How much to lose to fit in one pant size down?

Options
marpo_180
marpo_180 Posts: 4 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I've lost about 35 to 40 pounds, last I was at the doctors I weighed 210 with clothes on and was floating around size 15 to 16 and that was a few weeks ago. I don't think my home scale is very accurate but I'm officially fitting in size 14 and I can't accurately say how much I've lost if I went from 16 to 14. I think 12 is one pant size down from 14, how much more do I need to lose to get into 12s? Im 5'6". Thanks for your help! I'm stoked I actually fit in 14. My biggest was 20
«1

Replies

  • Fitnessmom82
    Fitnessmom82 Posts: 376 Member
    Options
    My weight vs pants size has been all over the place. When I was heavier it seemed to be 20 pounds or so between sizes. Most recently I went from a size 4 to a size 2 and had only lost about 7 pounds. Been bloated this week with TOM and up 3 pounds and now those seem tight.
  • nowine4me
    nowine4me Posts: 3,985 Member
    Options
    Fitnessmom82 wrote: »
    My weight vs pants size has been all over the place. When I was heavier it seemed to be 20 pounds or so between sizes. Most recently I went from a size 4 to a size 2 and had only lost about 7 pounds. Been bloated this week with TOM and up 3 pounds and now those seem tight.

    Same. Here’s how it went for me, I’m 5-7”. This is all in the exact same brand/cut of pants:
    200 = 16 ( too tight)
    180 = 14
    160 = 12
    150 = 10
    140 = 6/8
    130 = 4
    125 = 2
  • fitoverfortymom
    fitoverfortymom Posts: 3,452 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options
    I'm 5'6" and I got into a so 12 at around 165. I'm in the 150s now and a size 10.
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    Options
    nowine4me wrote: »
    Fitnessmom82 wrote: »
    My weight vs pants size has been all over the place. When I was heavier it seemed to be 20 pounds or so between sizes. Most recently I went from a size 4 to a size 2 and had only lost about 7 pounds. Been bloated this week with TOM and up 3 pounds and now those seem tight.

    Same. Here’s how it went for me, I’m 5-7”. This is all in the exact same brand/cut of pants:
    200 = 16 ( too tight)
    180 = 14
    160 = 12
    150 = 10
    140 = 6/8
    130 = 4
    125 = 2

    Hey, that's spot on for me, too! I'm 5'7" and my max weight has been the low 150's, when I was a size 10. My minimum adult weight has been 130 and I was a size 4. I'm currently 140 and wearing 6/8. My personal ideal weight is about 135-140. Size 6 seems about perfect for me. Any lower than the mid 130's (getting down into 4's) and I feel I start to look too scrawny. B)

    OP, You're almost down to 12 from size 20? That's awesome! What a difference. <3
  • ffswmn
    ffswmn Posts: 30 Member
    Options
    I'm 5'6" and the last time I wore a 12 I weighed 180.
  • Urbancowbarn
    Urbancowbarn Posts: 97 Member
    Options
    Congratulations on your weightloss! WTG!

    Here are my stats- also same brand jeans/pants
    5’ 6’
    168 size 6
    155 size 4
    144 size 2

    So it looks like every 10lbs I go down a size. I have a banana shape A lot depends on where you hold your weight. I would love a tiny waist, but it’s never gonna happen because of my body shape/proportions. I mean my waist could be tiny, but won’t look tiny in comparison to the rest of me if that makes sense.
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    Options
    Urbancowbarn wrote: »
    Congratulations on your weightloss! WTG!

    Here are my stats- also same brand jeans/pants
    5’ 6’
    168 size 6
    155 size 4
    144 size 2

    So it looks like every 10lbs I go down a size. I have a banana shape A lot depends on where you hold your weight. I would love a tiny waist, but it’s never gonna happen because of my body shape/proportions. I mean my waist could be tiny, but won’t look tiny in comparison to the rest of me if that makes sense.

    If you don't have a tiny waist, or a tiny something, how the heck do you squeeze into those tiny sizes!? I guess no hips maybe? Or is it vanity sizing, cuz I've never been able to go lower than size 4, and that's when I'm 130 or less...At 155 I'm squeezing into a 10 and pushing a size 12!!! I'm just trying to visualize it...(I've also been called a banana.)
  • Urbancowbarn
    Urbancowbarn Posts: 97 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options
    @jenilla1

    I’ve been trying to figure that out myself especially when I see other people’s stats. My hips are 36”, bust is also 36”, and my natural waist is 29”. I do have long legs and they are super lean. I have a short waist. I know it’s def. vanity sizing because I could never fit into a 90’s size 2 and I was 18lbs lighter then and a size 4. I go by hip measurement when buying pants today because waist measurement never correlates with what fits. I also wonder about bone density and if mine are unusually dense. My 12 yo daughter is a skinny minny and weighs about 20lbs more than she looks, my 15 yo son too. It’s weird.

