I guess you only consider the extremes as options.As David Mercer says, baggier is better. I don't like the skinned-rat look.
Brooks Regular and Traditional fits have an extra inch on the tail length. So there's something to consider for slim trads who complain about their shirt pulling out of pants.To add some color, on my 6'1", 150lbs frame with a 40" chest and 32" waist, the Regent (and similar brands') fit is not "skinny" or "tight" on me, but just not blousey or billowy. The Regent fit, fits me not much differently than a full-cut OCBD fits a regular guy with a stocky or full (not overweight) frame.
What a nice problem to have. I envy you....on my 6'1", 150lbs frame with a 40" chest and 32" waist...
I didn't know that - thank you. The Regent fit, compared to other brands, still has a pretty long tail though. I've only had the "untucking" issue with a few of the more modestly priced (cheaperBrooks Regular and Traditional fits have an extra inch on the tail length. So there's something to consider for slim trads who complain about their shirt pulling out of pants.
At 54, it takes work. I eat a third or less (and better and healthier, but less fun overall) than I did in my twenties, I drink a lot less and work out twice as much (I'm not exaggerating) all to stay at the same weight I was in my twenties and to stay in shape in general. I really started to take care of myself when I turned 40 and, while it's a lot of work as noted, I feel better physically and mentally than I did at 40 - which keeps me motivated to continue working hard at all of it.What a nice problem to have. I envy you.
This. I'm a similar build (155 lbs, 5'11", 38 chest/32 waist), and I wear the 15.5/34 Milano fit ocbd. There's still excess fabric- it's not skin tight, but it is fitted. The traditional fit ocbd has enough excess fabric on me that I could make a second shirt out of it- it just looks sloppy. I could make a similar argument for pants- most here love the Bills Khakis M1 fit, but it looks like I'm wearing a dress with how wide the legs are. The M2 fits on me like the M1 fits on bigger guys- nothing wrong with that, it's understanding what fits my body type.180m 65kg, 36-37" chest, 30" waist and I wear the BB OCBDs in the Milano fit ( 15.5/34). They fit by no means skinny in the contemporary sense, but provide enough room to comfortably move around or work at a desk without being restrictive, yet they are not overly billowy.
I always cringe when "traditionalists" insist skinny fit shirts are the devil and full cut the only correct and also trad way to go, because body types vary so extremely. I have a rel. thick neck for my waist and chest and could probably wrap myself twice in the "traditional" fit OCBDs. Sure, a 200lb guy will look ridiculous in a Milano fit, but that's simply not the body type the fit is made for.
/rant: the pictures on the BB website depicting the fits are complete garbage, the Milano sits on my like the Madison on it's model. I can only assume that the "slimmer" cuts were deliberately pulled tighter on the back for the photo-shoot.
I have these incoming, theyll go well with the tie:Glad to see there are other +5'10''/>160 members.
Feel free to join our just-made-up club, Skin & Bones.
We meet for lunch once a month, but don't eat anything.
Here is our club tie;
View attachment 25029
& a shameless plug... should any of my fellow club members be looking to sell some clothing, drop me a line.
Similar size here: 5' 10" / 155 lbs / 33" waistThis. I'm a similar build (155 lbs, 5'11", 38 chest/32 waist), and I wear the 15.5/34 Milano fit ocbd. There's still excess fabric- it's not skin tight, but it is fitted. The traditional fit ocbd has enough excess fabric on me that I could make a second shirt out of it- it just looks sloppy.
180 meters tall 65kg, I assume you're "pencil thin?"180m 65kg, 36-37" chest, 30" waist and I wear the BB OCBDs in the Milano fit ( 15.5/34). They fit by no means skinny in the contemporary sense, but provide enough room to comfortably move around or work at a desk without being restrictive, yet they are not overly billowy.
I always cringe when "traditionalists" insist skinny fit shirts are the devil and full cut the only correct and also trad way to go, because body types vary so extremely. I have a rel. thick neck for my waist and chest and could probably wrap myself twice in the "traditional" fit OCBDs. Sure, a 200lb guy will look ridiculous in a Milano fit, but that's simply not the body type the fit is made for.
/rant: the pictures on the BB website depicting the fits are complete garbage, the Milano sits on my like the Madison on it's model. I can only assume that the "slimmer" cuts were deliberately pulled tighter on the back for the photo-shoot.
I would call it athletic thin. My body fat percentage is genetically very low. I can eat as much as I want without gaining substantial weight and maintain a high level of fitness without having to exercise much/at all.180 meters tall 65kg, I assume you're "pencil thin?"