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 4617  

post #69241 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by MitchConner View Post

I'm really confused, maybe you all can help.

I bought a pair of Long Branch boots by Allen Edmonds. We tried every size from 10 to 12, including multiple widths. My feet measure 10.5-11 in length, but closer to 12-13 at the ball of the foot. The 11E feels best in the store, but I found out today after wearing them out for the first day that my right toe starts killing me after walking for 10 minutes or so. The left foot feels fine. Also, I got blisters on my right foot, but I figured that might happen. What gives with the toe? Is the toe box too narrow on one foot only? Too short on one foot?

My only other dress shoes are a pair of JM oxfords also in 11E, which started out feeling ok when I bought them, but now are too big after breaking them in. I've also had Florsheims in 10.5 wide, but they were more of a sneaker with dressier shells.

In case it helps, my sneaker size is 12EE.

I'm thinking of going to an AE store tomorrow, but I'm not sure what they can do, or if they'll do anything since they've been worn outside, however briefly.

MC, definitely head to the store. While some of us may snipe at AE quality control from time to time, it's hard to find issue with their customer service. If they helped size you and sold to you, I would be flabbergasted if they didn't help make it right.
post #69242 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by jet-stream View Post


MC, definitely head to the store. While some of us may snipe at AE quality control from time to time, it's hard to find issue with their customer service. If they helped size you and sold to you, I would be flabbergasted if they didn't help make it right.

Agree I would go to the store. I've just learned recently how to measure and fit my foot. Everybody measuring me has been getting it wrong. If you're a 12+ on a Brannock device I wouldn't bother with anything shorter. I would try fitting the Longbranch to your Brannock ball measurement and see how that feels. My length is between 9.5 and 10. I'm fitting well into a Longbranch 11 EEE. Brannock has my ball measurement as a 10.5EEE - 11EE. 


Edited by Dario65 - 1/9/16 at 9:48pm
post #69243 of 70737
Natural Shell Cordovan Patriots

post #69244 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagobred View Post

Natural Shell Cordovan Patriots


I saw those on eBay - super jealous!

post #69245 of 70737

New shoe - the Leiden - also comes in weave!  On the same last as the Cornwallis.

 

post #69246 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by polojock615 View Post

New shoe - the Leiden - also comes in weave!  On the same last as the Cornwallis.



Pretty much the Larchmont, no??
post #69247 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by MitchConner View Post

I'm really confused, maybe you all can help.

I bought a pair of Long Branch boots by Allen Edmonds. We tried every size from 10 to 12, including multiple widths. My feet measure 10.5-11 in length, but closer to 12-13 at the ball of the foot. The 11E feels best in the store, but I found out today after wearing them out for the first day that my right toe starts killing me after walking for 10 minutes or so. The left foot feels fine. Also, I got blisters on my right foot, but I figured that might happen. What gives with the toe? Is the toe box too narrow on one foot only? Too short on one foot?

My only other dress shoes are a pair of JM oxfords also in 11E, which started out feeling ok when I bought them, but now are too big after breaking them in. I've also had Florsheims in 10.5 wide, but they were more of a sneaker with dressier shells.

In case it helps, my sneaker size is 12EE.

I'm thinking of going to an AE store tomorrow, but I'm not sure what they can do, or if they'll do anything since they've been worn outside, however briefly.

Like everyone already said they should be able to help you. I have had them refund shoes that I had worn more than a month because they just wouldn't get comfortable at the pinky toe. Twice. And these were online orders (since I'm nowhere near a store).

I have worn ~8 E comfortably (actually it was a 40EU wide) but my AE Sauk Drive didn't get wearable until I tried them in 9.5 3E.
post #69248 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitchieBro View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by polojock615 View Post

New shoe - the Leiden - also comes in weave!  On the same last as the Cornwallis.



Pretty much the Larchmont, no??

Both this and the Larchmont are in the same 1943 last. Does anyone have a description of the 1943 last. None is provided on the summary pages for lasts. Or, does anyone have some comparison of the 1943 to any other last?
post #69249 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by smfdoc View Post

Both this and the Larchmont are in the same 1943 last. Does anyone have a description of the 1943 last. None is provided on the summary pages for lasts. Or, does anyone have some comparison of the 1943 to any other last?

Nope, Larchmont is the 333 last.
post #69250 of 70737

I have a hard time reconciling a longwing pattern with an elegant last and a flat welt. It's the primary reason I ended up selling my McGregors.

 

As a side note - for the folks in this thread who might be interested, I'm selling a few things over in B&S, including my navy shell Dundees, my oxblood First Avenues, and brown Fifth Avenues. 

post #69251 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by MitchConner View Post

I'm really confused, maybe you all can help.

I bought a pair of Long Branch boots by Allen Edmonds. We tried every size from 10 to 12, including multiple widths. My feet measure 10.5-11 in length, but closer to 12-13 at the ball of the foot. The 11E feels best in the store, but I found out today after wearing them out for the first day that my right toe starts killing me after walking for 10 minutes or so. The left foot feels fine. Also, I got blisters on my right foot, but I figured that might happen. What gives with the toe? Is the toe box too narrow on one foot only? Too short on one foot?

My only other dress shoes are a pair of JM oxfords also in 11E, which started out feeling ok when I bought them, but now are too big after breaking them in. I've also had Florsheims in 10.5 wide, but they were more of a sneaker with dressier shells.

In case it helps, my sneaker size is 12EE.

I'm thinking of going to an AE store tomorrow, but I'm not sure what they can do, or if they'll do anything since they've been worn outside, however briefly.


