3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community  

Go Back   3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community > Support Forum > General chatter

General chatter Because life isn't just about dieting. Play games, jokes, or share what's new in your life!

Brands most guilty of vanity sizing?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-28-2010, 10:10 PM   #1
One step at a time
 
mkendrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: OK
Posts: 1,286

S/C/G: 183/136.2/125-130

Height: 5'7

Default Brands most guilty of vanity sizing?

I know that the sizing system as a whole is more or less useless anymore, but just out of curiosity and for the sake of discussion...which brands have the most extreme vanity sizing, in your experience? Which ones are closest to "true sizes?"

American Eagle jeans fit my body the best, so I have been wearing them since I was 14 (I'm 22 now). Since I was 14 years old, I was a size 12 in American Eagle. At my highest weight, I was stuffing myself into those AE 12's like an overfilled sausage. I had a rubberband that connected the button to the button hole, lol. I absolutely refused to buy a pair of 14's. That was one of the wake up calls that I really needed to get a handle on my weight. I'm now a size 0 in AE jeans.

It seems that American Eagle is fairly guilty of vanity sizing. I'm easily a 0 at Gap, Aeropostle, and Abercrombie. Size 0's at Old Navy will button and zip up on me and fit well enough, but I'd probably get a size 2 for comfort reasons. I thought that was kind of odd since people always point the finger at Old Navy for having outrageous vanity sizing.

I've often heard that wedding dresses and formal dresses are closer to true sizes than street clothes. My wedding dress is a size 2 (David's Bridal), and I recently had a military ball where I wore a size 1/2 dress from Dillards. So if a 2 is my true size, I'd have to say that Old Navy has been the most accurate store for me.

Any thoughts? Again, just out of curiosity. Sizing is such nonsense these days it's hardly worth paying attention to, but kinda fun to point out the most guilty brands anyways
__________________
Megan Jewel
Success is a journey, not a destination

Goal Weight reached on: June 14, 2010
Monday Accountability Weigh-in: 136.2 - 10/10/2011...time to get back on the pony!

mkendrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2010, 10:19 PM   #2
June
 
runningfromfat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Brasil
Posts: 2,620

S/C/G: 240/184/155

Height: 5'6"

Default

I actually just posted threads similar to this recently:

So sick of vanity sizing!
BMI, measurements and sizes

Basically, long story short I had bought two pairs of size 14's at old navy and was shocked that they were too big (so maybe I'm a 12?). I wonder if they could have vanity sizing in the larger sizes and are more true to size in the smaller sizes?

I heard somewhere that H&M and Zara are more accurate (I have on old H&M size 12 pair of pants that are just a little bit too tight still but I have a size 14 skirt that fits perfectly so I think my "true size" is 14 then ).
__________________

Starting Measurements (B/W/H): about 51/40/46, 240 lbs Goal Reached Pre-Pregnancy: 39/29.5/38, 156lbs Current: about 43/34/42
Mini-Goals
Started at 240
Onederland 199 (Jan 6, 2010, exactly 2 years after my previous due date!)
Overweight BMI 185 (Aug 3, 2011, one year after joining 3FC!)
Pre-pregnancy weight 175 (Oct 18, 2011)
Called Goal 156

My Bras, Fashion, and Weight Loss Blog
runningfromfat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2010, 10:54 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 122

S/C/G: 177/137/122

Height: 5ft 4in

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by runningfromfat View Post
I actually just posted threads similar to this recently:

So sick of vanity sizing!
BMI, measurements and sizes

Basically, long story short I had bought two pairs of size 14's at old navy and was shocked that they were too big (so maybe I'm a 12?). I wonder if they could have vanity sizing in the larger sizes and are more true to size in the smaller sizes?

I heard somewhere that H&M and Zara are more accurate (I have on old H&M size 12 pair of pants that are just a little bit too tight still but I have a size 14 skirt that fits perfectly so I think my "true size" is 14 then ).
Don't really have much to say on vanity sizing, but I wanted to say that I went to a Zara when I was in Puerto Rico this summer and loved it! Sadly the closest one to where I live is in Chicago (a 6-8 hour drive, not sure since I've never been there) so I have not been able to shop there since. I just found out that they are launching an online store in the US in mid 2011 and am totally excited. I really recommend it, that place is awesome!
__________________
Paloma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2010, 11:00 PM   #4
Staying the Same
 
krampus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Troy, NY
Posts: 6,443

S/C/G: 160+/116/this is fine

Height: 5'5

Default

Zara is nice, if a little overpriced. Realistic, average European sizing. No dice for short people though :'(

H&M caused a sh!tstorm when they flipped their sizes a few years back. They were generous and vanity-sized around 2004 and then somewhere maybe 2006 or so their sizes suddenly shrunk and there was an uproar.
__________________
Push on some more!

http://www.3fatchicks.com/diet-blogs/krampus
krampus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 03:14 AM   #5
Calorie Counter
 
RoseRodent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 470

S/C/G: 197/ticker/136

Height: 1.65m

Default

If your sizes carry on getting any more generous over there everyone will be wearing a 0, 00, 000, 4x0... I think we need to go back to the drawing board. Then again the UK doesn't make a whole lot more sense because essentially we start at a 6 - there's nothing below 6, why not start with zero?

