or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - Page 804

post #12046 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucksfan View Post

Nice boots, cold iron! That pic really shows how great that color of shell is. Those will look great with some hard wear on them. Congrats!

 

Thanks bucksfan! It was hard to pass on yet another shell color, especially as nice as these and in a boot is just icing on the cake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsey shoes View Post

Beautiful pic Cold Iron... Enjoy!

 

Being the copy cat, I got a pair of 744s as well based on the earlier discussion. I was originally learning toward the Bayfields, but the cigar color of the 744 shell drew me in.

Have not taken them out for a spin yet, but the foot bed seems very comfortable. Will post a pic soon.

 

Congrats! I have the Bayfields also, in both CXL and Black. All 3 are great boots IMO.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spitshine123 View Post

The wolverine boots look amazing. How do they fit size-wise compared to other AE boots? I own the fifth aves in calf.

TTS for me, same as my #1 and #5 last shoes and boots, with the exception of the rough collection.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarioImpemba View Post

Haven't seen very many pictures of them in the wild - appreciate it.

 

The tone variation is unreal good. The gloss seems a bit much - would like to see a pic without the flash sometime.

 

I go back-and-forth on the punched-cap; if they had a beefy double-sole they'd almost look like White's.

 

Comfort-wise, if they're anything like the 721's, they should be stupid-comfy.

 

Enjoy! Great buy @$399 - any defects?

 

I don't believe I thanked you for turning me onto these boots, thanks! Even though I hadn't planned on another pair this year. Hey does that make us even for me influencing you on purchasing that jacket on another thread?! 

 

I will try to get a pic in natural lighting but likely be closer to the weekend, provided the sun actually comes out again. I used Alden Defender on them and they are  glossy IRL. Once the Defender gets dry and hazy I wipe them with a nylon stocking and it really brings out the color and shines with a high gloss. Not sure if I will end up using sno-seal or not yet. I'm used to a punched cap toe boot, that was my service boot for 20 years so to me it seems normal. The pinking at the base of the captoe threw me at first and I couldn't make up my mind about it. But from any distance at all you don't even notice it and it already is normal looking to me. I will add the Vibram Raptor half sole to them soon for winter traction. Yes they are comfortable, very much so. The only defect I can find is that the toe on the left is a lot lighter than the one on the right. But that doesn't bother me in the least, being shell I rather prefer it that way. 

post #12047 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by hohneokc View Post

I have the snuff suede Players and really like them. They are wingtips though.
Chris

 

Maybe suede wingtips will grow on me, but for some reason I just can't see myself wearing them.

post #12048 of 53190
Hi Everyone,

A few days ago, I received my first pair of Allen Edmonds, the Dalton in Walnut. I got them as factory seconds. Comestically, I cannot see any faults.

I wore my Dalton for the first time today. It looks great! I love it and have already received compliments on it when I wore it to the doctor's office today. But the pinky toe on my right foot was painful after wearing it for a couple of hours.

I came home and felt the inside of the right shoe. The leather inside the left shoe was smooth from heel to toe, but the leather inside the right side of the shoe near the pinky toe area (and the entire front, really) was rough, which explains the pain that I was feeling because my pinky toe kept rubbing against this rough patch of leather.

I have a few questions:

1. Will this rough patch of leather smooth out as I wear it more?

2. Is it normal to have a rough patch of leather inside the shoe, or should it all be smooth? Could this possibly have been the reason for the boot being a factory second?

I got the boots for $250, andI don't want to pay full retail price for it, so if I can get some assurances from the experts here that the leather will smooth out after being broken in, I would love to keep it. I'm a total noob when it comes to shoe / leather, so I would really appreciate anyone's input.

Thank you in advance.
post #12049 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by adamk77 View Post

Hi Everyone,
A few days ago, I received my first pair of Allen Edmonds, the Dalton in Walnut. I got them as factory seconds. Comestically, I cannot see any faults.
I wore my Dalton for the first time today. It looks great! I love it and have already received compliments on it when I wore it to the doctor's office today. But the pinky toe on my right foot was painful after wearing it for a couple of hours.
I came home and felt the inside of the right shoe. The leather inside the left shoe was smooth from heel to toe, but the leather inside the right side of the shoe near the pinky toe area (and the entire front, really) was rough, which explains the pain that I was feeling because my pinky toe kept rubbing against this rough patch of leather.
I have a few questions:
1. Will this rough patch of leather smooth out as I wear it more?
2. Is it normal to have a rough patch of leather inside the shoe, or should it all be smooth? Could this possibly have been the reason for the boot being a factory second?
I got the boots for $250, andI don't want to pay full retail price for it, so if I can get some assurances from the experts here that the leather will smooth out after being broken in, I would love to keep it. I'm a total noob when it comes to shoe / leather, so I would really appreciate anyone's input.
Thank you in advance.

