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 4581  

post #68701 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpearlberg View Post
 

Those Freibergs at $147 is hard to pass up....how is the sizing?  I have Long Branch/Strand/McTavish in 11D.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post

I have a pair of friebergs in my cart... Though I'm not 100% sure of the fit.

Same as 65? (Or should I size up 1/2?) Same as others on the 201?

Thanks, and happy holidays everyone!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by smfdoc View Post
 

 

I tried to purchase the Freiberg on AE site and they were out of my size at $147. The shoe bank still has the Freiberg seconds listed at $234, but not in the color I wanted. I called AE and they confirmed they no longer had firsts in my size, but found the Freiberg seconds in the correct size and color. She had to ask for permission to adjust the price to at least match the $147 clearance. She came back and said the shoe bank site had not updated the price and the Freiberg second was $117! So, continue to watch for the price changes on the shoe bank as they will update soon or you may want to call now.

Pardon my lack of "filtration" - I got very little sleep and am pretty cranky.  I called fully expecting the 2nds on the Freiburg to be the standard 147 -20%, or 117, and was told that 1sts were 147, 2nds were 234.  I lost it a little - I felt like Vincent Gambini in that scene where he says the whole store got the flu...bullshit with that.  I'll call back later.

 

This is how I would describe the Freiburg - 99% of the time I go with 7D, which is what I went with on these.  Same as my 65 size (and virtually everything else).  The toebox and heel fit extremely similar to the 65.  The major difference, major, is instep.  The vamp is raised to the point where it felt like I was almost swimming with room.  I knew the length was correct and was really on the fence about the large amount of room.  With gold toe or similar medium weight socks and tying them as tight as possible to eliminate some of the volume, I had a small amount of heel slip on both the right and left.  Over a period of a couple days wear, I rubbed up my heels - moderately, not terrible.  I would now consider them broken in.  They are very comfortable, a little larger than I'd like, but no more heel slip.  They feel larger to me than a McTavish but again, instep is the dominating factor - this being the 201 plus open-lacing.  Long branch is kind of different altogether, hard for me to compare to that.  The Long Branch had a wider toe but the vamp came down way lower, so to me the Long Branch felt tighter overall, but again, instep dominates.  No way 1/2 size up from 65.  If I could custom make anything I wanted, I'd go 65 and down in width.

post #68702 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayfinkle View Post
 

I'm also curious about this.  I got overly excited when I saw the new wave of clearance-- bought a pair of natural Clark Street and the light brown Freiburg (my first boot).  Didn't really think either of them through that much.  I'm wondering if maybe the russet brown wasn't the way to go.

Don't worry - they're both good.  I don't know what it was, maybe just the pair I tried or what was going on, but the the light brown Freiburg material felt a lot softer and more flexible while the russet brown was (and still is) extremely stiff.  Weird.

post #68703 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moose22 View Post
 

@Neo1 if you're rubbing heels off, try a tongue pad. That's the only way we figured out how to get me into a 65 last, as one that will flex up for my instep will be too wide in the heel. The tongue pad shoved me right back into the heel so I wasn't swimming around.

 

I hadn't considered the larchmont. I didn't realize that one was in Bourbon, too. So, now I'm torn. Considering the Rutledge fits just a touch too tight in the instep and perfect everywhere else, I'd assumed a 333 bal would be exactly the ticket. And I like the sort of European look of the last. It hints of Italian or English -- really sort of sitting between the square but pointier Italian styles and narrower but rounder toed English.

 

As for the Larchmont, I'm of two minds about it. I prefer short wings to long wings, and I don't care for the back of the shoe with that double seam. But I like the toe and vamp on that one. I actually don't own a pair of wingtips at the moment, but figured I'd be getting  a short wing in the next year or so. Maybe I go long wing instead?

 

The question is, is the Flatiron TOO spartan? I love the toe medallion on the derby shoe. It's a nice contrast to the Rogues, which are all full of big ol' holes. But almost wish it had a touch of brogueing along the seams, like the Cornwallis. And bourbon is really in the walnut range --  I already have Rutledge in burnished walnut, which are a pretty plain captoe with really reserved brogue. I'd like something slightly contrasting as I think this will be my last "light" colored shoe for a while.

 

I can't believe I've become so damned vain about shoes!

Found your thought process kind of interesting - I actually thought the exact same thing when I got the Larchmont - I thought the Flatiron didn't have enough going on, and that the Yorktown (or Cornwallis) were better bets...keep in mind the Larchmont and Flatiron are both open laced, so you shouldn't have trouble with either of them.

 

Tongue pads aren't much use to me - I can't take the heel slip so I'll usually just suck it up and deal with the instep pain on the bals..:).  Call me a glutton for punishment.  Those f-ing park aves - I remember wearing those things for 2x a week for like 6 months, they killed me everytime.  I could have gone 7E but stuck with 7D - I chose, wisely.  They did eventually "break", thank god.

post #68704 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buster Brown View Post
 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cc808314 View Post
 

Thank you both for your help.  I guess I was looking to use them in more of a business casual environment and someone warned against that on the AE site.  Was just looking to back up that claim.  I guess I wont jump on them.

post #68705 of 70737

Hey Gents - Hope you all are having a nice Christmas Eve.  I'm hoping someone can help me with a McTavish sizing question - I've heard they are a little quirky on sizing.  I wear an 11.5C in the MacNeil (shell), an 11.5B in the Ashton (calf), and a 12B in the Leeds (shell).  Any idea what size would work in the McTavish?  Thanks in advance for any insight you have!

post #68706 of 70737
Merry Christmas Eve everyone. With the new clearance sale announce, I'm thinking of adding to my AE collection. 13 and growing. That said, I'm looking for a bourbon, as I don't currently have that color. I'm tossing between the Strand and the Mcallister. Like the University, but no bourbon, but they do have a dark chili.

