Rated 4 out of 5 by Haverhilljim Utility
I have a couple pairs of these jeans. The same deficiency exists in each pair - the front pockets are small. I don't believe in 1912 these would have been acceptable with such small pockets. Otherwise these are very nice jeans.
August 17, 2015
Rated 4 out of 5 by LoveLoveBeanApp Fit/Size changed around April 2014
I have 6 of these from 2010-early 2014. They are perfect. But my most recent purchase around May 2014 were different. On the same waist, the bucket (as another reviewer described the same issue) gets baggier and legs get wider and longer.
Please bring back the original cut. Thanks!
July 15, 2015
Rated 3 out of 5 by Boo12 great jeans, no front pocket space
These jeans fit great and look great. The stone washed ones are soft and comfortable.
But the front pockets are so small, they are useless. I can't carry my wallet or phone.
So I won't be buying these again. But I'll keep them for around the house.
April 20, 2015
Rated 5 out of 5 by Jagjr222 Great Fit & Comfortable
I'm a big guy with long legs but short inseam. Finding good fitting jeans or slacks is very difficult. I bought the standard cut because relaxed or sometimes natural cut gets baggy on me. These fit perfectly. I have many boutique brand jeans & classic brand jeans, but these are my new favorite. I just ordered two more pairs.
April 10, 2015
Rated 1 out of 5 by ReadyToRumba Ridiculously Short
I have worn a 34 inch length for all of my adult life. I stopped growing vertically a long time ago and I am not shrinking. But when I put on these 33x34 jeans they seemed like they had a 32" inseam. Not even close. Do these get inspected when they are sewn? It's hard to believe it if they do.
April 7, 2015
Rated 3 out of 5 by Standardfitter Changed the fit from the original cut
I have six pairs of these. The original pairs I bought when the 'Standard Fit' came out are the most perfect fitting jeans for me. Over time, tho, as I've added to the collection, the cut has gotten worse for me. The 'bucket' of the pants (assuming pants are made of 2 legs and a bucket) has gotten larger. This latest pair is a full 1-1/4" longer from the seam of the crotch to the back belt line than the original pairs.
This same size creep is happening in the chinos as well.
I need / prefer a low rise, and these are not as low as they used to be. In fact I had to return the first pair of this most recent purchase because the crotch tore to shreds the first time I bent over. Because the crotch hangs too low.
Hope you get the original fit back!
February 27, 2015
Rated 4 out of 5 by OldSoccerRef 1912 Jeans, Standard Fit
I started buying LLBean jeans because Levis (which I have worn for years) has stopped manufacturing jeans with deep enough pockets. I can barely get my hand in them The first pair of LLBean jeans were relaxed fit and had nice deep pockets. The second pair, which I just received, have somewhat shallower pockets but still sufficient. However, the second pair was regular fit and had a somewhat minor problem. The button at the waist was apparently put in place through the slot on the other side of the jeans. It was very difficult to unbutton and as I tried on the jeans, I could not button it. I had to take a sharp knife and open the hole up somewhat.
February 20, 2015
Rated 5 out of 5 by KatyBiker Last of the 36" inseam?
I'm a pretty big athletic guy at 6'7" and have loved fit and style of the 1912 jeans. I have purchased at least 6 pairs of these jeans over the years. The lower waist sat perfectly below my "love handles" and was able to get them in a 36" inseam that looked great with my boots. Now LLB is no longer carrying this inseam and finding comparable jeans are $70+ that are made more for millennial's than for us simpletons. I get much of my casual clothing from LLB because they carry tall's and cannot beat the style, price and service. I hope they will reconsider or at least make it a special order. I for one would be willing to wait.
January 28, 2015
Rated 3 out of 5 by weeeeeeeeee ok
These are nice jeans. But for me they were not good work jeans. I bought 2 pairs and they both had stitching come undone and rip on me. Both pair lasted about a month. I'm going back to double L jeans for work jeans. If you do not work tough manual labor jobs, then you probably don't have to worry. They were nice jeans and I liked how they fit. Just wasn't tough enough for me.
January 26, 2015
Rated 5 out of 5 by TheTravler Great jeans, even better customer sercie
These jeans are great. I am somewhat larger guy and like to wear my pants well below my waist (imagine Hank HIll), so I am always searching for jeans that have a lower rise so that my pants don't seem crazy baggy. I can wear these jeans well below my waist and they fit perfectly. They are even snug across my hips, which is rare when you are built like me.
The dark indigo is a great color. I have stayed away from a lot of LL Bean jeans in the past because the color/wash of the pants scream "old man jeans" to me. It is hard to describe. But, all of the 1912 colors are great. The colors are more classic to me.
I normally wear a 38 waist and a measurement of exactly 38 in. fits snug. So, I ordered a 38 and they were very large on me. I measured them and really they measure more like 40in. I thought they might have been tagged incorrectly. So, I jumped on chat customer service. The person there said no problem and immediately sent me out another pair. I was worried that the pants were not marked incorrectly and I would just get another pair of 38s that were too big. But, the customer service rep. requested that the pants be hand pulled and measured. The person who hand pulled must have seen that they do run large and sent me a 36 instead. They fit perfectly.
January 22, 2015