Shoe lovers' trouser hem size

[kolecho]

I'd like find out what members have as their hem size, assuming that we are all shoe lovers and would love to showcase the shoes we are wearing.

Let me start, I am 5'10" UK size 8.5 shoes and my trousers hem is 17" circumference. I am slowly graduating to having the cuffs to just touch my shoes (ie: shorter than what I was used to before).

I would love to hear your hem sizes to get some guidance.

[iammatt]

I am about the same size as you, but perhaps an inch or so taller. My shoes are also UK 8.5 and my trouser bottoms are 16.5. I also like to wear them with little break as it makes me feel taller for some reason. I always used 1.75" cuffs, but my tailor talked me into 2" cuffs which I actually like much more.

[kolecho]

I just measired my hem circumference at 16.5". My cuffs are 1.5". I might try 1.75" next. What is the effect of increasing the cuff height?

[uppercase]

This is a tricky matter.

I've seen, and have, trousers which are tailored so tight and short, that shoes appear bulbous, as large, unnatural protuberances extending from the leg.

I am thinking in particular of the exaggerated Neapolitan style of trouser which is most often guilty of producing this unfortunate effect.

I increasingly think that in all matters sartorial that understated, tasteful moderation is called for to obtain a harmonious balance in one's appearance.

The noble tailoring houses which have existed for many years are our best guides to successfully navigate these difficult issues.

If we push too hard, with our modern sensibilities, we may lose the golden mean which they have developed through trail and error over a long history.

[smoothjazzone]

6' 2" height
12C UK shoe size
21.5 -- 22" hem
Since the trousers have zero break, seeing enough of the shoes has never been an issue

[iammatt]

This is a tricky matter.

I've seen, and have, trousers which are tailored so tight and short, that shoes appear bulbous, as large, unnatural protuberances extending from the leg.

I am thinking in particular of the exaggerated Neapolitan style of trouser which is most often guilty of producing this unfortunate effect.

I increasingly think that in all matters sartorial that understated, tasteful moderation is called for to obtain a harmonious balance in one's appearance.

The noble tailoring houses which have existed for many years are our best guides to successfully navigate these difficult issues.

If we push too hard, with our modern sensibilities, we may lose the golden mean which they have developed through trail and error over a long history.

This is good advice. What I dislike are pants that look like jodphurs in that they are baggy in the thigh and pegged at the ankle.

We also must keep in mind our own bodies. I am pretty stick legged, so a full pant just feels strange to me.

One thing is for sure, pant ankles should not resemble our ankles like you see a lot today inEurope. It just looks weird. For some reason it seems to be most popular in the Netherlands. Also, the style of shoe that you prefer is almost as important as shoe size when picking ankle width. When I was with Dimitri Gomez, he seemed to feel that this relationship was of the upmost importance.

[the tailor]

I am 5' 9"
Size 9 shoe UK
Trouser hem 19", with a little break.
I am starting to wear my trousers a little shorter at the front break.

[uppercase]

Yes, very important: shoe style and related trouser hem width need to be harmonious as Matt mentioned.

Plus, ofcourse, trouser width must ultimately be balanced with the coat. This is easier achieved when commissioning a suit as the tailor will usually be a good guide.

But if you're wearing a sports coat , you need to think a couple of times about choosing the right style trouser. Stove pipe leg trousers may not work with a loose drape sports coat.

Or a lean sports coat may not work with wide trousers although Caraceni made me a lean sports coat and paired it with quite wide trousers; I'm not sure that it works but I'm always up for a challenge to my exisiting limits and taste.

Anyway, same goes with shoes and trouser width. Do a pair of bulbous English shoes go with a lean Neapolitan trouser leg? Should one mix 2 different schools of dress?

I like a bit of discordance and don't want to overthink.

But again, more and more, I'm realizing that understated moderation in styles and dress plus reference to the classics of the past yields good results.

A final thought : access to a full length mirror in your home, which I don't happen to have yet, myself, is critical to being able to observe yourself in totality.

Then I'll be able to see whether my shoes look like duck feet protruding from my pegged trousers.

[blakewho]

Standing 5'9" tall, taking a size 8 UK shoe I have eventually settled on a 17" hem.

In my case this is not to show off my shoes to their best effect - I found the hem circumference of my trousers to be of primary importance in the appearance of any suit. Being rather larger in the hip & thigh area than anywhere else (despite a generally slim appearance), I find a gentle taper towards the ankle helps to elongate my rather stumpy legs. At 18" the effect is simply too baggy and square, at 17" the cloth seems to float just above the skin. Any narrower and I suspect I would be wearing drainpipes.

The additional display of fine shoe leather is merely a pleasing by-product!

But I would urge the consideration of what I have heard termed the "slope to heel" or "military" cut of trouser hem, in which the front is cut slightly shorter, thus allowing it to settle gently atop the instep without too much ruffle. I honestly cannot imagine why all trousers are not cut this way, and it does display the shoes wonderfully well.