or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › J&M vs. C&J: A wingtip comparison
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

J&M vs. C&J: A wingtip comparison - Page 2

post #16 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger
That style is referred to as "longwing." You know, I've never seen a balmoral longwing, only bluchers. Teacher, you've seen more shoes than any 100 men--have you ever seen a balmoral longwing?

I have never seen one. The typical example is the AE MacNeil. Florheim also carries them. IMO a longwing is a heavier looking shoe and works much better with a blucher, which is heavier looking than a balmoral.
post #17 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoopee
Royal brogue.

Ah, thank you.
post #18 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger
That style is referred to as "longwing." You know, I've never seen a balmoral longwing, only bluchers. Teacher, you've seen more shoes than any 100 men--have you ever seen a balmoral longwing?

Yes, I have a pair. They're J&M Aristocrafts in a pebble grain from the 1950's. Other than those, no.

(And there are others 'round these parts who've seen more shoes than I, but thank you!)
post #19 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhiloVance
Mr. Pollock was kind enough to sell me a pair. They are really something else, I'm really wondering if they should even be worn.

The shoe that I sold to PhiloVance is pictured here (except that the one I had was a "second," with a slightly cheaper all-rubber heel).
http://styleforum.net./showthread.ph...hlight=pollock
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › J&M vs. C&J: A wingtip comparison