Printable View
Guys I really don't know where else to ask this...but
do you guys know what the correlation is between pant size and waist size? it's not supposed to be exact is it? i keep getting my waist and hip measurements sorta mixed up when i measure them. i wear between a 36-38 in jeans...so where should my waist size be?
A couple months ago I measured my waist at 37', wearing 34s. A fewmonths before that I was at 40' wearing 38s. Just measure your waist bud.
My waist measures 33" but I wear 32s...
Thats interesting cause I noticed the same thing. My waist is always a few inches large than my pant size. I think its the style of jeans these days. Even the men's jeans sit lower on the waist. I noticed that the bigger my gut the lower them jeans get pushed down ;)
My stepson wheres his jeans down past his a@# so he has to measure around his legs ;)
[QUOTE=Cksh;114504991]Thats interesting cause I noticed the same thing. My waist is always a few inches large than my pant size. I think its the style of jeans these days. Even the men's jeans sit lower on the waist. I noticed that the bigger my gut the lower them jeans get pushed down ;)
My stepson wheres his jeans down past his a@# so he has to measure around his legs ;)[/QUOTE]
hahah..kids these days. for some reason i never got into that style....thank god
Go to a store and try on some clothes.
I wear a 34 in everything currently. My waist is 35. My biggest problem is that I have huge legs. I couldn't get into a 32 if I tried, but I could button it on my waist. I have to wear belts or they sag down a couple inches.
The clothing industry is trying to flatter us into buying pants by labeling them smaller than they actually are :) Now we understand why women's sizes have absolutely nothing to do with a measured size!
[QUOTE=E-Train;114485801]A couple months ago I measured my waist at 37', wearing 34s. A fewmonths before that I was at 40' wearing 38s. Just measure your waist bud.[/QUOTE]
same as me wear a 38" in jeans and have a 40" waist
whats crap is these new skinny jean fad.. who the h$## that has a 40" waist would fit into these skinny legged jeans. I have 29inch thighs for goodness sake. I have to find a relaxed or baggy fit to get teh 38inch waist jeans to fit right in the legs. anyway i'm done with my rant on that.
weird, I'm kind of the opposite. In dress pants I wear a 32', because they sit more on my waist. In jeans I wear a 34' because they sit more on my hips
in response to the post a few up, what do you guys do when ur waist can fit into a 30 32 pants but unless you get a 34 36 ur legs are so tight
[QUOTE=evan+eisenstein;115426661]in response to the post a few up, what do you guys do when ur waist can fit into a 30 32 pants but unless you get a 34 36 ur legs are so tight[/QUOTE]
buy relax fit jeans
it also all depends on brand, I got a bunch of 36 waist regular jeans and one pair was really tight around the thighs, another was perfect, another was kinda baggy looking, one brand 38 might be identical to another's 36 or 40. I've had most success with the relax fit types when it comes to thigh tightness... just watch out since some of them have HUGE thighs.
leg lengths are just as variable, I hate how it looks good new but after a few washes you're wearing those clown pants where you ankles are showing every step, so you get one size longer and now you have to hike up the waist around your gut until the pants begin to shrink a bit.
or am I the only one with these issues? I hate buying clothes
I wear 36" waist (with 30 inseam.. ugh :(). I measured the circumference around my belly button and its 41". My jeans sit lower than that but that is where I've been doing my measurements for the sake of consistency, so I dont know what the measurement is right around where my jeans sit.
When I was 185 I was wearing 34"s. :(
I think longer pants (34" or 36" inseam) usually accommodate larger thighs, because I'm rather large, and I don't seem to have problems...yet - I'm down to a 38" waist, almost ready for a 36". We'll see once I get down to a 32".
I wear a 34/30 and they are loose, I measure 37' around the hips.
I think it all comes down to what is comfortable. It depends on a lot of stuff, even the brand of pants/jeans. I vary from 40-42, sometimes 44". Also, don't forget that jeans also have so many different fits (loose, straight leg, etc.) and that affects what waist you need. Shopping for clothes is a pain in the ***.lol
The dilemna I face is that my job requires me to dress well, in a casual trendy way, and all the trendy clothes are made for skinny guys with skinny legs skinny butts skinny stomachs and no muscles to complement them. So it's very difficult to understand how things change for me versus the industry.
