Tag: PreCollection

Utility – Striped Boxers – Blue – Medium?

041

image

Material: So old that the tag is unreadable and the brand doesn’t seem to exist anymore, but I’m guessing it’s close to 100% cotton.
Aesthetic: A little loose from its age, but I do generally like the look of boxers with relatively fine vertical striping. It’s a nice color combination too, and even when the fabric wasn’t loose with age, it looked as soft and breathable as it felt.
Waistband: Also loose with age, but overall a really nice, soft, relatively thin waistband, especially as true boxers’ waistbands tend to go.
Pouch: NA, since it’s a true boxer. In terms of your junk, thankfully it’s a loose boxer instead of a tight boxer, (by design this time, not just from age,) so everything hangs pretty freely.
Backside: Relatively flat since it’s a true boxer, (and not like a modern one that’s designed to be more form-fitting,) but it’s incredibly comfortable.
Legs: Could maybe be a bit longer, but are wide and non-restricting like you would expect from traditional true boxers.
Overall: 4/5 – despite being older than my high school degree and stretched loose with age, I do love this pair. At some point, I’ll need to find a good successor pair.
Great for: Sleepwear, Loungewear
Good for: NA

Joe Boxer – Classic Cotton Boxer – White – Medium

023

image

Material: 100% Cotton and soft as you’d expect it! (You might suggest it’s a function of this pair’s pre-collection age, but it has always been super-soft.)
Aesthetic: You can’t really go wrong with a classic white, plus a true Joe Boxer vintage white-waistband-with-bold-black-text waistband – unless, of course, the pair has aged to the point of looking thin and ragged, which this pair somewhat has. Still, if you can get your hands on a crisp, fresh pair of classic white boxer-briefs like this pair, I’d say go for it!
Waistband: Feeling-wise, what you expect of most waistbands. Sits right up at or beneath the waist; good size.
Pouch: The one downside for having a truly classic white (boxer) brief look is that there’s essentially no shape whatsoever to the pouch – it’s super flat. The one upside to this pair is that it’s not entirely a true traditional vertical fly – the inner fly opening is a looser, non-trimmed horizontal opening not unlike the inner fly opening in the Jack Adams Core Cycle Trunk. However, while the inner opening of the fly has easy access, the outer opening is NOT, at least not by design. The opening is small and attaches too far up the “V” structure of the brief, making this more similar to the AC Tagless Brief. At least, it was – as you can see from the photos below, I’ve made a modification to the pair. Back in my late teens, I was as annoyed with the inaccessible fly opening as I am now, but I still loved the overall feel of the pair and the inner fly opening, so I decided to take a pair of scissors to the pair. Snip snip! You can see now that the right and left “triangles” formed by the trim/piping are no longer the same size. I wouldn’t do this to any pair I’ve purchased recently, or at least any pair that’s worth more than $6 or $8 – I think this is only a real option for underwear that you’d buy in bulk and isn’t designed to stand out.

image

Backside: Like the front, rather flat, though there’s at least a slight curve between the legs.
Legs: At this point in time, they’re getting worn and loose, but they were similar to the Core Cycle Trunk originally, if a bit shorter.
Overall: 2.5/5 – I do love sleeping in these, and they’re good to wear for a day in the office as well, but they’re really hard to find at this point, (the closest I’ve found are here,)and you can do sooooo much better pouch-wise anyway.
Great for: Sleepwear
Good for: Everyday wear, Loungewear