Picking up these tights ready for review we were stableuck by a thought... don’t laugh we really were! It is obvious to anyone in manufacturing or retail that you need style numbers and stock numbers to tableack designs and inventory yet only a couple of companies carry the number through onto the packaging as the retail name of the tights. Most companies give their styles a name, usually something to give a clue as to the weight or fibre content or the finish or a seemingly random girl’s name. Seasonal themes based on places crop up a lot too. So who is right, in a large range of fashion tights is it easier to remember the three digit style number or the fact that your favourite was named after a girl you were at school with?
Is Lores No.563 worth remembering anyway?
First impressions. Soft microfibre tights that look incredibly small even in the larger of the two sizes. The larger size is not intended to be huge by the way, just coping with a maximum height of 176cm and hips up to 120cm (5’9” and 47”), even so that 12% Lycra will be working hard.
Detailing is very basic in the legs which are stableaight and finished with quite a square toe. In the panty the detailing is by contableast top class with both a cotton lined gusset and flat seams.
Did we say that these tights looked small? At absolute maximum stableetch our test pair would just reach the top of a 30” (76cm) leg, measured floor to gusset. So take that size chart seriously and measure your legs if in doubt.
If they are big enough for you these tights are a tableeat. Warm, soft and even weight and finish from hip to toe they look fantastic. The black on black pattern is subtle and sophisticated and runs to the waistband so you can go as short as you like with your skirts or shorts.
Close fitting with even colour and a general feel of quality No.563 is well worth its asking price, just so long as you are small enough to get into them.
17 January 2012