Crockett Jones 238 last

could you please compare 238 last with other c&j lasts? 337 and 240 fit me quite snug, but not uncomfortably tight. 318, 325 and 360 are OK, perhaps a bit roomy. 324 is unbearably narrow for me. I am aware that 238 is known as a narrow C&J last but I don't know whether it is very narrow. Is it even narrower than 348 and even 324?

I was hoping that you, the C&J expert, reply to my thread. I am very lucky indeed.

Thank you so much. Your post helped a lot.

BTW, is the below sequence (from narrower to wider) correct in your opinion?

238 < 324 < 317 < 348 < 240 < 337 < 318 < 360 < 325 < 341

I know every foot is different, but your shoe tree test might help. In fact shoe trees also vary but anyhow, your test may be a standard, at least when used with a certain shoe tree model from a certain shoe tree brand.

Please feel free to add any other last that you may have first hand experience.

My below sequence, as revised, is based on the combination of my experience with certain lasts (318, 324, 325, 341, 337, 360, 240) and other people's posts in various threads. For the purposes of my sequence, I assume that same size (in terms of both length and width) is used for all shoes) and not the suede but the calfskin versions are taken into consideration.

238 < 324 < 317 < 348 < 240 < 330 < 337 < 341 < 236 < 318 < 325 < 360

Please anyone feel free to add any other last that you may have experience or create your own sequence. Of course everybody's feet is different but this can be a good reference.

I will appreciate if my dear forumites comment on the placement of 236 last.

I think this thread has become too subjective-- First, there is not so much difference amongst the lasts that come after 337, i.e. the ones wider than 337. Second, I do not have equal experience with the shoes that I own. For instance, I very recently bought a monk shoe on 360 last that I have only tried on carpet so far. However, I have worn a pair of my shoes made on 318 last many times. The uppers strechted a bit. Third, I would say, in terms of ball area my feet is a regular fit, however, in terms of instep, my feet is high. As a matter of fact, I might be thinking some lasts are narrow, although they are not indeed.

NONETHELESS, if we take 337 last as basis for a regular list having normal width, I believe my sequence prior to 337 is pretty accurate. The sequence of 348 and 240 may interchange, as I do not have any experience with 348 last, and I placed 348 prior to 240 according to my understanding from other forumites' comments on 348 last. Although I also do not have any experience with 317 last, as far as I understand from other forumites' comments, it is pretty narrow to such that it should be placed prior to both 348 and 240. (Someone please correct me if I am wrong. Some Peal & Co. shoes are made on this last so owners may confirm) As to the sequence coming after 337, please feel free to correct my sequence, but as I said above, unlike the lasts narrower than 337, there are small incrementals amongs that lasts wider than 337, meaning that I would not say one is substantially wider than the other. Nevertheless, as to your question, perhaps it would be correct to interchange 360 last with 325 last. So my revised sequence is as follows:

238 < 324 < 317 < 348 < 240 < 330 < 337 < 341 < 236 < 318 < 360 < 325

Double post