There's a lot less variation in small sizes because if you are already climbing into a zero they reckon your ego doesn't need a lot of flattery, but go further up to a US12 or UK16 and you can get much more variety. A 16 is the last size before "plus sized" here, so it's in manufacturers' interests to squeeze as many bodies as they can into the 16.

I think there's also more variety in shape at larger sizes. At a size 2 you might be a natural apple, pear or ectomorph (straight) but since wherever your body fat settles there isn't much of it most size 2 people are the same size and shape. When you get to a UK16 an apple might have a waist 6 inches bigger than a pear and a pear's hips could be 6 inches bigger than the apple, so to try to accommodate that variety they cut them big in both places and fill them with spandex in the hope that the waist will not drop off the pear (it always does!) and that it will do up around the apple.
__________________
_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

Immediate goal:
Undo holiday lapse, back to 160
BMI under 30: Maintained THREE YEARS!
BMI back under 28:
BMI back under 25:
Goal:
RoseRodent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 04:00 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
ringmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,321

S/C/G: 198/155/140

Height: 5'9"

Default

I think one way to tell is to look at their sizing guide and check your waist size to see if it matches up. Calvin Klein seems to be generous with their sizing...
ringmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 07:55 AM   #7
Closet health nut!
 
ncuneo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,297

S/C/G: S268/C170s/G140s

Height: Officially 5'-6"

Default

I don't know, I think Old Navy sizes are huge! I'm a 6/8 there but an 8/10 most other places. I'd say Old Navy, Gap, Ann Taylor and Banana Republic top my list, Target too. I think just like everything else it's going to depend on your shape as to who's clothes fit you best and who's seem like vanity.
__________________
My Journey
268 lbs - Journey Begins (January 11, 2006)
197 lbs - 71 lbs lost (October 15, 2007)
247 lbs - 50 lbs gained pregnancy (August 22, 2008)
195 lbs - baby weight gone (July 7, 2009)
168 lbs - 100 lbs lost (March 26, 2010)
148 lbs - GOAL! 120 lbs lost (July 18, 2010)
138 lbs - 10 lbs under goal (December 29, 2010)
PR 1/2 Marathon - Time 1:59:50 (November 11, 2012)
PR Marathon - Time 4:40:53 (March 18, 2012)
Today 140s & training for my Health
"There is nothing you can't have tomorrow so there is no reason to eat it all today."
ncuneo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 07:57 AM   #8
Reforming Cheese Addict
 
SheriWantsToRun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Maine
Posts: 28

S/C/G: 280/see ticker/130

Height: 5'2''

Default

I've always found Old Navy to run a bit large, but I boycotted them years ago when they stopped selling fat girl clothes in the stores around here and only made them available online. I don't get insulted very easily, but Old Navy definitely managed to offend me.
SheriWantsToRun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 09:30 AM   #9
Really maintaining now!
 
catherinef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 479

S/C/G: 375.6/low 160s maintaining

Height: 6'

Default

I find Gap to be the worst offender, by far. Really, for my size, I should not be wearing so many Smalls. They aren't consistent, either, because I have everything from an XL to an XS in my collection of Gap clothing.
__________________
Began 14 August 2008
Initial goal of 175 reached 5 July 2010
Goal reset to 160
Maintaining 160-165 since November 2010
catherinef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 09:35 AM   #10
Calorie counter
 
Eliana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,679

Height: 5'4.5"

Default

I am another who finds Old Navy SMALLER not bigger. But I also find them extremely inconsistent.

Catherine, I agree about Gap. Gap is a big offender. I run L to XS as well. They used to be known for running small.