 

This rough patch will probably smooth out over time, and yes it is normal.  I am not totally sure why they sand the toe area of the liner before the shoe is lasted, but they do it to all of them.  You can see it very briefly in their video here at the 3:50 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVihz2DbPd8  It does not have anything to do with the shoe being a second. 

 

All that said, it is not possible to diagnose all types of discomfort from descriptions online.  If the shoes are comfortable in every way with the exception of some tenderness in your pinky toe after wearing the shoes for several hours, then I would lean towards keeping them and continuing to break them in. 

post #12050 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoneyWellSpent View Post

The McTavish is a substantially higher quality shoe than the Neumok.  The leather on the McTavish is heavier (It is Horween Dublin leather, which is full cowhide rather than calf).  I am not sure what the leather uppers on the Neumok are, but it is much softer and silkier to the touch.  The softer leather combined with the lack of a liner will undoubtedly make the Neumok much softer on the feet.  However, this will likely make them less resilient when it comes to a long life span compared to the McTavish.  This obviously depends heavily on how well you care for it though. 

 

The AE website does say that the Neumok has a double sole, but it doesn't.  That has to be a typo.  If you haven't seen it in person, then look at some good quality photos (amazon has some of the best) and you can see that it is one layer of leather under the welt.  The butyl soles are soaked in oil to make them more water resistant.  They are distinguished visibly by the darker antique looking brown color over the lighter tan color of the oak tanned soles.  The split reverse welt is a different type of welting.  It isn't necessarily better than a traditional welt.  It can be seen by the additional "lip" of leather that you see where the welting and the upper meet.  This is accomplished by "splitting" the welt to a point before stitching it to the upper and insole rib.  The split piece of welting is assembled so that the bottom piece is used for the stitching, and the upper piece is turned up to rest against the upper of the shoe (this is hard to describe without photos or diagrams)  You can google it and easily find descriptions with pictures.  It is a variant on the idea of a storm welt (which is actually functional) where an additional waxed stitch is run through that lip of leather to provide additional water resistance by slowing the flow of water between the welting and the upper.  See here for a photo of a finished storm welt: http://theagatineeyelet.wordpress.com/2010/11/22/welts-part-1/.  The split reverse welt is really just adding a more substantial appearance to the welt/sole area. 

 

The softer leather all around, no liner, and single sole of the Neumok make it much more flexible right out of the box and overall lighter.  This is why they are able to claim that it is more comfortable.  That is all true, but in the long run the McTavish should end up being very comfortable as well assuming it fits you properly.  In my opinion, I would only buy the Neumok if the colors were something I couldn't live without.  I think the small price increase for the McTavish gets you a much more substantial shoe for your money. 

 

 

What a helpful response! Thank you for taking the time to type this all out.

 

  1. So do you think the Neumok is always single butyl and the McTavish is always double oak? If so, maybe we need to contact AE and have them fix their site.
  2. How did you find out the type of leather on the McTavish? I didn't see anything about Horween Dublin cowhide on their site.
  3. If butyl is good for water resistance, what is oak's specialty? I assume that the double oak is plenty water resistant compared to the single butyl?

 

I think you've convinced me to go with the McTavish. While I prefer the look of a thinner sole, I like the idea of something that will last longer, not to mention I'm only 5' 9" so the extra height couldn't hurt.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cold Iron View Post

TTS for me, same as my #1 and #5 last shoes and boots, with the exception of the rough collection.

 

How exactly would the Rough Collection change the fit?

post #12051 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by kentyman View Post

 

 

What a helpful response! Thank you for taking the time to type this all out.

