Changes to the length of Marks and Spencer trousers (reduced length)

[Britpopbaby]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/money/25428082/marks-spencer-huge-change-clothing-let-down/amp/

My inside leg is 34 and I joughg about half a dozen pairs last year. Gutted if they shorten.them

I'm only 5"8 but I've got a 34 inch inside leg - can sometimes get away with a 33" inch leg but only if the style looks OK as an ankle flapper, like pyjamas!

Added to this is the fact that a) I'm extremely chubby and b) aside from being chubby, my skeletal frame is big and sturdy.

So I need a long leg that's a plus size with generous proportions in the leg width etc - all of which seems about as possible as me waking up tomorrow and magically being a size 10 again 😅

At 5'6.5" my inside leg is 31. I have never before measured it but historically I have always needed an M&S long. The only trousers I have bought this season were straight leg, good quality Autograph ones. They only came in standard, I thought I'd get away with them an ankle grazers but they were perfect and cover the tops of my shoes, an inch off the ground.

I really wish M&S would start make good quality, half lined wool crepe trousers again. I would happily pay £80+.

Interestingly I put in a filter on their trousers: black, camel, navy, 14 or 16, long length, straight leg. The only options that came up were Jaeger.

They manage it for the men though. M&S needs to narrow the range of own brand trousers they sell so they can have a better range of sizes for women. And deeper rather than pretend pockets please.

Getting trousers taken up only works if they are straight leg. Anything flared or tapered will lose that shape. I also have a couple of pairs of wide leg trousers from M&S with zips at the ankle so those couldn't be taken up.

While I think M&S should have a range of lengths available to cover the majority of women, they are never going to be able to get it right for everyone. If someone is an outlier they may have to buy a style that can be altered, but at least if someone has short legs they have this option, unlike those with long legs.

What I find tiresome is the fact that M&S trousers fit me perfectly in a long. Their jeans and some casual trousers are fabulous and last year they had some good quality black wool work trousers, keenly priced at £39.50. But generally the quality of their work trousers is abysmal. This year they had a stripe down the side of tailored trousers making them look like trackies. It might be fashionable but it wasn't stylish.

I hanker for the days of their Italian tailoring.

That's the one!

Could all be solved if they just put the length in inches on trousers.

It is about awareness

Lots of shorter women bought their usual short found it to be too long and sent it back without discovering that the old short was now labelled as extra short.

Lots of taller women never found out that a new longer length was available and just didn't bother to look at jeans or trousers as for years the longest length was a miserable 31"

If they sold them marked with the actual inside leg measurement and had advertised their new extra long length they could have gained extra customers. Now they have alienated loads.

I'm 4"11 and for the past few years there has been no extra short so I'm delighted it's back again. It's sometimes not a case of just taking things up as often the whole shape is ruined and it's all out of proportion. M&S have however been amazing the past year with petite fit midi dresses .

Women have different body proportions compared to men as well as different shapes. One of those differences is leg length compared to torso which is longer in women so on average a 5'10" woman would have longer legs than a 5'10" man. I'm 5'10.5" ish and have a 34" inside leg if I try on men's trousers in flat shoes.

I gave up trying to buy in M&S due to sizings which would require me to chop my feet off to reach my shoes, even with the much vaunted "longer" trousers. I tend to agree that trousers a bit too long can be altered, too short cannot. However more than a couple of inches and you end up with proportion problems.

The problem is not that Marks have changed one of the only two lengths available - the problem is M&S think that women of all shapes and sizes come in only two leg lengths whilst men have a variety of leg lengths available for each size option. They get away with it because we grumble but made do and still buy clothes which don't fit well, where men are likely to complain more and go elsewhere.

I've also found that whilst M&S seem to have woken up a bit on style their quality hasn't improved - especially for work wear. £40 trousers are not good value when they wash and wear so poorly.

Me too. I bought a shorter length denim skirt, it trails the floor, Im five foot four AND a half.

ridiculous.

I used to buy most of my jeans / trousers there in Short because of the great lengths available but have given up now as XS barely actually exists.

If they are making a change, I do hope they start actually stocking the sizes and are clear what length they are with the " shown to help us out.

Hate the new M&S trouser lengths. I’ve always had Regular which worked fine as I need 30 ins leg. Short/petite is too short even if I could find any and Regular is now too long at 31 ins. Grrr!

Same here!

I'm 5 ft 3 & I've recently bought the cropped stripy linen trousers in short.
They're pretty much full length on me.

I couldn't find any short length ones recently- I got regular and took them up.

I've give up on m&s trousers, I'm petite 5ft 2, was in the norwich store last week, ask a member of staff where the petite clothing were, its only online now she said, they want customers to buy in store, I would if they had the clothing to try on.