Where Can One Find Side-Tab Wool Slacks, OTR?

[Quirk]

Yes, exactly that. I can kind of accept a slim drawstring for casual linen trousers, in fact I bought one precisely because it seemed the only way to do away with belt loops, but with wool trousers it's too much.
Still, some even have actual joggers (i.e. with elasticized ankles) in wool, which is much worse and way too streetwear for me.

Drawstrings are sort of inherently bothersome and unsightly. I have them on most if not all of my sweatpants and sleepshorts, but I only tolerate them, and barely so.

 

[larand]

Ralph Lauren Purple Label has quite a few currently available.

 

[dieworkwear]

I'm curious why people want side adjusters on their odd trousers. Is it for a style detail when you're wearing pants without a coat?

 

[Chashuuligan]

I'm curious why people want side adjusters on their odd trousers. Is it for a style detail when you're wearing pants without a coat?

I don't own any trousers with side adjusters myself, but they appeal to me as a way to hold trousers up without adding an additional color/material to the outfit as a belt or suspenders would.

 

[Quirk]

I'm curious why people want side adjusters on their odd trousers. Is it for a style detail when you're wearing pants without a coat?

As a subtler and/or more comfortable alternative to a belt? Certainly subtler than braces, especially if you're not wearing a sportscoat.

 

[dieworkwear]

They do allow you to adjust your trousers in increments smaller than an inch, which most belts won't let you do. But I find that side adjusters are a pain to adjust. For that reason, I never adjust mine.

If you want the "incremental adjustment" of side adjusters, you could get a slide belt.

Long ago, I had pants made without belt loops because I read somewhere that outfits look better without that line that bisects the middle. So I had all my trousers made with that "Italian" extended tab to help hide the waist button (still do) and no belt loops. But I find that outfits almost look empty now without a belt. And I like being able to wear the extra accessory.

Agree that suspenders are kind of a hassle. I wear them on rare occasions but have since moved to belted trousers on everything -- odd trousers and suit trousers.

 

[Quirk]

They do allow you to adjust your trousers in increments smaller than an inch, which most belts won't let you do. But I find that side adjusters are a pain to adjust. For that reason, I never adjust mine.

If you want the "incremental adjustment" of side adjusters, you could get a slide belt.

Long ago, I had pants made without belt loops because I read somewhere that outfits look better without that line that bisects the middle. So I had all my trousers made with that "Italian" extended tab to help hide the waist button (still do) and no belt loops. But I find that outfits almost look empty now without a belt. And I like being able to wear the extra accessory.

Agree that suspenders are kind of a hassle. I wear them on rare occasions but have since moved to belted trousers on everything -- odd trousers and suit trousers.

I get that. The interesting thing about the doctor I referenced originally (who as I said doesn't give the impression of being particularly stylish), is that because he always looks ever so slightly rumpled in his appearance, the lack of a belt seems to actually work to his advantage, sort of keeping things simple. (I don't recall ever seeing him in a suit jacket or sportscoat). Whereas on someone more conspicuously "elegant" in their appearance, I agree - the lack of a belt might easily make the outfit look a bit spare.

 

[Mirage-]

I dislike belts with suits strongly, they break the line too much. For everything else, again, it's simply comfort. I find belts uncomfortable when sitting.

I'm curious why people want side adjusters on their odd trousers. Is it for a style detail when you're wearing pants without a coat?