The Way Trousers/Chinos Sit On Shoes

[geo]

Maybe (probably) this is just me being a perfectionist and fussy but the way chinos etc sit on proper shoes i.e. brogues really annoys me.

I find if they are a straighter fit with a wider hem, they will fall and sit on the tongue/laces of the shoes nicely. But straighter fit/slightly wider hem often means they are not as slim fitting in other parts such as thighs etc.

My preference is to wear slim (not skin tight) chinos/trousers which taper slightly - I wear them mainly because I often wear loafers, which I personally think suit a slimmer style of trouser leg. Loafers are great and although you can get smart leather ones, there are times that proper brogues and lace ups are necessary. But I just find with these same slimmer chinos the way they sit on the shoe causes them to ruffle slightly at the bottom. Because they are a slightly narrower hem, they are just wide enough to sit and fall over the tongue of the shoe, but only seem ok when standing dead still. Does anyone else have this same gripe?

I basically mostly choose chinos and trousers based on their fit and suitability for wearing with loafers and not proper lace ups - do most people think slimmer trousers look okay with both shoe types, which are very different. In an ideal world I would have each pair of chinos etc. in a nice slim narrow silhouette for wear with loafers, which can afford to be that bit narrower, and then a pair with just a bit longer in length by half an inch / wider in hem by a bit for wear with proper brogues and shoes. Sadly I think I'll have to compromise!

Also, what annoys me in stores and especially online is when they show a pair of chinos being worn with a pair of brogues, which look great and sit perfectly, and then the same chinos worn with loafers, which also look tailored to perfection..obviously they pin the chinos to make them that bit more narrow for the picture with the loafers.

I guess a solution would be to keep my chinos that bit less narrow so they can be worn with both loafers and shoes, but I really like the narrow style with loafers and don't want to compromise on that look either.....

Here's an example of ones that appear to look good with loafers and then scroll through pictures to the same ones with brogues ..but in reality it doesn't seem to work.

http://www.my-wardrobe.com/dockers/s...-chinos-944894

[paul-b]

I'm not entirely sure on the issue you're having. You say the slim trousers ruffle too much on standard shoes, but then you say they're only okay when standing dead still (which is where I'd expect them to ruffle more), so I'm a little confused. Unless you're using the term "ruffle" to describe something other than the "break" of the trousers.

Where do you want the trousers to sit on the standard shoes, and where do you want them to sit on the loafers? I can't really suggest anything further without more of an idea on that. My personal preference with slim trousers is to have them sit naturally on the shoe (which with my slimmest is only just on the top) with a little break so that they look long enough, but at the same time not too bunched up.

As for the link you provided, I think the trousers are breaking too much in the opening image with the loafers, whereas the image before with the tan brogues they're sitting nicely. However, further on there's an image with the loafers where he's holding a bag, and they look fine there.

[geo]

Perhaps I did not explain correctly - by ruffle, I did not mean they bunch up because they are far too long. I meant at the hem and on the shin of the trouser, they just don't seem to sit as well because of them being narrower with no break and thus seem to sit on proper shoes in a funny way by slightly hitting the tongue but not covering the laces and can sometimes not come back to sit behind the tongue if that makes sense?

Whereas a straighter fit with a wider hem will happily fall slightly lower because they are a bit wider and so are wide enough to cover the whole tongue and top of the laces, and do not cause any funny folds or awkward looking bits.

Regarding the link, I was not talking about the first picture, but the same images you were talking about - the image before with brogues is the look I want, but I find with the some of my slim trousers that are perfect with no break with loafers just are too narrow to nicely surround the shoe. Wheras in that picture with the brogues they have a wide enough hem to just cover the tongue/first lace of the shoe, my chinos that look perfect with loafers are that bit too narrow so that they fall slightly awkwardly on the tongue of the shoe causing the funny small creased bits around the hem/lower part of the trouser.

It is hard to explain without pictures of my issue, but I suppose I need to have chinos that are just not quite as narrow, so that they fall like the ones in the picture with the tan brogues discussed, rather than sitting slightly awkwardly due to being too narrow at the hem. I have just always thought slim/very slim trousers suit a loafer much more than a brogue - the tongue/enclosed nature of a proper brogue just doesn't seem to suit the very slim trousers in the way loafers do.

Having thought about it, probably when standing still is actually when it is at its worst and when walking etc it is probably not as noticeable.

[paul-b]

I get you now. Unfortunately I think that's just the nature of slim trousers. Mine do a similar thing, but as mine sit so high to start with, are narrow enough, and have little enough break, it doesn't really bother me because they don't end up looking much different. You could just get straighter trousers as you mentioned to suit the standard shoes, then roll them up with the loafers. Alternatively stick with the slim trousers and roll them up with both, or have them cropped, but it depends whether you like that kind of look.

Of course, if you can afford to buy both fits of trousers that's the best option, but it's not something that's appetising, especially if the same colour and style of the trousers (minus the fit) works with both shoes.

[geo]

Yes, think you're correct - sadly like a lot of things, we are presented with a superficial image portrayed by models of clothing brands that clothes such as slim trousers look perfect without a single bump/fold/crease when in real life this is not the case. The way they pin trousers to make them look perfect in pictures is then totally different to what we can achieve at home!

When you say yours sit so high, do you mean they barely even touch the tongue or front of the shoe at all so as not to make any crease or anything?

And what do you mean when you say have them cropped?

[Nath6644]

I think this is just another case of guys like us getting worked up over something that NO-ONE in the real world would notice =P

I generally vary the number or type of turn-ups depending on my footwear but that's about it.

[paul-b]

When you say yours sit so high, do you mean they barely even touch the tongue or front of the shoe at all so as not to make any crease or anything?

And what do you mean when you say have them cropped?

When sitting down as far as they will go, they just about cover the first eyelets, but the first eyelets are barely a centimetre down from the tongue on these particular shoes. You can actually see a very small amount of sock at the sides of the shoes because of how high the trousers sit, and they only just touch the rear of the shoes. Because of this, if they do land behind the knot of the laces and only just touch the tongue, they're hardly any further back than they were before, so they hardly look any different.
I would agree that it looks nicer if they cover the laces all the time, but the difference it makes for me isn't enough to be bothered about, and as Nath said, I doubt anyone would notice it. Depending on the design and the break of the trousers, coupled with the position of the laces, it could be more noticeable, which I guess is your issue.

In regards to cropping, I mean having them taken up permanently so they sit above the shoe, showing either ankles or socks all the time. As would be achieved by rolling them up a little, but without the roll ups.

[geo]

Ok, thanks. Out of interest how slim do you wear your chinos? As in what is the width of the hem?

Yeah, I guess the whole thing is something most people would never even notice about - and if I'm concerned about this, I think I've got to the point where I've got the general look sorted - just fine tuning. Plus, I think the whole issue also depends on the style of lace ups - whether the tongue sits high or lower.

[paul-b]

The ones in question measure about 13.5 inches.

[geo]

Ok, thanks. Also, from the original link in my original first post, would you guess the trousers there are around 13.5? As in, with the pics with brogues, do yours look the same/narrower? I know it's probably hard to tell but just to get an idea.