Cookie banner

This site uses cookies. Select "Block all non-essential cookies" to only allow cookies necessary to display content and enable core site features. Select "Accept all cookies" to also personalize your experience on the site with ads and partner content tailored to your interests, and to allow us to measure the effectiveness of our service.

To learn more, review our Cookie Policy, Privacy Notice and Terms of Use.

or
clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Are Everlane’s New Wide Leg Pants as Flattering as They Claim to Be?

We tried them to find out.

Racked has affiliate partnerships, which do not influence editorial content, though we may earn commissions for products purchased via affiliate links. We also occasionally accept products for research and reviewing purposes. See our ethics policy here.

Everlane’s wide leg high waist pants Photo: Everlane

Racked is no longer publishing. Thank you to everyone who read our work over the years. The archives will remain available here; for new stories, head over to Vox.com, where our staff is covering consumer culture for The Goods by Vox. You can also see what we’re up to by signing up here.

We’ve been getting a lot of questions about Everlane’s latest drop: very of-the-moment wide-leg cropped pants in three different colors. They look a lot like those Jesse Kamm sailor pants you’ve probably seen in your favorite boutique (they’re everywhere), but at $68, they’re less than a quarter of the price. In other words, they seemed like a must-buy for anyone into that look for spring.

Everlane has been touting the pants as “the most flattering pants you’ll try” on its website, and it pointedly shows them on models with different body types, suggesting they’d look great on you no matter your size (well, as long as you are size 12 and under, because that’s the biggest the brand offers). We were a little skeptical, so we figured we’d try out the pants in a bunch of sizes in the name of research.

Here, we’re all sharing our honest reviews of how they fit. If you’re considering the pants, we hope this helps you figure it out.


The backside of Everlane’s pants Photo: Everlane

I'm probably the biggest Everlane fan of the bunch, but these unfortunately did not look good on me. I wore my regular size, and they were big in the waist and also just the general front area. I think they made everyone's waist and butt look really good, though. They just have kind of a funky fit in the front. I will say, though — these are maybe the most comfortable pants I've ever put on, aside from sweatpants. I think the move might actually be sizing down, because they do stretch. Tiffany Yannetta, shopping director


I tried a size 2, which felt like a stretch for me waist-wise (I'm easily a 4 at H&M or Zara), but the size worked fine. In terms of hips and waist, these babies are forgiving and generous, with a nice stretchy, thick material.

The problem came with the length and the proportion. For someone petite like me, these wide legs were hilariously overwhelming. I'm 5'2'', so what was supposed to be a wide-legged cropped pant on me was basically JNCOs that swept the floor. Combined with the high waist, I felt swallowed up in baggy fabric. All my coworkers laughed. —Ellie Krupnick, managing editor


I’m one of the only people who liked these. Look, they're not remotely perfect — they give me some pretty hefty FUPA, they look weird and crinkled when I move, and they are most definitely not "cropped" (I am 5'6" with fairly long legs and they're still long enough to graze the tops of my shoes).

But they're really comfortable, even when sitting down, I love all three washes, and they make my waist look TINY. It's an extremely ‘70s look, with all the attendant pitfalls, but if that's what you're going for, $68 really isn't a terrible investment. I don't think I'm going to buy these, ultimately, but they felt like a good gateway pair — I'll definitely be keeping an eye out for similar silhouettes with fewer drawbacks.

Heads up that there is some major vanity sizing in play here: I usually wear between a 4 and a 6, and the 2 fits me perfectly. If you're willing to risk these, size down. Alanna Okun, senior editor


I tried on these pants in my size, 12, in black, and I felt like the love child of a teen Juggalo and a pregnant sailor. It wasn't my best look. Before putting them on, I noticed the sheer bizarreness of crotch area, which curved into a full blown J-shape without having a person inside. They were wide, they were short, they were waist-defining as hell, and they were very confusing. But they looked cute on Alanna!Meredith Haggerty, senior editor


So, I think I’m the lone soldier actually going through with this purchase. While I was wearing them around the office, my most stylish coworker (who didn’t know about the pants test) told me I looked “fly” unprompted, which kind of sealed the deal.

But they certainly aren’t flattering. For me, it’s more about the color and the comfort and the fact that wide white pants feel sort of hip; I’ve been wanting white pants for awhile, and buying these, which looked pretty decent, are very comfortable, and, most importantly, are well under $100, feels like the easy answer.

After wearing them for a bit, they stretched out a lot, by the way. My typical size felt huge, though I know some of my coworkers had the reverse experience. I liked the way they looked best when they were pretty baggy at my waist and a little more low-rise (for me, that was a 2 instead of my regular 4); when I sized down enough to get that high-waisted, tight, ‘70s sailor pants thing, we were approaching the camel toe danger zone. Nobody wants to be there. Cory Baldwin, shopping editor


When I first saw the campaign for these pants I was really excited, mostly because they looked a lot like those Jesse Kamm sailor pants for a whole lot less. After that initial connection, I was stoked to see that they were claiming they worked on a lot of different bodies. Unfortunately, though, I can't say this was a good experience at all. Trying these pants on was pretty much the cliché trying-on-pants nightmare.

Once we took them out of the box, I could tell they looked a lot smaller than I'd expected, so I sized up. Still, I had a hard time buttoning, even at the small of my waist. When I finally did get them together, I was honestly just embarrassed. There was so much extra material in the crotch area. It looked as though they tried to gather all of the unflattering parts of me and squeezed them together. 0/10, would not recommend! Tanisha Pina, associate market editor