1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Manufacturers XXL Clothing sizes are ridiculous!

Discussion in 'Components, Accessories and Clothing' started by Bigtallfatbloke, 22 Jul 2007.

  1. Bigtallfatbloke

    Bigtallfatbloke New Member

    Ok here is an example for some Altura night vision trousers I liked:



    Altura Size Chart
    MEN S M L XL XXL
    Chest 36-37" 38-39" 40-42" 43-44" 45-46"
    91.5-94cm 96.5-99cm 101.5-106.5cm 109-112cm 114.5-117cm
    Waist 25-28" 28-31" 32-34" 35-37" 38-40"
    63.5-71cm 71-78.5cm 81.5-86.5cm 89-94cm 96.5-101.5cm
    WOMEN S M L XL XXL
    UK Size 8 10 12 14 16

    How on earth can a waist size of just 38" be considered as XXL?????!!!

    I have just measured myself around the hips (not belly) and I have almost no flab on my hips (it's all belly!) and the absolute minium I would be even if I were a bloody skeleton is 46". I am 6'4" tall and I really do not think I am some kind of freak...!!:biggrin:

    ..and this is just one manufacturer...most are similar.
    Personally i find this 'biggism' offensive...

    come on Altura (and others) all i want to do is give you my cash...time you woke up to reality.
     
  2. Dayvo

    Dayvo Just passin' through

    Location:
    O' slO'
    Not the flashest of shorts, but Bourne Sports offer a fairly good selection of bib shorts up to a XXXl size: what that equates to in real terms I don't know.

    http://www.bournesports.com/Public/Bib_Shorts/5172.htm
     
  3. Steve Austin

    Steve Austin The Marmalade Kid

    Location:
    Mlehworld
    I bought a jersey the other day that was xxl.

    I also own jerseys that are M, L, XL so i have no idea what to buy anymore.
     
  4. Fab Foodie

    Fab Foodie hanging-on in quiet desperation ...

    Yeah, I'm becoming middle-aged as well...:biggrin:
     
  5. rustychisel

    rustychisel Well-Known Member

    ba-boom ching!!!!
     
  6. chris42

    chris42 New Member

    Location:
    Deal, Kent
    Pearl Izumi make their clothes in US. XL wich is very large! :biggrin:
     
  7. gbyers

    gbyers New Member

    Location:
    Leeds
    My experience says sizes are expanding. I've been medium in just about everything all my life now I can get into small in polo shirts, T shirts etc. My chest has not collapsed BTW.

    I think this is generally so in all sizes esp women's (never tried them on I hasten to add)

    Shoe sizes are getting random. Size 9 since my teens now I've got nothing above 9 and a pair of boots from Clarks which are 7 and a half.

    Great, first your hair goes, then your teeth fall out, then your fitness drops off and finally your feet shrink.:biggrin:
     
  8. monnet

    monnet Über Member

    gbyers, that's exactly what's happened to me.
    - always been medium, now buy small alot of the time.
    - always been size nine but was worried my feet were shrinking as all my shoes are now 8's (I tried some clark's a couple of months ago and was down to 7)

    I've gone from clothes shopping being easy because I was mr average size to finding it impossible as everything is so big. Maybe I'll just wear lycra all the time - I've never had trouble getting the right size cycling clothing.
     
  9. Blonde

    Blonde New Member

    Location:
    Bury, Lancashire
    I'm a 'large' in women's and a 'medium' in Men's cycle kit. A size 12 is not really 'large' though - just look at any of the non-cycling women on the high street - almost all of them are bigger than a size 12 and almost all of them are several inches shorter in height than me too! High street stores tend to call a size 12 a 'medium' but for some reason it's always a 'large' when it comes to cycling kit. Has anyone else noticed this? Cycle kit does seem to be consistently marked as a larger size than ordinary clothes of the same measurements. Odd. Maybe it's meant to make people want to cycle more to lose weight and be able to fit in the smaller sizes... or something... apparently many high street stores have made their sizes bigger for the opposite reasons - so people can pretend they aren't fat and but a Small or a 'size 10', or whatever, when they are really a bigger size. Asda's size 10 fits me, but I know this is because their measurements for their sizes are much bigger than other stores. Does this mean we're destined to buy ever decreasing 'sizes' in ordinary clothes and ever increasing 'sizes' in cycle kit?
     
  10. monnet

    monnet Über Member

    I think bigtallfatbloke has complained about this before
     
  11. gbyers

    gbyers New Member

    Location:
    Leeds
    Whew it's not just me.........

    I read recently that even when sizes are given in inches American garments are actually larger than the waistband, e.g. 32" trousers will measure out at 34". This was in the context that the population was getting bigger but didn't necessarily like to be confronted by it.

    Blonde - I think women's sizes have stayed the same measurement but the population now wears 12-14 instead of 10-12 a generation ago.

    I think you're right about cycling kit i sent a cyclejersey.com medium back for a large, perfect fit. Any non cycling large garment would be too big.

    Makes buying on line a bit of a gamble even if you follow the sizing charts.
     
  12. monnet

    monnet Über Member

    No not just you, and I was going to mention the waist size issue as well. It's another problem area for me. I'm the same weight I was ten years ago but then a 30-32 was a nice fit, now it makes me look like an LA 'gangsta' - not my style at all!
     
  13. Blonde

    Blonde New Member

    Location:
    Bury, Lancashire
    No, 'sizes' have definitely got bigger, which is why those who now wear a 10-12 in most shops (me) are really wearing a 1950s' 14-16, but Asda's '10' is the same measurement as a 12 in other shops, or the same as 1950s 14, which at two real 'sizes' bigger, is just getting ridiculous! No wonder people are getting fatter - clothing manufacturers, with their oversized 'small', try to make people think they are a much smaller size than they actually are!
     
  14. alecstilleyedye

    alecstilleyedye nothing in moderation Staff Member

    some replica team tops are certainly sized for the pros. i have an xxl z-peugeot top which, despite the fact that am only 5'7" and not built like the proverbial brick outhouse, fits fine. i'd imagine m (which is what i am for aldi's cycling stuff) would only have fitted a rasmussenesque figure.
     
  15. MsMalfoy

    MsMalfoy New Member

    Location:
    Derby
    Get out on your bike more then you'll be able to fit in the gear.

    I've a similar prob in that I have to wear mens cycling clother at the moment as I'm currently a size 20/22, down from the size 28 I was back in February.
    Most womens cycling gear stops at about a size 16, they class this as XL.
    Thankfully I should be able to fit in the more girly gear by the end of the year.
    At the moment I'm wearing Ronhill Bikesters in XL and Polaris jerseys in XL.
    The Ronhill gear is generally quite generously sized in my experience.
    (I wear their running kit too)