Men's Clothing Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What type of alterations or pant names does anyone suggest to make short legs appear less stumpy. I am 5'7 with a 32" waist an inseam of 28". Seems like most off the shelve chinos/pants for me are too full in the thigh and too wide at the leg opening. I really like tapered legs and narrow leg openings.

Thanks a lot for any help!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,994 Posts
Polo makes some pants with narrower legs, but I don't know which models. And the Bills M3 model is supposedly pretty slim. You'll probably want to avoid cuffs and full breaks as a general rule.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
Polo makes some pants with narrower legs, but I don't know which models. And the Bills M3 model is supposedly pretty slim. You'll probably want to avoid cuffs and full breaks as a general rule.
I have a similar challenge--inseam runs between 27" & 28", depending on the cut of the trouser. I avoid breaks, but not cuffs.

Good luck!

hbs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,994 Posts
I have a similar challenge--inseam runs between 27" & 28", depending on the cut of the trouser. I avoid breaks, but not cuffs.

Good luck!

hbs
Does the cuff not visually cut a couple of inches off of your leg length? Or does it maybe visually add length, as though you've got 27-28" of inseam plus the additional width of the cuff? Either way, I would think a full break would be the worst thing a person with short legs could do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
Does the cuff not visually cut a couple of inches off of your leg length? Or does it maybe visually add length, as though you've got 27-28" of inseam plus the additional width of the cuff? Either way, I would think a full break would be the worst thing a person with short legs could do.
I suppose the logical approach would be to skip the horizontal distraction of cuffs, but cuffs on dress (not formal) trousers is one short step removed from an article of the Faith with me.
Overly wide leg bottoms seem to be more of a shortness emphasis for me--look like they were cut off just below the ("normal") knee.

Ah, the joys of Hobbit ancestry...:rolleyes:

hbs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,186 Posts
^ Yeah, I went short (no break) on my Bills until I discovered how wide the leg bottom is. Doesn't quite work.

Now I aim for the golden mean: Slight break. Shoe type can change the game here.

Same goes for jacket sleeves: First I wore them too long. Then I went too short on a couple jackets. Shirt sleeves can change the situation here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
655 Posts
My legs are bit longer, but I'm about the same height.
I actually like the J crew Classic fit. It's pretty slim, and looks right on my legs. You can get them hemmed for free at many of the stores. Get no break or a very slight break. Make sure to be very clear, as you may not be measured by someone who knows what they are doing. Then again, mine came out perfect, and I've had pants butchered by professional alterationists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
I am also graced with a 28-29 inch inseam. I think you have to keep the whole outfit in mind when dressing, not just the pants. Contrasting shirt and pants will make us look shorter, as will short sleeve shirts, horizontal stripes, etc. Jacket length is also critical. Anything to accentuate a long vertical line from the toes of our shoes to the top of our heads is a good thing.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top