I think Kohl's is a big offender too.
__________________
Long term goal: To still be calorie counting 11/9/2010
mini goals: ~211-10% lost;12/24/09 ~203 class I obesity 1/28/10; ~199 Onederland/15% 2/19/10; ~188-20%; ~185 half way 5/14/10; 179-bye 180's 6/12/10; ~174 overweight 7/3/2010;169-bye 170's 8/13/10;~164-30% 10/23/2010159-bye 160's~11/1/10; 153-35%~12/23/10; 149-bye 150's~2/11/11; 145 normal~2/14/2011; ~141-40%; 139-bye 140's ~135 GOAL! (129-45%; 117.5-50%)






My "goal" story: http://www.3fatchicks.com/forum/goal...goal-post.html

Last edited by Eliana : 11-29-2010 at 09:35 AM.
Eliana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 11:02 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
stargzr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,022

S/C/G: original 221 198/ticker/150

Height: 5'9"

Default

I think shape has something to do with sizing also... I can't wear AE jeans because of my butt. They just aren't tall enough in the back for me to pull them over my rear. What's sad is that I can button them without pulling them all the way up, which is another story altogether, lol. My fav jeans are Levi's. I can wear an 8 now, but I was barely fitting in a 6 at 153. I have some really old jeans from Anchor Blue that I love, but they've changed they way they make jeans so I can't wear anything from there now (see butt comment above, haha). I also like Merona from Target, they seem to be pretty true to size. As for shirts, I'm pretty much a medium anywhere I go...
__________________
Mini Goals - 179 achieved: 169 achieved: 163 achieved: 159 achieved:
145-150 achieved(GOAL! I get to spend my gift cards on new clothes!)

stargzr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 11:20 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Pint Sized Terror's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ohio, US
Posts: 842

S/C/G: CW: 155 GW: 130

Height: 5'2"

Default

I think it has to do with the actual cut of the jeans, tbh.

Most of Old Navy's jeans have spandex in them for extra stretch. That means they will run a bit bigger. But I've noticed lately that they are getting away from that a little more, and more and more jeans don't contain that stretch. I have a size 10 from Old Navy that fit very tightly when I first put them on, but within a few hours they are falling down. By the end of the day I can pull them off without unbuttoning them. I also have an older pair of Old Navy jeans that I bought about 7 years ago . They are a size 10 and I can't get them up past my hips. They are low-rise jeans, which run slim at ON. Even when I first bought them my butt was hanging out and I had muffin-top.

In some styles of Levis I'm a 12, and others a size 6. When I put my goal measurements into it, I'm anywhere from a size 6 to a "loose fitting" 2. They don't have the little My Virtual Model thing where you could try on their jeans and put in your measurements anymore though.
__________________
One Jivin' Bunny for every 5lbs lost:

Starting weight: 160lbs
First Goal: 150lbs

Second Goal: 140lbs
Third and Maybe FINAL GOAL: 130lbs
Pint Sized Terror is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 11:25 AM   #13
Delectable Inside + Out
 
Pudgebrownie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 191

S/C/G: 163.3/132.8/100

Height: 5'00

Default

Your body shape plays a huge factor in how certain brands fit. I find that Kohl's and Dress Barn run large. I'm currently a size 5/6 in jeans and XS in tops but at Kohl's and Dress Barn I can squeeze into smaller.
__________________


My tags: Wife Mama Globetrotter Baker Artist Pinay LDS
Pudgebrownie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 05:34 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
sisypheanme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 107

S/C/G: 175+/113/120

Height: 5'6"

Default

New York and company is a giant offender. The XS shirts in there just hang on my frame. The size 0 pants are spacious. I agree Calvin Klein is big as well as several of the Kohls designer labels (Daisy Fuentes, etc). I think the seven brand of jeans is fairly true to size. My legs are toned I weigh 116 at 5'6" and get into a 26 (us 3) in that brand. Gap, Old nay, Calvin Klein, Ann Taylor, Express, etc i fit very easily into a 0. AE brand 00 and 0 fit...but they sure stretch out by the end of the day and I have to keep pulling them up. I find that some of the smaller stores are forever 21 (however they can be very inconsistent) and H&M. I wish we would move to a european sizing system--that might make things less confusing overall.
sisypheanme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2010, 07:08 PM   #15
Burn It!
 
Aclai4067's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,515

S/C/G: 310.6/310.6/155

Height: 5'8

Default

Old Navy and Target are by far and away the worst I've found. Old Navy's clothes also stretch horribly. Items that fit or are even a bit snug when I try them in the store are falling off of me later (literally, my pants fell down at work). Interesting that someone mentioned Ann Taylor, I guess it's all in your perspective. Their 18 runs just slightly smaller than an 18 at Torrid or Lane Bryant, so from the plus size perspective, I view Ann Taylor as true to size. But I suppose comepared to, say, J.Crew it does run quite big.
__________________
Ashley
Mini Goal 1- 5%


Overall:

Last edited by Aclai4067 : 11-29-2010 at 07:16 PM.
Aclai4067 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Posts by members, moderators and admins are not considered medical advice
and no guarantee is made against accuracy.


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:11 PM.






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2