----------



## Orgetorix (May 20, 2005)

Acacian said:


> The stuff itself looks pretty good, but its difficult to get past the models who look like they're from Amsterdam and on ecstasy.


Huh? All I see are some slightly-better-looking-than-normal folks. They're no more extreme looking than the models BB uses. Am I missing something? :icon_scratch:


----------



## eightysixed (Jan 10, 2010)

chiamdream said:


> Hard to say until it really launches and we see what they're offering and what they're asking for it, but I'm excited to see what they do with this. I can't say that I sympathize with the critical tone. It's not like LE or LLB are scrapping their regular offerings; I think the decision to separate imprints to compete with J.Crew is a great development and I'm sure they'll get business from me if they continue to offer their unparalleled customer service with slimmer cuts.


I agree.

While I'm not happy with the lower quality of much of the LL Bean merchandise compared to say 20 years ago, my main problem as a customer is that most of the clothes simply don't fit. At age 41, I have a more traditional physique, athletic shoulders, slim waist, like those in Take Ivy rather than the increasing waistline girth that's so popular today. I know that by looking at the product reviews on the LL Bean web site, LL Bean sells to a predominantly older demographic and the reality is that the majority of people that age are overweight. I can't simply size down to make these garments work for me as the proportions are off when doing that. Most of these clothes also aren't of the quality worth my time and money to have significant alterations done. So, along with the younger customers, I pretty much ignore LL Bean today. I'm not looking for high-fashion gimmicks like very low rise, shirt tails too short to tuck in, or miniature collars. I'm just looking for classics that actually fit someone of a slimmer build too.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

I'm waiting to see what an LL Bean suit is like.


----------



## Sir Cingle (Aug 22, 2009)

Those are all very good points, Eightysixed. I too prefer classic-looking trad items, not the "fashion-forward" knock offs. But I just don't want to wear tents for shirts and sweaters! If LL Bean manages to slim down their items without becoming to "hipsterish," I'd be more likely to buy a thing or two from them in the future.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

chiamdream said:


> Hard to say until it really launches and we see what they're offering and what they're asking for it, but I'm excited to see what they do with this. I can't say that I sympathize with the critical tone.* It's not like LE or LLB are scrapping their regular offerings*; I think the decision to separate imprints to compete with J.Crew is a great development and I'm sure they'll get business from me if they continue to offer their unparalleled customer service with slimmer cuts.


*"It's not like LE or LLB are scrapping their regular offerings.*"

Oh really? What has happened to all of Land's End "Must iron" shirts?

It's not a rhetorical question, *they've been scrapped*.

How about the high quality heavyweight chinos L.L. bean used to sell tons of? (at a fair price)* They've been scrapped*.

Have you seen Land's End's latest blunder, one of many, where they offered their new "varsity collar?"  (Although with most every "Varsity collar" shirt now in the clearance section of their web site I believe they have admitted defeat,...At least on that one!)

So you see *it is* like both of them are scrapping *many* of their regular offerings. Just do a search right here at AAAC and see what others have posted from L.L. Bean catalogs of old.

What would be wrong with sticking to a tried and true formula of selling quality merchandise at a fair price? After all this is what both of these companies reputations have been built upon.

Instead they try to do a Madison Avenue "Makeover." When a smoke and mirrors makeover isn't what either one of them needs.

This was the point I was making. It's my opinion that my statements are not cynical but rather accurate observations.

My best wishes,


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

I guess the worst testimony to all this is that I covet and seek out used and vintage LL Bean items first. Oh sure, I could get the new stuff, but its more expensive, worse made and doesn't fit well.

Flying tiger jacket? Close to $400 for a funky medium sized for someone with basketball belly.

Vintage Flying Tiger off eBay? Sized to my chest size (remember when they did THAT?), one piece back, leather that's lasted for 20+ years already and will last 20 more. 

I even bought vintage Bean boots off eBay a couple days ago. The point is, I don't want to pay Bean more dollars for lesser merchandise. The vintage Norwegian I snagged for $30 will beat the new one up and down the street.

Make quality again, make it to fit. This collection MAY be just what the doctor ordered. We'll see.