    I tried to upload a photo but it won’t load, but I did add a profile photo.
  • Fitnessmom82
    Fitnessmom82 Posts: 376 Member
    Options
    Urbancowbarn wrote: »
    Congratulations on your weightloss! WTG!

    Here are my stats- also same brand jeans/pants
    5’ 6’
    168 size 6
    155 size 4
    144 size 2

    So it looks like every 10lbs I go down a size. I have a banana shape A lot depends on where you hold your weight. I would love a tiny waist, but it’s never gonna happen because of my body shape/proportions. I mean my waist could be tiny, but won’t look tiny in comparison to the rest of me if that makes sense.

    I am 5'7", 144 and go between a 2 and a 4. Everyone always thinks it's a "heavy" weight for that pants size, and people are shocked to find out my weight. Maybe I am a banana shape also?! I've never heard of that!
    Must just be how we carry our weight. Even at my very heaviest (214) I could wear a 10/12.
  • mazcor536
    mazcor536 Posts: 115 Member
    Options
    Depends on the cut of the trousers etc. I started off at 228 in UK 18-20, I’m now 182 and can wear some of my 18’s, 16 are my go to, and can wear a high waisted 14 (all UK sizes). I’ve lost a lot more off my top half up to my belly button than I have around my lower tummy/hips. There isn’t a sudden, clean boundary between clothing sizes, it’s more of a range. Bigger sizes gradually get looser as smaller sizes gradually begin to fit. Huge well done on your loss and I hope your transformation continues!
  • Chunkahlunkah
    Chunkahlunkah Posts: 373 Member
    Options
    It varies with my size. The smaller I am, the fewer the pounds. On the high end, I've had to wait 10-15 pounds. On the low end, 5 pounds.
  • wenrob
    wenrob Posts: 125 Member
    Options
    It all depends on your build and the way you’re weight is distributed. When I was really heavy it took 30lbs for the first size down. (Though I suspect the jeans I was wearing at my heaviest were a good size or two too small) After that it was 20 then 10lb increments. Now it is as little as 5lbs.
  • NHDaisy2
    NHDaisy2 Posts: 151 Member
    Options
    I agree it's how/where we carry weight.

    I'm 5'6" 194. I am currently wearing a size 12 and they don't get baggy on me after wearing them for a bit. I am still able to wear my size 14 but, they eventually get baggy and I'm constantly pulling them up.

    I think it also depends on the brand you are wearing - I can not get into all size 12.
  • adrnelane
    adrnelane Posts: 4 Member
    Options
    I'm 5'5" and now weigh 155 down from 173...I was wearing a 12 now I wear an 8 that are getting loose... Im also 54 years old. I can't imagine someone being 144 and wearing a 2, my daughters weigh 102 each and wear a 0-2 depending on the make of the clothing...they are both shorter than me 5' and 5'2" when I was 40 I weighed 116 and wore a size 4... do clothing manufacturers even put accurate sizing anymore?
  • Urbancowbarn
    Urbancowbarn Posts: 97 Member
    Options
    adrnelane wrote: »
    I'm 5'5" and now weigh 155 down from 173...I was wearing a 12 now I wear an 8 that are getting loose... Im also 54 years old. I can't imagine someone being 144 and wearing a 2, my daughters weigh 102 each and wear a 0-2 depending on the make of the clothing...they are both shorter than me 5' and 5'2" when I was 40 I weighed 116 and wore a size 4... do clothing manufacturers even put accurate sizing anymore?

