[paulluuk]

I bought a 200 dollar jacket and it had holes in it within months, just from regular use. I have an old 3 dollar shirt I bought years ago and it's only now beginning to show wear.

One problem this shows, is that as a consumer I have no idea what the hell is quality clothing. Clearly, expensive does not always mean high quality. And I'm not buying "brand" clothing either.

[torben-friis]

Another problem is the dive to the bottom that the industry has suffered.

Your experience is very common, I have a fake nike sweatshirt I bought more than a decade ago from a random street seller (emergency on a trip) which still outlasts current brand clothes.

Consumers' ignorance is not the problem, it used to be generally true that the more expensive item was better. Every brand has seemingly decided to burn their furniture to heat the house though, and what we experience is not as much consumer ignorance as it is a lack of names deserving trust.

[jbaber]

This happened to me.

I tried to be a good boy and wrote to the company asking for zipper parts to fix it and they told me to buy another jacket.

So I looked for companies that advertise repairability and found Patagonia made the most believable claims. Quite reasonable now that I'm old and rich, but I wouldn't have had the choice when young and poor.

[JKCalhoun]

They knew what "slow fashion" was 100 years ago when shirt collars and sleeve cuffs were turned to double the life of the garment.

[mikepurvis]

I've started buying "nicer" things purely for fit reasons, like I've realized that I'm a lean 6' guy with a long torso, so for shirts and especially sweaters a medium is too short and a large is too baggy— the correct size for me in off-the-rack items is a tall medium, and that's definitely not available everywhere.

So I'm extremely happy with a Land's End quarter zip that I picked up recently, and I hope that's a well-made piece that will last a while, but overall I completely agree that mass-produced clothing is a market for lemons; no one can tell what the good stuff is, so it's all assumed to be garbage and priced accordingly.

[ninalanyon]

Buy second hand clothes. These are either very, very, cheap, and they last just long enough for me to get bored with them. Or they are merely fairly cheap and last almost forever because the stuff that quickly falls apart doesn't get resold, it gets discarded by the person who bought it new.

In either case I have lengthened the time between manufacturing and landfill and had the enjoyment of clothes that I would otherwise not have been able to afford along the way.

[paulluuk]

I've tried, but I've been to so many thrift stores and never found anything I liked or which fit well. I'm a tall guy and the men's section of thrift stores is just filled with what I assume is the clothes that widows donate after their husbands die. And I don't mean that as a joke, half of it looks like something a small boxy train conductor in the 50s would wear.

[J1philli]

I think my parents knew this. I grew up with second hand clothes almost exclusively and didn't really know until I asked my parents about it when I was older. It is a great strat to find quality clothes.

[padolsey]

Yep :/ There are just no good heuristics left for quality clothing. It's horrible. One thing I do genuinely have good experience with is Japanese denim. But that's about it.

[IAmBroom]

I've been trying to buy winter coats at end of season (coincidentally; not chasing sales), and one thing is consistent: fabric content is only hinted at. "Full wool" but "slightly stretchy" - possible with a broadcloth woven wool, but more likely "full"!=100%. "Cashmere" at prices that can (at best) be 10% cashmere, but might be 2% just to avoid outright fraud.

I bought a really good-looking dark blue fedora; I received a really good-looking black fedora a size-and-a-1/2 too big. I had to fight them at the credit card level, because they offered me half off at best for a hat I can't wear.

What is inconsistent: only some of them are fraudulent fronts. I'd guess about 25-50% right now, based on my recent shopping experiences. But not all: I ordered some expensive gloves; their advertised fit was wrong; we settled on 50% off (I /can/ wear them, but it's not ideal, and their return policy clearly required me to ship back). That firm had shite measurement guides, but honest merchant fronting.

I've ordered super-cool button-front shirts that ended up being tissue-like fabric. Grrr...

Speaking of fabric... Amazon folded Fabric.com into their Borg cube, and you CANNOT buy fabric by weight online - for some goddamn reason. I want to buy 100% white cotton for a play costume, and need it thicker - between sheeting and terrycloth; closer to the latter; Nothing else really matters to me about it. But can I determine the cloth thickness/weight? Nope.

So: 50% swindlers; 75% idiots; buy clothes in person or else expect to throw a certain amount away.

[ninalanyon]

In Europe if a garment says 100% New Wool it had better be just that. I have several coats with varying proportions of wool, nylon, etc. All bought secondhand and of very high quality compared to the price I paid.

Of course they aren't the latest fashion but clothes that last are by definition out of fashion for most of their existence.

[SV_BubbleTime]

>I bought a really good-looking dark blue fedora; I received a really good-looking black fedora a size-and-a-1/2 too big. I had to fight them

Ah, very relatable…

>buy clothes in person or else expect to throw a certain amount away.

That’s reasonable.

[cannonpr]

A “quality” jacket in the 1930s would cost 300-400$ or more inflation adjusted, it would also look less fashionable today, and feel somewhat less comfortable due to several concessions for durability in design. A durable quality jacket back then was also holding a majority market position, rather than being a niche good, which means that “quality clothes” do still seem to exist, but I’m always looking at 500-600$ for durable jeans or coats.

[SV_BubbleTime]

>but I’m always looking at 500-600$ for durable jeans

tf.

That’s clearly you looking for a specific fashion or intending to pay as much as you can.

Triple Aught Design jeans are $150 to $250 and I am skeptical you have anything that is outlasting them. Others brands surely as well. Seems to me you are still stuck in the “if it costs more…” line of thinking.

[cannonpr]

No, I am just buying import Japanese jeans from the folk that bought all of the original high quality jeans making machines when the Americans moved to the flexi stuff, the jeans I buy last with next to no damage for 10-15 years despite near daily wear. I will grant you that I am paying a premium for both import, and a particular quality of fabric, but honestly I look like farmer Joe mostly.

[mikepurvis]

I recently ordered some Levis that I'm happy with, but I think there's also a limit for me in that certain life-things can happen that will end a garment regardless of how much was paid for it or how much it was babied.

I'm pretty disciplined about wearing a bib in the kitchen these days, but you can still get a glass of wine on it at the dinner table, or sparks from a campfire, or a cycling wipeout. Those are annoying at the best of times, but particularly if it ends a garment that you paid 3-5x normal price for specifically so you could have it forever.

[khimaros]

having burned though easily 10 pairs of Triple Aught pants of various designs, they are well made and attractive, but durability is not an outlier from my experience. each design consistently fails in the same area with regular use. i tend to repurchase the designs that fit and function well, but they all inevitably fall.