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

Can someone explain why the new chinos my dad just bought from Bean are better made than my Bill's khakis?


----------



## Overman138 (Feb 14, 2010)

Doctor Damage said:


> Can someone explain why the new chinos my dad just bought from Bean are better made than my Bill's khakis?


do you know which model he bought?


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

Overman138 said:


> Doctor Damage said:
> 
> 
> > Can someone explain why the new chinos my dad just bought from Bean are better made than my Bill's khakis?
> ...


They were the really cheap ones from the front of the latest spring catalogue, $29.99 or somehting.


----------



## chiamdream (Aug 7, 2009)

127.72 MHz said:


> *"It's not like LE or LLB are scrapping their regular offerings.*"
> 
> Oh really? What has happened to all of Land's End "Must iron" shirts?


I'll confess to not being as well versed in the offerings of these companies as others here. I'm 29 and I'm still buying the ~$20 must-iron OCBDs that I bought from LE in high school, but I'm sure there are many items that have been discontinued over the years. I appreciate what you're saying, but I would never expect giant companies like LE or LLB to operate like Russell Moccasin and never change anything over 100 years.


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

Doctor Damage said:


> Can someone explain why the new chinos my dad just bought from Bean are better made than my Bill's khakis?


Might I ask for an elaboration on "better made"?


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

chiamdream said:


> I'll confess to not being as well versed in the offerings of these companies as others here. I'm 29 and I'm still buying the ~$20 must-iron OCBDs that I bought from LE in high school, but I'm sure there are many items that have been discontinued over the years. I appreciate what you're saying, but I would never expect giant companies like LE or LLB to operate like Russell Moccasin and never change anything over 100 years.


\

Your point is well taken. Everyone,...everything must change. (It's the one thing we can count on.!)

I'm actually happy you mentioned Russell. Ralph "Lefty" Fabricious and the entire staff at Russell make what I consider to be the finest hand made moccasins in the world. Now look up "Yukaten" boots and moccasins. Yuki Matsuta spent a few years working at Quoddy moccasins further refining his craft in hand made moccasin construction. Now he builds moccasins that look in so many ways like upscale Quoddys,....*.Except they cost much more*. He stresses the American made handcrafted aspect of his product and the Japanese are eating up everything he can turn out. No doubt they're great boots, shoes, and moccasins but they're no better than a handmade pair of Russells.

What is different is the marketing strategy. Create low volume, (kind of like the South African company De Beers has done with the non precious commodity of diamonds) and stress quality,....Yada yada yada.

Again, my point is that L.L. Bean already had a winning formula. They once sold many American handmade products. (Specifically the boots and moccasins) They do not need any Madison Avenue freaks from New York taking their money with a promise of taking the L.L. Bean mark upscale!

L.L. Bean only needs to return to their roots and sell high quality mostly American made products.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

The heritage tote looks pretty good. I wonder if its made in the USA. At that price I'd certainly hope so. (Just followed the link: 'Imported'--this seems to defeat the purpose of exploiting the Americana trend *sigh*).

Like most anything else you'll be able to raid the offerings for a few good pieces


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

Doctor Damage said:


> Can someone explain why the new chinos my dad just bought from Bean are better made than my Bill's khakis?


I'm always looking for a better built Khaki at a better price than Bill's. If you get the chance to get a closeup on your dad's chinos I'd love to know the model.

My best,


----------



## Charles Dana (Nov 20, 2006)

Doctor Damage said:


> They were the really cheap ones from the front of the latest spring catalogue, $29.99 or somehting.


Doctor Damage appears to be referring to a new item: "Bean's 1912 Chinos." They are $29.50 and are available in two fits: Natural, which is relaxed in the hip and thighs, and "Standard," which, according to the LL Bean Spring catalogue, "sits lower on the waist." They have a plain front and on-seam front pockets. Colors: stone, red, navy, and khaki. I asked an LL Bean customer service representative about the rise of each model. She said that the Natural fit as a rise of 11.75 inches, while the Standard has an 11-inch rise.


----------



## David V (Sep 19, 2005)

phyrpowr said:


> Okay, who'll admit to being old enough to remember when the Bean "models" were their regular employees?


