🚚 no-cost SHIPPING on orders over $50 | ⭐ 4.8/5 from 203+ reviews
Men✓ In Stock 🔥 Bestseller

vintage men’s long jean shorts

★★★★★ 4.8 out of 5 (203 reviews)
Special Offer Price
$36
$60
Sale
✓ gratis dispatch on this item • Limited time offer

vintage long baggy jeans shorts waist was taken and fit favor a 32 from a 36Rise:15.5inches Inseam:20 inches Leg Opening:11.5inches

🔒
Secure Checkout
🚚
rapid shipment
↩️
effortless Returns

📋 Product Description

vintage men’s long jean shorts

vintage long baggy jeans shorts waist was taken and fit appreciate a 32 from a 36
Rise:15.5inches Inseam:20 inches Leg Opening:11.5inches​

This product is impeccable for anyone looking for quality Men products.

📐 Specifications

SKU: 661857

Category: Men > Shorts > Denim

Original Price: $60 USD

Sale Price:$36 USD

Availability: In Stock

Condition: Brand newly-released

🚚 dispatch & Returns

✓ on the house delivery on orders over $50

Standard shipment: 3-5 business days

Express shipping: 1-2 business days (+$9.99)

30-Day Returns: Not satisfied? Return within 30 days for a full refund.

Recommended For You

4.8
★★★★★
Based on 1606 reviews
JB
James Brown ✓ Verified Purchase
6 months ago · Pittsburgh, PA
★★★★★
faultless purchase
Happy with the look of this vintage men’s long jean shorts.
37 people found this helpful
AW
Ashley White
2 weeks ago · Atlanta, GA
★★★★★
Exceptional quality
From my experience, the vintage men’s long jean shorts performs as expected so it’s acceptable. Nothing fancy.
9 people found this helpful
ET
Emily Thompson ✓ Verified Purchase
3 months ago · San Diego, CA
★★★★★
Five stars!
No problems encountered with vintage men’s long jean shorts.
12 people found this helpful
CE
Christina Evans ✓ Verified Purchase
2 months ago · Orlando, FL
★★★★★
ideal vintage men’s long jean shorts
Quality meets expectations for vintage men’s long jean shorts.
12 people found this helpful
MR
Matthew Robinson ✓ Verified Purchase
10 months ago · Dallas, TX

★★★★☆
Absolutely cherish it
To be fair, the vintage men’s long jean shorts is straightforward to use which is good enough.
21 people found this helpful