or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › RLPL Barksdale vs. Mackay. Which is more versatile?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RLPL Barksdale vs. Mackay. Which is more versatile?

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
Which is more versatile and why? Can you pull off wearing either one with jeans?
post #2 of 26
I wear the Mackays with jeans, usually with a dress shirt and blazer. I think it works best with a fitted jean, as opposed to an anti-fit.

post #3 of 26
I wrote this in the other thread: the Mackay. In fact, I'm wearing them now with a shirt tucked into dark, slimmish jeans. Of course more casual denim will not work, nor will tees on top.
post #4 of 26
which one is the barksdale? i've only seen the one RLPL shoe on the polo website. also, do you guys know if there is a black RLPL chelsea boot (and about how much does it go for??)

post #5 of 26
Thread Starter 




Anyone else have any opinions on which is more versatile? Can either one be worn with jeans?
post #6 of 26
The Barksdale looks very much like an old mans shoe to me. Get the Mackay.
post #7 of 26
The MacKay is more versatile. I can see wearing that with anywhere from jeans to trim khakis or cords to the best navy worsted suit. Penny loafers do not go that high in the range of formality. You are pretty much limited to sportcoats and below with loafers like that.

Plus I think the heel counters on the loafers look just a bit weird, but that's just me. I probably wouldn't wear penny loafers anyway.
post #8 of 26
Mackay for me hands down, no question - not even a moment's hesitation.
post #9 of 26
Thread Starter 
I've asked some of my friends as well and they seem to be split. What I've noticed however is that which of those two shoes a person perfers is correlated with their age. Now could each of you post your age?
post #10 of 26
How exactly does the split correlate? I am 20.
post #11 of 26
Well, I guess it remains for me to be the contrarian on this question. In my mind, most cap-toes, and particularly balmorals, just look out of place with anything remotely casual. The Mackay will look good with a suit, but a little less so with a sports jacket/odd trousers. Perfed bluchers would be fine in the latter case, but to my eye, sleek balmorals like these look badly incongruous with jeans, chinos, or, really, anything but a jacket and tie at least. The Barksdale, on the other hand, looks completely natural with jeans, chinos, and anything casual, but can, in addition, be appropriately worn with jacket/tie/odd trousers, and would look ideal with a jacket and turtleneck or jacket/open-collared shirt. Further, sleek, stylish, and high-end loafers like these can, if necessary, work with a suit too, not looking badly out of place.
post #12 of 26
Thread Starter 
From what I have noticed, younger guys seem to like the Barksdale more as it is a sleeker, more modern design. They seem to think that the Barksdale is a lot more versatile in that it can be worn with anything from high end jeans to a suit.
Older men on the other hand tend to gravitate towards the Mackay with it's traditional broguing and cap-toe style. The Mackays seem like the type of shoe that should only be worn with a suit, lest you look like one of those old overweight bankers trying too hard to look stylish.
The Barksdale, in my opinion, has more of a European/Italian sensibility, whereas the Mackays are more old school English.

Does anyone care to differ?
post #13 of 26
Originally Posted by Roger
In my mind, most cap-toes, and particularly balmorals, just look out of place with anything remotely casual.

I am in total agreement with this. Also, the shape seems wrong for jeans. Generally, I will wear trim and fairly tapered shoes with narrow leg jeans, and rounder toed loafers with bootcuts (so the bottom covers the vamp and leaves only a little showing).

The Barksdale is too squared-off and, yes, too "old-mannish" for jeans IMHO. It's like something by Allen-Edmonds. Better leather, better construction, but still that style.

For my part, Gucci (and Ferragamo) loafers, plain-toe bluechers, and chelsea, chukka and jodphur boots are the ideal shoes with jeans. Wholecuts look really nifty, as do trim dark brogues.

As with trousers, I think open-lacing should be worn with shorter legs, minimal break and maybe narrower openings, and closed-lacing with slightly longer and fuller jeans. If you wear longer ones with bluechers, you run the risk of the opening bunching on the vamp.

Just my two cents...
post #14 of 26
The Mackay certainly is the more formal design, though it is almost the sleekest semi-brogue available. Young men wearing loafers with suits usually either look ignorant or trying to hard to be cool. In fact, it is that very few young men own a truly elegant, classic shoe like the Mackay that makes them so cool when pulled off well. No doubt this depends on one's inherent sense of style.

Also note that penny loafers carry connotations, too, and not of youth. Though - and perhaps because - it is often done, wearing them with suits is not a good idea.
post #15 of 26
Thread Starter 
Let's try to get back on topic--which shoe is better for which occasion and which one is better for a guy in his 20s? Mackay or Barksdale?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › RLPL Barksdale vs. Mackay. Which is more versatile?