(raises hand)


----------



## Mazama (May 21, 2009)

chiamdream said:


> I can't say that I sympathize with the critical tone. It's not like LE or LLB are scrapping their regular offerings


Again I concur with 127.72 MHz and disagree with the above statement that "it's not like... LLB (is) scrapping their regular offerings."*

As 127.72 MHz correctly notes LOTS of prior offerings have been purged from the LL Bean catalog.*

Among items I previously bought and would buy again: saddle shoes in the same pebbled pigskin that Horween makes for NFL footballs (had a pair in college in the '70s); excellent woolen cavalry twill and whipcord trousers with leather pocket protectors (into the late '80s/early 90s); many others. I mean where's the "sandwich" knife for heaven's sake.

Just in the last year Bean dropped their flannel-lined Chamois shirt - a fantastic shirt-jac - and even dropped (unbelievable!) tartan flannel boxers.

Now I may be an old codger - Baby Boomer - but, Lord willing, I've still got 20+ years of retail buying ahead of me which is a lot of lost sales if Bean goes the route of Eddie Bauer (where I bought thousands of dollars of clothing and equipment before they went "mall rat" in the 1990s) and drops all the things I like to buy and will eventually replace.

Those of us who like traditional American outdoor clothing like to buy - why is this hard to understand? - actual traditional American outdoor clothing not some fashion designer's knockoffs that are "inspired by" the real thing. "Inspired by" whether in clothing, cuisine or movies is the kiss of death for most things that are worthwhile.

And as for the 60s traditional sizing per "Take Ivy" being "athletic", puleeeze... Believe me all that stuff was baggy, including the sweat suits that passed for athletic training gear . I know because I wore them then


----------



## chiamdream (Aug 7, 2009)

Guys, I wish I could walk into my local Volvo dealership and buy a new 240DL, but it ain't gonna happen. Just to clarify, I wasn't saying that these companies haven't dropped beloved items over the years, just that they haven't been systematically doing it for the express purpose of launching fashion-forward imprints somewhere down the line. Llbean.com isn't going to direct you to Llbeansignature.com come March. Anyway, that's the last I have to say about it - I hope that my suspicions that this line might be a catalyst for bringing back classic items prove true.


----------



## Chaps (Feb 27, 2006)

*Bean Boots*

The Boots featured in the Signature line use a wax cotton upper and are limited to 100 pairs.

https://www.llbean.com/llb/shop/65556?nav=hp-gndp


----------



## Cardinals5 (Jun 16, 2009)

Doctor Damage said:


> Can someone explain why the new chinos my dad just bought from Bean are better made than my Bill's khakis?


DD - does this look like the model your Dad purchased?

They're the 1912 Chinos, Natural Fit, in 8.5 oz cloth (Bills Originals are also 8.5oz), straight-leg, flat front. These look promising for $29.50.

Okay, I just purchased a pair of the above 1912 Chinos (only long lengths available, which is fine since I'll add a beefy cuff) and I'll write a review when I receive them. If they're nearly as good as Bills this would be a great price.


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

Cardinals5 said:


> DD - does this look like the model your Dad purchased?
> 
> They're the 1912 Chinos, Natural Fit, in 8.5 oz cloth (Bills Originals are also 8.5oz), straight-leg, flat front. These look promising for $29.50.
> 
> Okay, I just purchased a pair of the above 1912 Chinos (only long lengths available, which is fine since I'll add a beefy cuff) and I'll write a review when I receive them. If they're nearly as good as Bills this would be a great price.


That price sounds right and that is the new model - must be them. I didn't realize the cloth weight was the same as Bills. Anyway, Bean bolts their clothing together as good (or better) than anyone. Folks might lament the demise of their favourite model from 1984, but the fact is that you can spend a lot more and get less than with Bean.


----------



## Doctor Damage (Feb 18, 2005)

Mazama said:


> As 127.72 MHz correctly notes LOTS of prior offerings have been purged from the LL Bean catalog.


Those may have been "prior" items but they probably weren't "popular" items. If customers had been buying said items in great quantities, Bean - which is after all a commercial business operation - would have kept those items in their catalogue. Poor sales will kill a product faster than anything. It's not 1984 anymore. Tastes change, even if they don't around here, and companies have to change with them. Unless you'd like to pay Alden prices (and price increases) for your Bean gear?