Im dropping weight, so im shopping on Ebay for the time being, for dress pants and jeans, to save on financial outlay.
I have a pair of Levi "loose" straight leg jeans, sz 50. (yeah I know....I was a 52 month ago, though)
Yet, a pair of Levi Dockers 50 don't fit? What gives? Its frustrating-is it the cut as well as the waist size that are different on khakis? They two pair that I wear regularly have 'self adjusting' waists, so I can't really use them as a judge.
[QUOTE=praex;114484731]Guys I really don't know where else to ask this...but
do you guys know what the correlation is between pant size and waist size? it's not supposed to be exact is it? i keep getting my waist and hip measurements sorta mixed up when i measure them. i wear between a 36-38 in jeans...so where should my waist size be?[/QUOTE]
It depends on where you wear your pants. These days people tend to wear their pants at the thinnest portion which is neither abdominal circumference or true hip circumference, so the typical measurements won't be super helpful.
Just wear what's comfortable.
American clothing sizes have grown to where they're no longer accurate. This is especially true for non-dress clothes. My waist is 32-33, but my jeans are all 30s.
As mentioned above, waist sizes are measured across the bellybutton but most people wear theur jeans around the hips. Generally speaking, your hip measurement is probably going to be closer to your pant size, though not everyone wears their jeans the same spot on the hips.
The US conversion is to subtract 6. (Etc. Waist Circumferance is 42" you waist size in pants is 36. [42 - 6 = 36]) If you wear a size 32, your waist circumferance should be 38".
i have a weird waist related question
i currently wear a 36 wasit or a 38 in dress pants cuz they fit skinnier
when i feel my waist tho, it seems like its bone and even if i were to lose weight id have the same waist size, is this true?
There isn't one.
That said i think most pant sizes are about 1-2 inches less than waist sizes. Probably for same reason womens dress sizes go down to "0", make us feel better about being fatasses loool.
Edit: [QUOTE=jgs75;613186753]The US conversion is to subtract 6. (Etc. Waist Circumferance is 42" you waist size in pants is 36. [42 - 6 = 36]) If you wear a size 32, your waist circumferance should be 38".[/QUOTE]
Nvm just saw this.
@AreYouSerial
What you're feeling is your iliac crest (double-check, i could be wrong Anatomy&Physiology class was years ago). Also what you're not considering is the substantial amount of fat that is stored in that exact same area on the side and back. Rest assured losing weight will corresponding with a reduction in waist size. Also theres fat on your buttocks/upper thigh will also corresopnding to smaller pant sizes and better fitting pants.
Even though I measure ~40" around the gut (navel) I wear 34" and 36" pants depending on the cut. I don't have much ass fat and I tend to wear my pants under the flap lol.
[img]http://www.esquire.com/cm/esquire/images/dU/waistline-measurement-chart-for-men-090710-xlg.jpg[/img]
[url]http://www.esquire.com/blogs/mens-fashion/pants-size-chart-090710[/url]
I was thinking the same on this topic: you're meant to measure your waist at your belly button,but who actually wears pants that high if you're under 70 years old....got me nervous but feel more in tuned to this now.
[QUOTE=praex;114484731]Guys I really don't know where else to ask this...but
do you guys know what the correlation is between pant size and waist size? it's not supposed to be exact is it? i keep getting my waist and hip measurements sorta mixed up when i measure them. i wear between a 36-38 in jeans...so where should my waist size be?[/QUOTE]
This is weird because i just got a tape measurer today to start gauging my muscle growth and measured my waist at exactly 36 inches. The last 10 years of my life I have worn size 32 in all shorts/pants so not sure how this works. I think i must have skinnier hips (what a size 32 persons hips would be).
[QUOTE=tuckerpsd;1354918481]This is weird because i just got a tape measurer today to start gauging my muscle growth and measured my waist at exactly 36 inches. The last 10 years of my life I have worn size 32 in all shorts/pants so not sure how this works. I think i must have skinnier hips (what a size 32 persons hips would be).[/QUOTE]
2 year old thread. Just as an FYI, many pants and especially jeans use "vanity" sizes that are about 2 inches smaller than you waist. Dress pants are usually tailored so they are more exact. It also depends on the rise of your pants. Higher rise means you would wear it higher up. Some people wear high rise pants too low (under the gut) instead of buying properly sized pants or pants with a mid rise instead.