My office attire (software engineering mgr, mid 50s) is chinos with a button down and sweater in the AZ winters. Chinos and a nice polo in the summer. I rarely wear jeans to work, but do wear them occasionally when out with my wife. I currently have 4 "Strand":
  • Walnut
  • Chocolate suede
  • Rush Street
  • Blue Suede Strandmok


The only wings I have are a pair of Longbranch boots in brown. My questions.... is a wing more formal than a brogue? Would the Mcallister look weird with chinos? I'm leaning bourbon Mcallisters for a change from the Strand. Just not sure if they'll work in my situation. Any comments appreciated.

Thanks

EDIT: one other thought, what about the Carlyle?
Edited by Mark_Y - 12/24/15 at 1:24pm
post #68707 of 70737

Anyone have any experience with the Buckstrand in tan? How do you like it? Any real world photos?

post #68708 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexnb View Post
 

Anyone have any experience with the Buckstrand in tan? How do you like it? Any real world photos?


I picked up the floor display when I was last in the store - nice looking shoe, but no way I'd get anything with the plain gumlite sole.  If you don't mind that, pretty good price.  I'd put the Rush Street on top, then the Neumok, then this one.  If you're looking at it from a sale price perspective, consider the tan Strandmok as an alternative - the danite is way better.  The Strandmok may look way more boring but I think it would be more practical in terms of pairing it.

post #68709 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by redmusic1 View Post
 


Go for the Mora. It won't be a suit shoe, but I'm not fond of the bourbon with suits anyway. I would get them if they still had my size in firsts.

If you do need something to pull double duty, then go with the FA or PA, because I'm not sure what to think about a plain toe bal in bourbon. Seems very limited to me, but I've been wrong before

When was that?  You're always spot on.  Couldn't have agreed more.  Wish they stuck with the Neumora....passed on that and now the Mora 2 doesn't fit me.  At least I got the Norwich....

post #68710 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post
 

When was that?  You're always spot on.  Couldn't have agreed more.  Wish they stuck with the Neumora....passed on that and now the Mora 2 doesn't fit me.  At least I got the Norwich....

 

Haha, so two votes for the Mora. Has anyone had experience with the coloring and creasing on the Mora's?

post #68711 of 70737

@neo1 "Pardon my lack of "filtration" - I got very little sleep and am pretty cranky.  I called fully expecting the 2nds on the Freiburg to be the standard 147 -20%, or 117, and was told that 1sts were 147, 2nds were 234.  I lost it a little - I felt like Vincent Gambini in that scene where he says the whole store got the flu...bullshit with that.  I'll call back later."

 

I was also told $234 for the seconds and I had to ask for a reduction. The phone rep (at AE, not an outlet)  put me on hold and had to ask her supervisor. Not sure who she spoke to, but pulled it down to the $117 when she got back on the phone with me.

post #68712 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by sentry View Post
 

 

Thanks for the advice, leaning towards the Mora now. What color do you recommend for suits? I wear charcoal and navy - I like wearing walnut with navy but it might be too flashy. Should I be looking to pick up a pair of dark brown PA?

 

Also, some of the AE reviews mention the Mora has some issues with creasing and discoloration. can anyone weigh in on that?


I wouldn't wear the Mora with a suit personally, but I could see someone more modern than me wearing them in brown with a suit while in less formal settings. The brown PA would be a great second suit shoe, but I wouldn't recommend it for wear without a blazer. Grab the brown Moras for one pair versatility. Or grab the Bourbon Moras and brown FA's (better choice than the PA to me since you have them in black) to have something for casual, business casual, and business. 

post #68713 of 70737

@Neo1

I totally agree with heel slip, and cannot abide it myself, but I find your patience overwhelming. I could never suffer twice a week for that long waiting for shoes to break in.

 

Ben in Freeport got me fitted in 65s (up a size, same width, tongue pads to shove me back in the heel so it doesn't slip) and then after all that work told me straight up to just wait for something in a different last. Now I call him with questions about shoebank items -- seems strange to have a rep literally at the opposite corner of the country, but he's straight up helpful.

 

Anyway, a question. How red is your russet brown Freiburg? I swear, I hear russet brown I think an Idaho potato, but the website looks significantly redder than I'd expect.

post #68714 of 70737

I was gifted this pair of chili Benton's with a goodly amount of wear on them. This duplicated a pair I already had. Since they were free, I decided to recraft them to a storm welt and mini-lug sole. Not sure about some fashion consensus on that move, but I thought it would be interesting and a more causal feel. There were some stains on the originals that were greatly improved, but not entirely eliminated. Since the MTO program is no more, I thought it was the next best thing.

 

 

post #68715 of 70737

@smfdoc, I find that absolutely hilarious. I don't know why, but there's something almost kafkaesque about a rep telling you the flawed boots cost $100 more, completely straight, without immediately offering to look into the sale price.

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...