----------



## chiamdream (Aug 7, 2009)

I wish I'd put this down before. I KNEW this line was our best chance at a higher-quality blucher moc.

https://sartoriallyinclined.blogspot.com/2010/02/first-look-ll-bean-signature-footwear.html


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

Interesting... definitely a nice photo to look at if nothing else! Thanks for updating this thread with the info.


----------



## Cardinals5 (Jun 16, 2009)

Thanks for grabbing that pic of the new Bean models. 

I think I'll be getting the Eastport Handsewn Blucher Moc Suede - I'm liking the idea of casual suede bluchers (or should I get the Ranger ).


----------



## xcubbies (Jul 31, 2005)

*In Search of LL Bean, by M.R. Montgomery*

Interesting exchange. I recently read the a/m book, which is now quite outdated, but still of interest. Montgomery, who use to be the outdoor sports writer for the Boston Globe, writes about LL, how he came up with the hunting boot and went on to develop the company. The book is fascinating when explaining the Maine hunting scene at the beginning of the 20th Century, where the wealthy came to their Maine camps. These were Bean's clients, not the typical Maine resident who hunted in his work clothing. Montgomery writes about how the catalogue business was developed, and later the philosophical debates about where the company should go as the company expanded well beyond the original clientelle of hunters. Ultimately it was decided that the greatest portential was with selling to women.
The book came out in the 1980s and Montgomery could never have anticipated the current debate and the distance the company has come from its origin. I no longer buy about 90% of my clothing there, but if you go to the hunting and fishing sections in the Freeport store you'll find that the departments are extensive and the sales staff knowledgeable and helpful. Unlike 90 years ago, now the company is in competition with Cabelas, which is just down 95, the Kittery Trading Post and various independent shops that sell fishing gear. 
It's curious to see how perspectives change, with talk above of the new models-originally the catalogues just carried photographs of the items, and the items were ordered with forms that referred not to item numbers but the page on which the item appeared in the catalogue, and talk about the fit of clothing for buff city folks.


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

I'm a bit worried. Most of the items available as of now are imported. I would happily pay a markup for a made in the USA barn coat, or other such iconic item. As of now however, this collection just looks like J. Crew. And I like J. Crew, but there is only room for one J. Crew. And unfortunately, since J. Crew has had such explosive success in the last few years, there is already a legion of imitators, not the least of which is the new Lands End Canvas. 
If Bean does not have some really serious clothes in this collection they are sunk. It's probably to late for them to get much of that young hip market share and god knows that the old stalwarts won't be buying more expensive versions of the same stuff. 
I just want better quality, USA made versions of the plain Khakis and button-ups that they sell for 30 dollars normally. Is that too much to ask?


----------



## dshell (Mar 17, 2007)

AlanC said:


> The heritage tote looks pretty good. I wonder if its made in the USA. At that price I'd certainly hope so. (Just followed the link: 'Imported'--this seems to defeat the purpose of exploiting the Americana trend *sigh*).
> 
> Like most anything else you'll be able to raid the offerings for a few good pieces


I received mine yesterday. The tote is made in china. I phoned LL Bean to make sure that I wasn't missing something. Quite sad that there is even an embossed signature on a tote now made in china. I hate to join the line of naysayers, but at that price, it really does seem unreasonable.


----------



## Trip English (Dec 22, 2008)

I also think it's a missed opportunity. LE Canvas is very plain and relatively inexpensive and in that regard it's riding in J.Crew's slipstream. I also have never thought about LE as a company with a particularly storied heritage beyond quality & service.

LLB Signature seemed like a good opportunity to open up the old catalogs and start bringing back select classics and inventing new ones with quality and provenance as the primary story. 

The more that's released the more it really does seem like all flash and no substance without even low pricing to recommend it.


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

This really does expose the real problem with the Americana trend. Companies see that guys like Micheal Williams are promoting this heritage look and they have all jumped on the bandwagon while missing everything important about it. I know that ACL is a divisive subject, at least the guy cares about "Made in America." The idea that companies can sell an "American" look while outsourcing all the jobs to China makes me so mad. I just wish that bloggers would call them out on this more often, and I'd say that they have a responsibility to do so.


