Boxer shorts have changed

[MNW67]

I’m still the same size I was 20 years ago round the waist (actually a tiny bit slimmer at 37 inches). I'm slim but naturally broad, and I only wear traditional loose woven cotton boxers.

Twenty years ago, I bought size L. Today, I have to buy XXL.

Why?

Because modern brands use cheap, rigid elastic that doesn't expand. Old elastic stretched easily. Modern synthetic elastic hits a hard wall immediately.

A modern XXL stretched to its limit is the exact same size as an old Large.

You have to buy the massive size just to get them to fit without digging in.

Sizing is totally broken.

 

[pete01]

You mean you've put on a bit of timber

 

[MNW67]

You mean you've put on a bit of timber

Reported

 

[MNW67]

You mean you've put on a bit of timber

OMG

No!

I'm half a stone lighter than 20 years ago and people say I look a bit thin.

I've noticed the boxer thing over many years. I had to go from L to XL. But then after having to buy XXL yesterday I decided to Google it.

It's all down to the cheap elastic.

Apparently some premiums brands still use proper elastic so the sizings are the same as 20 years ago.

But bog standard supermarket three packs are all affected.

 

[Mottie]

It’s the opposite with women’s clothing, so Mrs Mottie tells me. It’s called 'vanity sizing'.

"Size inconsistency has existed since at least 1937. In Sears' 1937 catalog, a size14 dress had a bust size of 32 inches (81 cm). In 1967, the same bust size was a size 8. In 2011, it was a size 0. Some argue that vanity sizing is designed to satisfy wearers' wishes to appear thin and feel better about themselves. This works by adhering to the theory of compensatory self-enhancement, as vanity sizing promotes a more positive self-image of one upon seeing a smaller label".

 

[Old Salt]

I’ve lost over two stone in the last few months and now wear the same size trousers and boxers as 30 years ago. Not the same boxers but the same size

 

[MNW67]

I’ve lost over two stone in the last few months and now wear the same size trousers and boxers as 30 years ago. Not the same boxers but the same size

Are they comfortable, though?

Are they a good brand or cheap ones?

 

[MNW67]

This seems to be the answer:

1. The Switch from Natural Rubber to Synthetic Elastane
Twenty years ago, most boxer waistbands relied on an internal core made of natural rubber threads (latex) encased in cotton. Today, almost all mass-market brands use synthetic elastane (Spandex/Lycra) or polyester/polyamide blends. [1, 2, 3]

• The Difference in Give: Natural rubber stretches incredibly easily with minimal resistance, allowing a small band to open wide without squeezing you tightly. Synthetic elastane blends have a much higher "modulus"—meaning they require far more physical force to stretch to their limit.
• The Result: If you pull on a modern Large, the band feels like a stiff, unyielding circle. You are forced to buy an XXL just so the unextended raw diameter of the loop matches your waist without needing to stretch it.

2. Eliminating the "Grip" (Reduced Mechanical Stretch)
Older boxers used heavily gathered, "crinkled" waistbands stitched under intense machine tension. When relaxed, the elastic bunched up tightly; when pulled, it offered massive mechanical expansion. [1]

• The Modern Way: To save on fabric costs and achieve a trendy, flat look, brands now use smooth, flat-knit jacquard elastic. Because the elastic is not pre-gathered or bunched into a fabric tunnel, its maximum expansion is strictly limited to the length of the synthetic band itself. It simply runs out of "track" and stops stretching entirely. [1, 2]

 

[Dec27]

My work pants seam to be tighter…. That must be why

 

[Highway Man]

I’m still the same size I was 20 years ago round the waist (actually a tiny bit slimmer at 37 inches). I'm slim but naturally broad, and I only wear traditional loose woven cotton boxers.

Twenty years ago, I bought size L. Today, I have to buy XXL.

Why?

Because modern brands use cheap, rigid elastic that doesn't expand. Old elastic stretched easily. Modern synthetic elastic hits a hard wall immediately.

A modern XXL stretched to its limit is the exact same size as an old Large.

You have to buy the massive size just to get them to fit without digging in.

Sizing is totally broken.

You are buying cheap underware from those car boot sales and markets again. Try switching to a decent brand like I wear, you wiill obviously have to buy 1 pair at a time over a period of months but well worth it. Mine are made from bamboo and are like me, amazing.

 

[Brigadier]

But bog standard supermarket three packs

"Bog standard" = "Barely fit for scratching your arris with"

 

[Old Salt]

I’ve lost over two stone in the last few months and now wear the same size trousers and boxers as 30 years ago. Not the same boxers but the same size

Are they comfortable, though?

Are they a good brand or cheap ones?

Decent make I believe, from Sweden but I cant read the label without breaking my neck.

 

[pete01]

Decent make I believe, from Sweden but I cant read the label without breaking my neck.

Don't you ever take them off

 

[Highway Man]

Don't you ever take them off

He has only had them for 30 years for god sake, quit your astonishment

 

[fixitflav]

I’m still the same size I was 20 years ago round the waist (actually a tiny bit slimmer at 37 inches). I'm slim but naturally broad, and I only wear traditional loose woven cotton boxers.

Twenty years ago, I bought size L. Today, I have to buy XXL.

Why?

Because modern brands use cheap, rigid elastic that doesn't expand. Old elastic stretched easily. Modern synthetic elastic hits a hard wall immediately.

A modern XXL stretched to its limit is the exact same size as an old Large.

You have to buy the massive size just to get them to fit without digging in.

Sizing is totally broken.

I wear conventional underpants, size M for years, but noticed recently they're getting tighter, and I haven't put on weight. My guess is they're made in the far east and skimping on material.