Like everyone else,  see what AE can do for you.   My experience may not apply well to you since my foot is smaller, but I fit fine in a Dalton 8D (511 last same as Long Branch), but the Sauk Drives I just got, also in an 8D (201 last), is more roomier in the toes, but everything else is the same as my Daltons.

post #69252 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitchieBro View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smfdoc View Post

Both this and the Larchmont are in the same 1943 last. Does anyone have a description of the 1943 last. None is provided on the summary pages for lasts. Or, does anyone have some comparison of the 1943 to any other last?

Nope, Larchmont is the 333 last.

You are right and I stand corrected. Now, back to the issue at hand. Does anyone have any information on the 1943 last?

post #69253 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by smfdoc View Post
 

You are right and I stand corrected. Now, back to the issue at hand. Does anyone have any information on the 1943 last?

 

Based on the opinion of one guy:

 

TL;DR version ...

1. If a given size on the 65 last fits you perfectly, that size on the 1943 could work, or could be tight in length and/or width

2. If a given size on the 65 last is tight for you, that size on the 1943 will very likely be too small length and/or width

3. If a given size on the 65 last is a bit loose for you, that size on the 1943 might work pretty well

 

To my knowledge, AE has not released an official description of the 1943.  I read many pages ago on this forum that lasts are about toe and shoe shape, rather than fit.  If that's the case, they are going for scuplted / squared off / modern / aggressive with this last.  That's not pejorative - I like the last and would buy the Cornwallis if I could get it to fit.  I've read somewhere on this thread that AE based the 1943 on the 333 last.  That seems reasonable - visually, the 1943 is kind of like a blunter 333; the toe is not as long and the squared area at the front is wider.  I'm an 11D on most AE lasts but nowhere near that on the 1943; it is shorter and narrower than the other lasts with which I have experience.

 

Compared to the 65, the 1943 is a bit narrower at the widest point and tapers much more sharply toward the point of the toe.  It's a bit shorter overall.  The 1943 is maybe a half width and a quarter-to-half size smaller.  I'm an 11E on the 65 and haven't found anything that works on the 1943; if I do, it will probably be an 11.5E.

 

Compared to the 333, the 1943 is notably narrower at the widest point, tapers similarly toward the toe, and is much shorter.  I'm an 11D on the 333, which is perfect for me.  The volume of the 1943 is also lower than the 333, which isn't a high-volume shoe.  These comments mostly apply for the 108.  Note: if the Cornwallis was made on the 333, AE would have even more business from me.  I would buy a lot of them.

 

Compared to the 201 (think Rogue), the 1943 is narrower, shorter, and much lower volume.  An 11D is a pretty good fit for me on the 201 (though a bit too much volume), and I'd be at least a half size and full width up on the 1943.

 

I can't make a useful comparison between the 511 (Dalton, Leeds) and the 1943; the 1943 is dramatically smaller.

 

 

Caveats: this is obviously just based on my experience and limited by my dim perception; YMMV.

Hope this helps!

post #69254 of 70737
Quote:
Originally Posted by jet-stream View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smfdoc View Post
 

You are right and I stand corrected. Now, back to the issue at hand. Does anyone have any information on the 1943 last?

 

Based on the opinion of one guy:

 

TL;DR version ...

1. If a given size on the 65 last fits you perfectly, that size on the 1943 could work, or could be tight in length and/or width

2. If a given size on the 65 last is tight for you, that size on the 1943 will very likely be too small length and/or width

3. If a given size on the 65 last is a bit loose for you, that size on the 1943 might work pretty well

 

To my knowledge, AE has not released an official description of the 1943.  I read many pages ago on this forum that lasts are about toe and shoe shape, rather than fit.  If that's the case, they are going for scuplted / squared off / modern / aggressive with this last.  That's not pejorative - I like the last and would buy the Cornwallis if I could get it to fit.  I've read somewhere on this thread that AE based the 1943 on the 333 last.  That seems reasonable - visually, the 1943 is kind of like a blunter 333; the toe is not as long and the squared area at the front is wider.  I'm an 11D on most AE lasts but nowhere near that on the 1943; it is shorter and narrower than the other lasts with which I have experience.

 

Compared to the 65, the 1943 is a bit narrower at the widest point and tapers much more sharply toward the point of the toe.  It's a bit shorter overall.  The 1943 is maybe a half width and a quarter-to-half size smaller.  I'm an 11E on the 65 and haven't found anything that works on the 1943; if I do, it will probably be an 11.5E.

 

Compared to the 333, the 1943 is notably narrower at the widest point, tapers similarly toward the toe, and is much shorter.  I'm an 11D on the 333, which is perfect for me.  The volume of the 1943 is also lower than the 333, which isn't a high-volume shoe.  These comments mostly apply for the 108.  Note: if the Cornwallis was made on the 333, AE would have even more business from me.  I would buy a lot of them.

 

Compared to the 201 (think Rogue), the 1943 is narrower, shorter, and much lower volume.  An 11D is a pretty good fit for me on the 201 (though a bit too much volume), and I'd be at least a half size and full width up on the 1943.

 

I can't make a useful comparison between the 511 (Dalton, Leeds) and the 1943; the 1943 is dramatically smaller.

 

 

Caveats: this is obviously just based on my experience and limited by my dim perception; YMMV.

Hope this helps!

 Thanks, that does help a great deal. The 65 last is too small for me for 11EEE, so if the 1943 is smaller, I am totally screwed. Perhaps it would work at 12EE or some other size configuration since it is dramatically smaller.

post #69255 of 70737
I thought I remembered reading somewhere that the 1943 was suppose to be wider in the ball of the foot, than the 65, and narrower/more tapered and sculpted toward the toe box.
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...