----------



## Danny (Mar 24, 2005)

xcubbies said:


> Interesting exchange. I recently read the a/m book, which is now quite outdated, but still of interest. Montgomery, who use to be the outdoor sports writer for the Boston Globe, writes about LL, how he came up with the hunting boot and went on to develop the company. The book is fascinating when explaining the Maine hunting scene at the beginning of the 20th Century, where the wealthy came to their Maine camps. These were Bean's clients, not the typical Maine resident who hunted in his work clothing. Montgomery writes about how the catalogue business was developed, and later the philosophical debates about where the company should go as the company expanded well beyond the original clientelle of hunters. Ultimately it was decided that the greatest portential was with selling to women.
> The book came out in the 1980s and Montgomery could never have anticipated the current debate and the distance the company has come from its origin. I no longer buy about 90% of my clothing there, but if you go to the hunting and fishing sections in the Freeport store you'll find that the departments are extensive and the sales staff knowledgeable and helpful. Unlike 90 years ago, now the company is in competition with Cabelas, which is just down 95, the Kittery Trading Post and various independent shops that sell fishing gear.
> It's curious to see how perspectives change, with talk above of the new models-originally the catalogues just carried photographs of the items, and the items were ordered with forms that referred not to item numbers but the page on which the item appeared in the catalogue, and talk about the fit of clothing for buff city folks.


I read this book about 6 months ago...quite enjoyed it...very interesting. Interesting that Bean himself never understood who his customer base really was. If you think about it, the things we worry about Bean transforming into...the same thing kinda happened in the 70s to them, and they sorta stumbled into it.


----------



## HistoryDoc (Dec 14, 2006)

Cardinal, 
Did you get your trousers? I need to replace two weekend-grade pairs of chinos and I am interested in knowing what you think of the 1912 models.


----------



## tsweetland (Oct 2, 2006)

BTW, I got a pair of the waxed canvas Maine Hunting Shoes, and I gotta say I love them.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

HistoryDoc said:


> Cardinal,
> Did you get your trousers? I need to replace two weekend-grade pairs of chinos and I am interested in knowing what you think of the 1912 models.


I just got a pair. They're nice but casual - the seam running down the outside of the leg is lapped or big or whatever you call it.


----------



## Pgolden (May 13, 2006)

Patrick06790 said:


> I just got a pair. They're nice but casual - the seam running down the outside of the leg is lapped or big or whatever you call it.


How's the fit compared to bill's M-2.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Pgolden said:


> How's the fit compared to bill's M-2.


Shorter rise, based on a cursory tryout. I'll do some pix and measurements this weekend.

Nice fabric, though. Soft.


----------



## redmanca (May 29, 2008)

Youngster said:


> I just wish that bloggers would call them out on this more often, and I'd say that they have a responsibility to do so.


Huh? Bloggers have no responsibility to anyone but themselves. Unless they get free stuff or money from their blog (ala ACL), in which case they have a responsibility to their sponsors. A blogger is going to rep what they like (if they're in it for that reason), and you can read it if you want. If you don't like it, go find another blogger. It's as simple as that.

I understand bloggers wanting to keep or suck in readers (believe me, I've made a few questionable posts for that reason), but saying that any of them (us, I suppose) has a responsibility to their readers is making way too big a deal about blogging. In reality, it's just a bunch of nerds writing about stuff they like to nerd out about. Especially in the trad/ivy blog sector, most readers come into a blog with a specific mindset, so one person writing from their apartment isn't going to have the kind of power to really influence other people. Only the big blogs with sponsors who get payed to blog can have that kind of impact.

Conor


----------



## HistoryDoc (Dec 14, 2006)

Patrick06790 said:


> Shorter rise, based on a cursory tryout. I'll do some pix and measurements this weekend.
> 
> Nice fabric, though. Soft.


Right on. You are the man.


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

LL Bean 1912 chino vs. Bill's M2

Bean much lighter weight. Not even close. This is a warm weather garment.
Note side seam. Very casual. Does not overwhelm the loafer (given I had them hiked up a bit).

