or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc... - Page 4312  

post #64666 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by M635Guy View Post
 

 

I'm hugely biased since I own the tan McT, but i'd recommend both the Mct and the Kenilworth if you can pull it off.  Very different shoes that will give you some options...

 

If you have to get one pair, the McT leans casual and the Kenilworth leans more dressed.  Both can go either way, but it just depends on what your needs are. 

 

@DNSamurai. This is some pretty good advice here, in terms of how each of those shoes can be worn. The McT is strictly causal for me. The Kennies, on the other hand, are much more versatile for me and can be dressed up much easier (though I feel like my Bleeckers have taken the role of my kennies.

 

So, if you had to have one workhorse type shoe, than I would go with the Kenilworths. If you want more casual and fun, then grab the McT (in tan!!).

post #64667 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by watchidiot View Post

Not really AE but since its about an AE boot then I'm posting it here anyway.

I've finally worn out the harrier wedge soles of my Carson City boots and Id like to replace it with RLH soles. I already checked with B nelson and sadly try don't have RLH soles. Does anybody here know anyone that resoled with RLH?

 

Ack ....keep me updated I have a pair of old Sebago handsewn USA's that need a new sole and that is what I want.

post #64668 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by mreams99 View Post


I saved a lot of time doing this with a Black & Decker "mouse" sander.

nice, for me sanding using hands reduces the chances of me screwing up...But yes it takes more time...

post #64669 of 70737

Hi all, looking to pick up my 2nd pair of AEs and would like to ask a question and advice.

 

I am having a hard time seeing the difference between the Lexington and the Oak Street, besides the colorways available. Can you tell me what is different? I'm sure I'm missing the obvious.

 

Next, some advice for filling the gap in my shoe wardrobe. Currently I have tan McTavish, a light grey suede oxford from BR, and Clarks Desert Boots in beeswax. I work in a pretty casual environment where chinos with polo's/button downs are the norm. I'd also like if the new shoes would go well with jeans. I'm considering the Oak Street, Lexingtons, or even Odenwalds (shoebank in brown). 

post #64670 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by aero25 View Post

 

I am having a hard time seeing the difference between the Lexington and the Oak Street, besides the colorways available. Can you tell me what is different? I'm sure I'm missing the obvious.

 

The Lexington is calfskin whereas the Oak Street comes in more casual leathers.  The Lexington has a traditional leather footbed whereas the Oak Street has a foam-padded insole.  It appears that both shoes are now coming standard with a Dainite rubber outsole (the Lexington used to come with a single oak leather sole).

 

More generally, the Lexington is intended to be a dress shoe, and the Oak Street is not.

post #64671 of 70737
All that talk of McT wants me to try it but its a bal and I never fit in bals. The price at $157 is just great though. Isn't there a blucher version of a McT price point? Is the LGA close enough? Would fit me better being on the 511 anyway.
Edited by tharkun - 10/1/15 at 4:52am
post #64672 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by tharkun View Post

All that talk of McT wants me to try it but its a bal and I never fit in bals. The price at $157 is just great though. Isn't there a blucher version of a McT price point? Is the LGA close enough? Would fit me better being on the 511 anyway.

The LGA is MUCH different, for a variety of reasons. I'd recommend you compare in person.
post #64673 of 70737
All the McT talk is interesting, because it has always seemed to be an unappreciated model on these boards. Perhaps all the recent pictures, low price, or lack of other options is driving this?
post #64674 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post

All the McT talk is interesting, because it has always seemed to be an unappreciated model on these boards. Perhaps all the recent pictures, low price, or lack of other options is driving this?

It's a tricky shoe. It's a clearly casual model (reverse welt, double sole, contrast stitching, rough cowhide uppers), but it has closed lacing. Tricky to pair. Unless you're going with jeans and casual attire, in which case most bets are off.
post #64675 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLeslieS View Post
 

 

The Lexington is calfskin whereas the Oak Street comes in more casual leathers.  The Lexington has a traditional leather footbed whereas the Oak Street has a foam-padded insole.  It appears that both shoes are now coming standard with a Dainite rubber outsole (the Lexington used to come with a single oak leather sole).

 

More generally, the Lexington is intended to be a dress shoe, and the Oak Street is not.