    Although I do believe that size 2 is the new size 4 and that sizes have changed/inflated over the years I don’t think the size you currently wear is vanity sizing since the sizing has inflated across the board for at least two decades now. In fact I think it’s a better indicator that a number on the scale is just that —a number — and doesn’t indicate how much lean mass someone has, or even someone’s frame size. My profile photo is me at 143 and a size 2 pant. I would love nothing more than to have my midsection as lean as the rest of me. I’m surprised that my stats are so surprising. I wear a size 2 pant at any store I buy clothes from - JCrew, Ann Taylor, Bananna Republic, A&F, Etc. OP I’m sorry that my stats are such a problem (or so unbelievable) on this thread.
  • jrochest
    jrochest Posts: 119 Member
    Options
    I think the usual difference between sizes (standard sizes, not plus) is about an inch, which on me is always 10 pounds. I'm a bit perplexed by some numbers as well: I'm 5' 4.5" and at my heaviest (205) I wear about a 16 (or a UK 18, which is supposed to be a 14 but always fits a bit larger). I'm now 180, and I'm still in 14s. I'll be in 12s at 170, and, I assume 10s by 160. I cannot imagine how anyone close to my height can wear a size 10 at 200 pounds?

    I think the distance between a 14 and a 12 is larger than between a 12 and a 10, and the distance between 8 and 10 is smaller yet.
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    Options
    Urbancowbarn wrote: »
    adrnelane wrote: »
    I'm 5'5" and now weigh 155 down from 173...I was wearing a 12 now I wear an 8 that are getting loose... Im also 54 years old. I can't imagine someone being 144 and wearing a 2, my daughters weigh 102 each and wear a 0-2 depending on the make of the clothing...they are both shorter than me 5' and 5'2" when I was 40 I weighed 116 and wore a size 4... do clothing manufacturers even put accurate sizing anymore?

    Although I do believe that size 2 is the new size 4 and that sizes have changed/inflated over the years I don’t think the size you currently wear is vanity sizing since the sizing has inflated across the board for at least two decades now. In fact I think it’s a better indicator that a number on the scale is just that —a number — and doesn’t indicate how much lean mass someone has, or even someone’s frame size. My profile photo is me at 143 and a size 2 pant. I would love nothing more than to have my midsection as lean as the rest of me. I’m surprised that my stats are so surprising. I wear a size 2 pant at any store I buy clothes from - JCrew, Ann Taylor, Bananna Republic, A&F, Etc. OP I’m sorry that my stats are such a problem (or so unbelievable) on this thread.

    Your stats aren't a problem. LOL. Everybody carries their weight differently. It's just really hard to visualize in the mind how various bodies are fitting into clothes when everyone's stats are so widely varied. Like if you are wearing size 2 at 143, and I wear size 8 at 138 and have never even contemplated squeezing into a 2 at even my lowest weight, you could see how amazed I might be. Not mad, not unbelieving, just amazed and surprised at
    how different everyone is. :)

    Here's a pic of me at 140 in a solid size 8 to get an idea of how the two of us at the same weight have such a difference in sizes. I'd have to be skin and bones to fit into a 2. I'm not "big-boned" or "curvy" or anything like that. Most people think I'm scrawny and weigh a lot less than I really do.

    8tbuql6ap2b0.jpg


  • fitoverfortymom
    fitoverfortymom Posts: 3,452 Member
    Options
    jenilla1 wrote: »

    Here's a pic of me at 140 in a solid size 8 to get an idea of how the two of us at the same weight have such a difference in sizes. I'd have to be skin and bones to fit into a 2. I'm not "big-boned" or "curvy" or anything like that. Most people think I'm scrawny and weigh a lot less than I really do.

    8tbuql6ap2b0.jpg


    You look awesome!

    I was having a conversation with my MIL yesterday and she asked me to help her get set up on MFP. I looked at her stats and she's 185 now and had her goal weight of 125. I was like realllly? You want to weigh 125?!! She's 5'5" and probably in her early 70s. Then I told her that I weigh 153 and was a size 10 she was certain that I weighed wayyyy less than that. I got her to pick a better goal weight and rate of loss that was a little more rooted in reality.

    I'd like to get down to 145 and maintain between 145 and 150 eventually, but any thinner than that and I think I would look exceptionally scrawny.
  • Chunkahlunkah
    Chunkahlunkah Posts: 373 Member
    Options
    fitoverfortymom wrote: »
    You want to weigh 125?!! She's 5'5" and probably in her early 70s.

    I often come across older people who believe the ideal weight formula (for women) is 100 pounds for the first 5 feet and then an additional 5 pounds for each inch. I wonder if this was passed on as conventional wisdom for certain generations?

    I also see some people who've been overweight for most of their lives use that formula to pick their ideal weight when they're not yet sure how they'll look/feel at lower weights.

    Personally, that formula doesn't work for me. I get too scrawny at about 10 pounds above it. 15-20 pounds above it is what works best on my frame and has me in a size 4 (5 in juniors - I'm short ;)).

Categories