Edit: As pointed out below, these LLBs are standard fit. "Natural" is likely roomier. But I have more than enough chinos; someone else will have to make the natural vs. M2 comparison.

Rise: Bean 11 3/4", M2 12 1/4"
Leg opening at bottom: Bean a tad under 10". M2 a tad under 9" (cuffed)

Bean front and back:

















M2 front and back (please note I am on first cup of coffee)


















Bean side and foot detail


















LLB 1912 chino pros:

Nice fabric, untreated
Won't swallow up your loafer or boat shoe
Allows those of us with no rear end to have a bit of one

LLB 1912 chino cons:

No alterable waist

Conclusion: Decent value in a casual summer chino, but nothing startling.


----------



## my19 (Nov 11, 2009)

Patrick,

Are those the "natural" fit or the "standard" fit LLB chinos?

thanks ...


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

my19 said:


> Patrick,
> 
> Are those the "natural" fit or the "standard" fit LLB chinos?
> 
> thanks ...


Standard


----------



## Pgolden (May 13, 2006)

Thanks, Patrick. Funny thing is they list the chino at 8.5 oz, just like Bill's yet you say it's lighter. I ordered a pair, but we have a store here so if they are a summer chino they're going back



Patrick06790 said:


> LL Bean 1912 chino vs. Bill's M2
> 
> Bean much lighter weight. Not even close. This is a warm weather garment.
> Note side seam. Very casual. Does not overwhelm the loafer (given I had them hiked up a bit).
> ...


----------



## HistoryDoc (Dec 14, 2006)

Ok, I ordered two pairs. If they suck I will blame you!


----------



## Cardinals5 (Jun 16, 2009)

HistoryDoc said:


> Cardinal,
> Did you get your trousers? I need to replace two weekend-grade pairs of chinos and I am interested in knowing what you think of the 1912 models.


I did receive them and they aren't a replacement for Bills. Decent enough for 29.99, but I have a hard time believing they're supposed to be the same weight cloth as Bills, which confirms Patrick's evaluation.

On the positive side, they are 100% cotton and have a nice hand. I've decided to keep mine for weekend-wear so they might just be what you're looking for. As for fit, they're neither comfortably baggy like Bills nor too slim like some of the more fashionable chinos.


----------



## Mike147 (Jan 15, 2006)

*Nice Watch in your blog!*



Patrick06790 said:


> I'm waiting to see what an LL Bean suit is like.


I really like the Citizen Ecodrive Military watch (saw it on your blog) - found it online for $81.00...

Comparing this to the Timex from JCREW - which I love, but think is too expensive at $150

and

This Squad Leader watch from US Cav ($31.00):

https://www.uscav.com/Productinfo.aspx?productID=5427&TabID=1&CatID=102

How are Citizen Ecodrive watches? I have a few Automatic Watches and I'm looking for something that's a bit more bang-around.

Also - anyone know if the JCREW and J Press Watch bands fit on the Citizen?

Thanks!


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Mike147 said:


> I really like the Citizen Ecodrive Military watch (saw it on your blog) - found it online for $81.00...
> 
> How are Citizen Ecodrive watches? I have a few Automatic Watches and I'm looking for something that's a bit more bang-around.
> 
> ...


A. I got mine through Amazon and I think it was about $60, so you might want to poke around a bit more.

B. I left mine in a suitcase for three weeks and it was still ticking away when I rescued it.

C. It fits the 18mm Central strap, the BB grommet straps and a strap I got at Press.


----------



## Mike147 (Jan 15, 2006)

Patrick06790 said:


> A. I got mine through Amazon and I think it was about $60, so you might want to poke around a bit more.
> 
> B. I left mine in a suitcase for three weeks and it was still ticking away when I rescued it.
> 
> C. It fits the 18mm Central strap, the BB grommet straps and a strap I got at Press.


Thanks Patrick - Did you look at the Timex at all? Or just too pricey for what you get? Gotta admit that it's a really nice looking watch...

Looks like $81.00 is the cheapest i can find online at the moment.


