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 4470  

post #67036 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post
 

Had an interesting conversation with my wife, and then later a co-worker, on what is considered dressier or more casual. 

 

Can you guys please order these 4 shoes from casual to dressy, at least in terms of what you could get away with?

1) Brown grain First Ave (with dainite sole)

2) Tan McTavish

3) Bob's Chili Bleecker Street

4) Merlot Franciscan

 

My wife felt that the McT's and Franciscans were the dressiest, because they were the fanciest and had broguing; Bleeckers were the most casual becuase they were plain.

 

Pics of 1-4:

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Well the forum answers to this question will be interesting. For those who weigh in, I think we should provide an order rank for forum members AND then a rank order for those who are not shoe aficionados. For me, the most "dressy" is the  Franciscan and the others are toss ups for various reasons. Many non forum people will agree with your wife.

post #67037 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by jzrhwinnj View Post
 

Normandys are in.  Glad they updated the b34 to size 15, but I prefer the 511 last.  Definite keepers, they fit best with the laces very tight.

 

Love the hearty Vibram lugged sole on this soft leather!

 

 

 

Gigi says hello, now 18 weeks old.




Did you have to pay extra for the Vibram sole? I thought it came standard with a leather sole. I've had my eye on the Normandy for a while, but felt conflicted about the sole. That thing screams for a lugged sole standard. Wondering if they changed the specs.

post #67038 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post

Had an interesting conversation with my wife, and then later a co-worker, on what is considered dressier or more casual. 

Can you guys please order these 4 shoes from casual to dressy, at least in terms of what you could get away with?
1) Brown grain First Ave (with dainite sole)
2) Tan McTavish
3) Bob's Chili Bleecker Street
4) Merlot Franciscan

My wife felt that the McT's and Franciscans were the dressiest, because they were the fanciest and had broguing; Bleeckers were the most casual becuase they were plain.

Pics of 1-4: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
1)


2)


3)


4)


My ranking:

2) Tan McTavish - the welt really make these easily the most casual
1) Brown grain First Ave (with dainite sole) - notice the eyelets are not naked? That makes these more casual
3) Bob's Chili Bleecker Street
4) Merlot Franciscan
post #67039 of 70737
Yes I did pay an up-charge. It was well worth it as I was not interested with stock sole. Same up charge on my shearling First Aves and same logic- would not have ordered them without some kind of lugged outsole. Both boots got the lugged sole from the previous version Long branch.
post #67040 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post

Had an interesting conversation with my wife, and then later a co-worker, on what is considered dressier or more casual. 

Can you guys please order these 4 shoes from casual to dressy, at least in terms of what you could get away with?
1) Brown grain First Ave (with dainite sole)
2) Tan McTavish
3) Bob's Chili Bleecker Street
4) Merlot Franciscan

My wife felt that the McT's and Franciscans were the dressiest, because they were the fanciest and had broguing; Bleeckers were the most casual becuase they were plain.

Pics of 1-4: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
1)


2)


3)


4)


Fun question with an interesting line-up. From my understanding of the rules, the 'correct' answer is (in descending order of formality): Franciscan > Bleecker St > First Avenue > McTavish. I've heard different takes on the relative formality of monks vs bluchers. I'm giving the nod to the Franciscan as it's a slightly more formal color. I'm putting the First Ave below the Bleecker St based on rubber vs leather sole. Despite being a balmoral, the McT's waxy leather, contrasting welt and laces clearly mark it as a casual shoe. All that said, I can understand your wife's take. My 'public' seems to associate brogueing with 'dress shoes.' Now, I live in southern California so anything with a closed toe or actual laces could be considered formal.
post #67041 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by jzrhwinnj View Post

Length has been an issue in all previous downsize attempts with AE.  I have 2 'tolerated' examples in 14e/eee but none I'd call a clear success.  

Would like this boot in a 14.5 but these will do.  Seems I got a very light distress effort which I am happy about.

