Oh my i remember when i had tight pants...
ugh thts when i was a skater
made me look super anorexic
hahahaa i still have them
idk y tho
Haha
Volcom super tights

hcoguy11, would I be right in assuming the Exclusive Dark Baxters are in fact darker than the picture you took below? Did you take it with a flash?

The reason I ask is because the picture you took makes them look extremely different from the stock picture on the Abercrombie & Fitch website. I know it's fairly naive to base my opinion on a stock picture, but the two images below look different enough to be considered different washes.

I have the exclusive Baxters and they are a lottt darker than his pics. it is def the flash.

Thanks Tassadar, that's a big relief.
Looking forward to becoming the owner of a pair, in the next week or so!

np man.

They are ****in sweet looking, def my fav pair of jeans. It was actually this pair that made me switch from kilburns to baxters.

I don't like them, they look .. to weird for me. Maybe I just have to see them in person.

They could still be testing the water for this price, just not "test" in the normal AF sense of the word.
I think that the original $89 Baxters and Kilburns from early this year (maybe even late last year, I can't remember) were tests to see how well they would sell at that price. And they obviously sold well enough to merit the increase.

Sorry, I had to use the flash, the light in my apartment wasn't sufficient enough.

Thanks for the pics...but these jeans don't look the same as the picture....not even a bit !!! Still they look great

Are they selling superflares again now? I just saw them online.

Sorry in advance as I'm pretty sure this has been discussed already in the past but I wasn't able to locate a thread.
Taken that A&F is supposed to be a college-brand no matter if you see Europeans in their 50 wearing it - how come that they produce tops in XXL, and bottoms in 36? I mean, you can be a body builder, wear 32 jeans and an XL muscle tee, but sometimes the XL and XXL tops are definelty huge - is that because jeans are more expensive to produce that they don't go bigger than 34 or 36?

For the tees, the XXL is not for fat people to wear, its for really tall people.

true that.

^^i agree with what peter and n5 said, but also, they are trying to limit what they produce so that people under a certain size fit into their clothes.

for example, a XXL in a&f sizing isn't a true XXL...it's actually much smaller compared to what the industry-wide standard for it is. they're still being restrictive with their sizing to a certain sector of the market.

the same goes with their jeans. just being restrictive. i don't think it has much to do with costs, it's just the upmost point of their sizing for each clothing category.

I don't care how tall someone is. A fit, 6'6" male is not going to look good in an XXL from A&F. I think XXL's are more for massive beefcakes.

__________________

what if he is a 6'6" beefcake then? .

LOL u people think that a 36 is big one time at the outlet there was a size 40 pleated khakis but these were from the original A&F before MJ took over, I don't know how they ended up at the outlet. BTW Ruehl used to have size 38 belts.

These are my 32x30 Dark Wash Remsens, what do you think of the fit?

They look like they're not pulled up all the way...I think the fit could be better.

They don't look right for soem reason, maybe its just the camera angle. also, no offense bro but thats a horrible looking belt...is it supposed to be gold? also, why is it on that angle?