Trouser Pleats

[uppercase]

Which is more slimming: forward or reverse pleats?
TIA
UC

[Costi]

Fullness goes with fullness, I think. Forward pleats throw the fullness forward, where I understand it's needed So you can't tell if the fullness it's from the cut or from what lies underneath. Reverse pleats make for a neat front and give away anything that is less than perfect - they work fine with a flat stomach, if the wearer feels he works hard to maintain it and doesn't want it to go unnoticed. But anything looks good on a slim man...

[couch]

Uppercase, there was quite an extensive discussion of this and other aspects of the pleated life a few years back in this thread. Unfortunately some of the images have been lost, but you can follow the topic.

I retain the view that forward pleats throw any added fullness on opening toward the hips, while reverse pleats throw it forward below the stomach. The line from the main forward pleats into the creases also throws the shadows to the inside, which may make those vertical lines appear closer together and more pronounced than the equivalent lines with reverse pleats. So I think forward pleats are more flattering to and elegant on most men, the exception perhaps being slim men whose hips are wider than the ideal. But the difference is not likely to be dramatic. And, as the other side of the effects just described, reverse pleats may preserve a smoother front below the waist when walking / sitting. Tom Mahon has written that he feels forward pleats are slimming, and manton has all his trousers cut with forward pleats.

[davidhuh]

So I think forward pleats are more flattering to and elegant on most men (...) Tom Mahon has written that he feels forward pleats are slimming, and manton has all his trousers cut with forward pleats.

Agree with Couch. Mr. Mahon has convinced me about the forward pleats, which I have never regretted. I find the effect quite dramatic - in the most positive sense. I don't really need slimming effects though.

Cheers, David

[rodes]

Forward pleats always for me. They are more elegant and usually, though not always, an indication that the trousers are not RTW. All my suit and dressy odd trousers have them. Flat fronts only on casual trousers.

[JCH]

I cannot add to the well thought out reasons already posited for why, or even say I understand them. But the conclusion I have reached for me—without doubt—forward.

[Jordan Marc]

As far as I'm concerned, double forward pleats that are somewhat deeper than usual are the only way to go, especially when you're seated. Furthermore, pleated trousers should be held up by brace buttons
or self-fabric side adjusters with metal buckles. The proper placement for side adjusters is half-on the waistband, half off the waistband. Pleated trousers held up with a belt and loops around the waistband cut a man's torso in a peculiar way that's rather unattractive. Of course holding up your trousers
could be a helluva lot worse. Think of those poor bedraggled hiphoppers whose pants are falling off
their asses. Children only a mother could love.

JMB

[Gruto]

I find the effect quite dramatic - in the most positive sense.

Dramatic, I like that word But, I doubt that forward pleats have much to do with a slimming effect. That really seems to come from the cut of trousers a lot more than pleats/no pleats forward /reverse pleats. In my experience, a good tailor can cut a pair of trousers with "slimming effect" with deep pleats or without.

[bond_and_beyond]

As has been said on this forum by many (mainly mr Alden I believe): Sean Connery in the early Bond films gets it right. Slim fit and full cut at the same time.

DN_129-1.jpg

[uppercase]

There's more than one point of view.

I think that the king does it better than Bond....James, that is.

[bond_and_beyond]

Uppercase,

I do agree that the examples you posted are indeed the very height of elegance with regards to trousers. However I fear that such trousers are confined to a certain era, and will resemble more costume these days. 007's trousers on the other hand should, thanks to their fitted shape, be as acceptable today as in 1962.

S

[rodes]

It is very hard for Clark Gable with his broad shoulders, narrow waist, and long legs to look bad. In this case the line of his trousers is enhanced by what appears to be very heavy cloth and recent pressing. However, IMO, he would look marginally better with forward pleats.