----------



## HistoryDoc (Dec 14, 2006)

I have mentioned this on another thread but I really like many of the grey market Seikos you can get on Amazon. You can find some great stuff in the $70-120 range.


----------



## Enron (Feb 16, 2010)

HistoryDoc said:


> I have mentioned this on another thread but I really like many of the grey market Seikos you can get on Amazon. You can find some great stuff in the $70-120 range.


For all your watch questions, get thee to watchuseek! Just make sure you lock up the wallet before reading.


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

Holy thread hijacking, Batman!

For what it's worth, I have a Citizen Eco-Drive (though not the one pictured) and it's kept ticking longer than I would've thought in storage, though I don't remember exactly how long - it was on the order of a couple of months I think. Makes me wonder how much "regeneration" it really gets and how much is just a normal battery.


----------



## Enron (Feb 16, 2010)

TheWGP said:


> Holy thread hijacking, Batman!
> 
> For what it's worth, I have a Citizen Eco-Drive (though not the one pictured) and it's kept ticking longer than I would've thought in storage, though I don't remember exactly how long - it was on the order of a couple of months I think. Makes me wonder how much "regeneration" it really gets and how much is just a normal battery.


Eco-drives don't need a whole lot of light to work. Certain models can go for a year or more without needing to be charged.


----------



## Fraser Tartan (May 12, 2010)

Patrick06790 said:


> ...
> Bean much lighter weight. Not even close. This is a warm weather garment.
> Note side seam. Very casual. Does not overwhelm the loafer (given I had them hiked up a bit).
> 
> ...


I purchased a pair of these Bean 1912 Chinos in Standard Fit about a month ago and they've been worn and washed several times.

I feel about the same as Patrick does about them. The side seam does make them more casual.

I need trousers with a waistband that measures about 32" or a little bit less. I contacted customer service and it turned out that ordering "30x30" would get me there. Sure enough, they measure just under 16" across (~32" around) at the waist. They fit me well around my seat and hips without excessive bagginess.

The leg opening is 8-7/8" on this size. Customer service had given me measurements for 31" and 32" as well and I could see that the leg opening increases progressively on these.

I like the fabric and weight.


----------



## Cardinals5 (Jun 16, 2009)

Some of the new Spring 2011 Signature line

Handsewn loafer, Made in USA, $285 (Rancourt?)









Crepe-soled blucher - I remember similar shoes from Quoddy back in the day - pretty ugly, but very comfortable.









8-eyelet Ranger Boot


----------



## rbstc123 (Jun 13, 2007)

^ IMO the boot is the most attractive shoe out of the 3. The loafer up top is hideous. It's a door wedge. Maybe it's the angle they were photographed. Let's hope so anyway...


----------



## hookem12387 (Dec 29, 2009)

rbstc123 said:


> ^ IMO the boot is the most attractive shoe out of the 3. The loafer up top is hideous. It's a door wedge. Maybe it's the angle they were photographed. Let's hope so anyway...


My thought is simply that Oak St Bootmakers handmakes a much better looking penny for $250 that is in the same style.


----------



## Charles Saturn (May 27, 2010)

hookem12387 said:


> My thought is simply that Oak St Bootmakers handmakes a much better looking penny for $250 that is in the same style.


Plus, the Oak St. are Horween Chromo.


----------



## oxford (Feb 24, 2008)

As a native to Maine, I never have purchased anything from L. L. Bean. I do consider myself a Trad but I prefer to save my money and buy higher end merchandise though I have to wait a bit longer to acquire it. You get what you pay for in this world and L. L. Bean is about the same quality as Land's End at Sears; perhaps they source from the same vendors offshore. I buy regularly from Orvis and have found their products and service to be outstanding dollar for dollar. Wait a bit longer, save your money and buy the better items, in the long run it beats having to settle for L. L. Bean or ebay thrifted items.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

I notice that you too are from Maine and I am embarrassed.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
LOL. While I have purchased quite a few items from LL Bean and from Land's End, over time, and I can certainly see how oxford's post could be be seen as being overly negative, I'm sure he really never intended it to come off sounding as snobbish as it does. Indeed, quality and value can be found in some of the most unexpected places, even LL Bean and LE!


----------