 

Perfect explanation. On a more general note, I find cap toe blucher/derbies such a weird combo. Like the conversation about the mctavish, cap toe screams business and blucher is more casual. I don't exactly follow or believe in the rules (I'm wearing walnut derbies with a suit *gasp), but I struggle with the lexington. I guess it's good if you're one of those people whose feet can't do oxfords as an alternative to the park ave.

post #64676 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by BKBridge View Post

Perfect explanation. On a more general note, I find cap toe blucher/derbies such a weird combo. Like the conversation about the mctavish, cap toe screams business and blucher is more casual. I don't exactly follow or believe in the rules (I'm wearing walnut derbies with a suit *gasp), but I struggle with the lexington. I guess it's good if you're one of those people whose feet can't do oxfords as an alternative to the park ave.

I think there's rather a continuum of casual to formal based on how many country elements a shoe has vs city elements. I look for the following characteristics (rated from country to city):

1) Upper material (Canvas, Distressed cowhide, CXL, suede, grain calf, cordovan, calf, patent leather)

2) Welt (reverse norvegese or goyser, split reverse, flat 360, flat 270, cemented or stitched formalwear)

3) sole (lugged rubber, double leather, flat "dress" rubber, single leather)

4) shoe construction (sneaker, loafer, blucher, Oxford, pump)

5) ornamentation (mocc toe, longwing, full brogue, semi brogue, punch cap, cap toe, plain toe) not sure where whole it's fit here, as many consider them to be fashion-forward. Not formal, but definitively not country.

6) upper color. Darker = more dressy. Lighter = more casual. With some exceptions. A white buck will be less casual than a mid green one. And a tan shoe will be dressier than a dark purple one, etc.

Then there are other factors, such as size of brogue holes (bigger is more "country" for all those highland bogs you'll be traversing), stitching color (contrast vs matching), welt and edge color (again, contrast vs matching), size of stitch thread/needle on mocc toes (think bradley vs delray), exposed vs blind eyelets, etc.

As long as a shoe falls mostly to the "city side" (upper material, color, and welt style being more defining to me than lacing style), then I don't think anyone will bat an eye at your wearing them with more dressy outfits. As long as the other elements of your outfit fall similarly along the country/city spectrum.

I think a well polished Lexington with a wool suit would look just fine, in my opinion.
post #64677 of 70737
@tharkun id say roll the dice on the mct if you like them. I have a ton of trouble with bals - for better or worse, the mcT fits much wider. I have to wear them with medium weight socks and can close the gap almost all the way. Like others have said, its a unique casual style that puts off a lot of people but I think they're great.

Now you'll get me into some hot water im sure...😉 The LGA? Have you ever tried that in person? I don't think the quality is anything like the mcT to start. On top of that, id take the double sole over the lga sole hands down. And another thing - they use the 511g, significant difference, much less room than the normal 511. Does that persuade you😃
post #64678 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post

@tharkun id say roll the dice on the mct if you like them. I have a ton of trouble with bals - for better or worse, the mcT fits much wider. I have to wear them with medium weight socks and can close the gap almost all the way. Like others have said, its a unique casual style that puts off a lot of people but I think they're great.

Now you'll get me into some hot water im sure...😉 The LGA? Have you ever tried that in person? I don't think the quality is anything like the mcT to start. On top of that, id take the double sole over the lga sole hands down. And another thing - they use the 511g, significant difference, much less room than the normal 511. Does that persuade you😃

Haha nice wink.gif No I haven't seen them in person. There's no AE store even close to Montreal and the few shops that carry AE are downtown (where I almost never go) and/or don't carry anything but D and just very few models anyway (e.g. TF Firma at the Eaton Centre). I'd be happy to learn I'm wrong on that if anybody from around here is reading.

Back on topic though, I actually haven't ever tried AE bals because of my previous experiences with other bals (tried quite a few at the bay and sometimes can't even get into bluchers). I have to order them and try them and send them back. Being in Canada means $40 US shipping here and $20 CAD back. So I'm quite reluctant and try to go with the wisdom of the crowds here. I think I'm maybe a suede person. My old beaters were black suede once but so ruined that I just put black boot dressing on them and they worked great (3 years and going and cost 60€. Soles are done for now though).

As an aside I was looking for cheap beaters yesterday and just had a very bad try on with a Dockers in 9D. Could barely fit in and walking hurt really badly on the top. In the end I went with $40 CAD tan Suede shoes with purple laces in 9D biggrin.gif
post #64679 of 70737

Went with the Aberdeens on this waterlogged day (week?).  These puppies bead off the water like crazy (unlike my pants). On casual days, I'll wear my bean boots, but these are passable and keep my feet dry when I dress up.

 

DkVHRp6.jpg

post #64680 of 70737

Picked up a pair of Cordovan "Truffle" Dundee from the Shoebank, a previous 'webgem'? $299.  Any thoughts on these? Will be my first shell.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - reviews, pictures, sizing, etc...