40cm Barenia Birkin Owners: Any regrets??

chloechloe

Member
Oct 28, 2008
243
0
To all the owners of a 40cm Barenia Birkin:

Any regrets?
Is the bag too big? Do you ever find it too bulky?
Is the leather too easy to mark or spot (what about rain or snow)?
Does carrying the bag mostly in the crook of the arm avoid the problem of darkened handles?
What year is your bag, and how much was it--please PM me if that is too personal :smile:

Please please--any help would be greatly appreciated!!
 

birkel

O.G.
Jan 17, 2009
6,432
477
i only have a very small bolide in barenia so i cant truly relate, but i have 2 birkin 40 cm and well i guess im just being nosy in this post but i love barenia so very natural i can only imagine how perfect it must be i a 40cm birkin !.
 

chloechloe

Member
Oct 28, 2008
243
0
Hi birkel and margieb,

I might have a chance to get at a 40cm barenia birkin, so I'm wracked with desire while, at the same time, becoming exhausted from restraining myself! I still don't know. I've recently started to carry less because I changed jobs and don't need to carry as much now when I leave home. Historically, though, I was always a 'big bag' woman (5 ft 7, and medium build).

I loved my Chloe Bag Bay (which is more than 40cm), Chloe Edith bag (also about 40cm), Burberry 40cm ribbon-y bag (but that was floopy). So it may not be out of the question. However, I did lift a JPG in Clemence recently and it was heavier than I thought it would be. (I currently have a 32 Kelly, but no Birkin).

If it weren't barenia, I would probably would keep looking for a 35cm. But it's barenia--with gold HW! And in (light-colored) Barenia, it may look larger in person.

I've read about how others have had a chance at barenia and passed on it, and then fully regretted it. But I've also read how others have bought the 40cm and then leave it in the closet! So--I guess I must meditate on this a little longer:confused1:
 

mcs1111

O.G.
Dec 31, 2006
511
2
I have a 32cm HAC in Barenia and I love love love it. I don't worry too much about scratches or spots although I live in a drive your car to work sort of city so not out in pouring rain with it, etc. However much i love my bag though, I would give anything for it to be a 35cm birkin. I can't personally see carrying a 40cm birkin as I am quite petite, but since you sound like 40cm is your size, I would say GO FOR IT with the barenia. I don't think it is a "big looking" color at all. And remember, the natural barenia will darken considerably with wear and will eventually settle it at a noisette-like hue. Yum.
 

birkel

O.G.
Jan 17, 2009
6,432
477
well if you are a person that likes to see leather age and show its patina, then barenia is for you. if it were my only birkin then maybe i personally would not go for barenia, because of the age factor i love this leather proof of this is i got the baby bolide in it, but i got this bag because of two reasons.
1.- its a very classic hermes bag, historically important to the house.
2.-and because its small , i usually dont wear it well because of its size its a going out bag so it does not get hurt
this said i do tend to over care for my bags and maybe this is the reason why barenia just does not go with me, but i do have to say this leather in the bag you are getting offered is divine, hermes perfection. so im a bit in the middle, but i would not go for it, 40cm is not as easy to control, being that the birkin is bulky it may scratch on the edges a lot and when you move you do not control the dimensions getting out of cars planes . i got my natural looking color in 40cm in fjord gold that incidentally does not look like gold it looks like caramel and barenia and for me the perfect 40cm. i do recomend the size because im also used to large bags for everyday use 40s and 35s 30s evening wear in exotic but point is, 40 is the way to go you wont regret this and again if you are used to all the other bags you described 40cm is for you. so im hoping this helps you. i tend to go on ... but i do it with the best intentions again hope it helps birkel
 

chloechloe

Member
Oct 28, 2008
243
0
Thanks msc1111, kalliegirl, and birkel. It's really helpful to read your opinions. I'm going back and forth in my mind about this.

I was wondering how a 40cm would fit in/under the seat in airplanes. I fly about once or twice a month, so I thought this would really work for those times, but I also don't want to smush a barenia under the seat in front of me (I don't usually like to use the overhead much). Then I read somewhere here about how a woman with a SO Kelly was asked to smush her bag into the overhead compartment! A SO Kelly! I wouldn't think that would be considered too big to keep at your seat.

I remember reading about how people manage their birkins on planes. I'm going to go look for that thread again.
 

birkel

O.G.
Jan 17, 2009
6,432
477
it will fit under your knees i personally travel with swift 35cm because its much softer but i know a 4o cm is posible but again barenia hmmmmm !!!
 

mistikat

Bling!
O.G.
Sep 2, 2006
20,415
2,677
Nothing is permitted behind your legs while the plane is taking off or landing. Anything you are carrying must be placed under the seat in front of you or in the overhead compartment so that if you needed to evacuate the plane suddenly, the aisles would be clear. Not even in business class would flight attendants permit you to leave a bag behind your legs during those times of a flight. Seriously.
 
Oct 19, 2008
11,383
10,552
Northern Virginia
I just brought my 35 barenia/toile birkin on a plane. But I brought its sleeper bag with me and put it in the bag, then under the seat in front of me. the 35 fit perfectly. Not sure about how a 40 cm would work.
 
May 27, 2007
13,288
1,161
I think a 40cm could fit under the seat in front of you, but only on it's back and not on an aisle seat where the carts might catch it as they go by. Personally, I think a 40cm in barenia would be very heavy, but if you're used to Chloe bags, it might not be a problem.
 

birkel

O.G.
Jan 17, 2009
6,432
477
mistikat, to your very pasive agresive remark- then maybe i have been lucky and well i guess iresponsable because in my las 3 flights air france 2 and lufthansa 1 ,first class my 35cm in one flight and 40cm in the other two have actually been behind my legs and well... nothing yet this is why i know it fits there but my dear im not lying what i place in the forum is what i know for sure so... im sorry if the case is that it is not posible then i have been lucky !:smile::confused1:
 

mistikat

Bling!
O.G.
Sep 2, 2006
20,415
2,677
mistikat, to your very pasive agresive remark- then maybe i have been lucky and well i guess iresponsable because in my las 3 flights air france 2 and lufthansa 1 ,first class my 35cm in one flight and 40cm in the other two have actually been behind my legs and well... nothing yet this is why i know it fits there but my dear im not lying what i place in the forum is what i know for sure so... im sorry if the case is that it is not posible then i have been lucky !:smile::confused1:
birkel, you flatter yourself that my comments were directed at you. How wonderful that you were able to keep your bag behind your legs. My understanding is that this is considered to be a danger to other passengers and flight crew in the event of an evacuation. It is also completely against airline rules on takeoff and landing.

chloechloe, I have flown with my 40 barenia birkin. I was not permitted to keep it behind my legs - in business class. It had to go in the bin above me.