Love my pair, too. I live in a desert region of the country, so the leather sole is fine for me. The distressing on mine is very mild as well. So comfortable!
post #67042 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Count de Monet View Post

@AdamAdam those are some great looking specs. I think AE ought to offer non-golf versions of the Heritage rather than bringing back the Broadstreet. Or both😎

 

Thanks! I wear them a lot actually. They aren't overly flashy but just enough so that they get noticed and still work in a business environment. I get lots of compliments.

post #67043 of 70737
. Friday MacNeils. 45 on EBay.
post #67044 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post

Had an interesting conversation with my wife, and then later a co-worker, on what is considered dressier or more casual. 

Can you guys please order these 4 shoes from casual to dressy, at least in terms of what you could get away with?
1) Brown grain First Ave (with dainite sole)
2) Tan McTavish
3) Bob's Chili Bleecker Street
4) Merlot Franciscan

My wife felt that the McT's and Franciscans were the dressiest, because they were the fanciest and had broguing; Bleeckers were the most casual becuase they were plain.

Pics of 1-4: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
1)


2)


3)


4)

My order, from casual to dressy:
2, 1, 3, 4
For me, it's really a toss-up in the middle between 1 and 3.
post #67045 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by smfdoc View Post
 

Well the forum answers to this question will be interesting. For those who weigh in, I think we should provide an order rank for forum members AND then a rank order for those who are not shoe aficionados. For me, the most "dressy" is the  Franciscan and the others are toss ups for various reasons. Many non forum people will agree with your wife.

 

I like the idea of a personal ranking and then a ranking of what you think the general public would say.

post #67046 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Brown View Post

Fun question with an interesting line-up. From my understanding of the rules, the 'correct' answer is (in descending order of formality): Franciscan > Bleecker St > First Avenue > McTavish. I've heard different takes on the relative formality of monks vs bluchers. I'm giving the nod to the Franciscan as it's a slightly more formal color. I'm putting the First Ave below the Bleecker St based on rubber vs leather sole. Despite being a balmoral, the McT's waxy leather, contrasting welt and laces clearly mark it as a casual shoe.

I agree with this, except my reasoning for the First Ave being less formal than the Bleecker is the choice of leather rather than choice of sole. As far as I'm concerned, dainite is acceptable office attire for all but the most formal occasions. And doesn't the Bleecker come with a tap-toe?
post #67047 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Brown View Post


Fun question with an interesting line-up. 

 

The options were not chosen completely at random. There are some certain elements of all 4 that can go either direction, so I thought it would be a fun question to pose.

post #67048 of 70737
Wearing my MTO chili/bitter chocolate Fifth Streets today and got caught in a brief (and not forecasted) shower. So glad I went with JR soles, as they seem to just shrug off moisture that standard leather shoes would crumble from. Anyone know the price differential (wholesale or retail) between the two? I'd happily pay an upcharge for them on all my leather-soled shoes.
post #67049 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post

Had an interesting conversation with my wife, and then later a co-worker, on what is considered dressier or more casual. 

Can you guys please order these 4 shoes from casual to dressy, at least in terms of what you could get away with?
1) Brown grain First Ave (with dainite sole)
2) Tan McTavish
3) Bob's Chili Bleecker Street
4) Merlot Franciscan

My wife felt that the McT's and Franciscans were the dressiest, because they were the fanciest and had broguing; Bleeckers were the most casual becuase they were plain.

Pics of 1-4: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
1)


2)


3)


4)



That cracks me up. My wife recently questioned me why I have three pairs of the same shoe (Merlot McAllisters, Chili McGregors, Walnut Strands). After a lengthy discussion she started to see the differences.
post #67050 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flytrout View Post


That cracks me up. My wife recently questioned me why I have three pairs of the same shoe (Merlot McAllisters, Chili McGregors, Walnut Strands). After a lengthy discussion she started to see the differences.

 

Ha! Had a very similar conversation about other brogued shoes.

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...