 

  1. So do you think the Neumok is always single butyl and the McTavish is always double oak? If so, maybe we need to contact AE and have them fix their site.
  2. How did you find out the type of leather on the McTavish? I didn't see anything about Horween Dublin cowhide on their site.
  3. If butyl is good for water resistance, what is oak's specialty? I assume that the double oak is plenty water resistant compared to the single butyl?

 

I think you've convinced me to go with the McTavish. While I prefer the look of a thinner sole, I like the idea of something that will last longer, not to mention I'm only 5' 9" so the extra height couldn't hurt.

 

 

How exactly would the Rough Collection change the fit?

 

I wouldn't want to make any dogmatic guarantees that they are all single sole, but they sure look like single soles to me.  If it is a double sole, it is a THIN double sole.  The Rough Collection uses Horween Dublin Leather as discussed in this article from Horween: http://horween.wordpress.com/2011/11/04/essex-and-dublin/  I don't think all of the Rough Collection uses Dublin (the descriptions are inconsistent) but the McTavish in Cognac says that it is "Horween Leather in Cognac", The Rapid City says "handsome cognac Dublin Leather."  The models describing a "wax infused" or "waxy" leather are likely also the Horween Dublin.  I have the Finches in the Tan Dublin, and LOVE them. 

 

Oak is the traditional tanning agent for leather soles due to it's resilient nature, hard yet flexible characteristics that make it good for shoe soles.  It has been in use for centuries.  The butyl soles are simply based on the idea that oil and water don't mix smile.gif so if you soak the leather in the oil, it will be more resistant.  When you feel a butyl sole, it actually feels slightly greasy (though it isn't like it will leave a residue on anything).  Double oak soles are very hardy, they just wear a bit faster when wet.  Once they dry out, they are back to their usual hardiness.  None of these are waterproof. 

 

Also, in looking at photos of the Neumok and McTavish, which I hadn't remembered from last time I saw them, they have the storm welt stitching as described in the previous post.  It doesn't appear to be the non-functional or "decorative" split welt that many other models use. 

 

As for the Rough Collection changing the fit, apparently since they are made of tougher full cowhide rather than more delicate calf, they aren't able to be lasted quite as tightly.  Therefore the shoes end up slightly more roomy. 

 

I do wish AE would be more clear about which leathers are being used for different shoes.  That may be a good customer service recommendation. 

post #12052 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by OptoDoc View Post

I ventured over to the AE store in New Orleans yesterday and was pleasantly surprised to learn that I wear the same size in the 1, 2 and 3 lasts as I do in the 5 & 8 last.

I currently have:

Walnut Strand
Walnut Hale
Burnished Brown Kenilworth
Burgundy Clifford
Medium Brown Stafford wingtip boots
Beeswax Bushacre II Clark's

My next purchase will be a pair of black Vernon's as my formal shoe. From there I would like a pair of black Fifth Street boots and the brown single monks available on Kent Wang's site.

As for casual shoes, I am deciding between the Black Hills and Ashbury in Walnut. I'd also like to venture into suede at some point. Does AE make or have they ever made suede bucks?

Any thoughts on my choices or opinions on what I should also consider?

This is completely mind-boggling to me, but I certainly believe you. There is no doubt each foot is different. I wear 9D in the 5 and 8. I wear 10C (brown shell Leeds) or 10D (burgundy shell Leeds; burgundy shell and black shell Bradleys) in the 1. A 9.5D in the 1 is uncomfortable. A 9D in the 1 is unwearable Oh well ....
post #12053 of 53190

What is the shipping/return policy on seconds and is the 2/$300 deal still going on?

post #12054 of 53190
[quote name="OptoDoc" url="/t/141581/allen-edmonds-appreciation-thread/12045#post_5892064"What is the shipping/return policy on seconds and is the 2/$300 deal still going on?
[/quote]

Return policy is same as for firsts.
post #12055 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by OptoDoc View Post

What is the shipping/return policy on seconds and is the 2/$300 deal still going on?

Is the 2/$300 deal on all models or just a certain few?
post #12056 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenfoldtieguy View Post


This is completely mind-boggling to me, but I certainly believe you. There is no doubt each foot is different. I wear 9D in the 5 and 8. I wear 10C (brown shell Leeds) or 10D (burgundy shell Leeds; burgundy shell and black shell Bradleys) in the 1. A 9.5D in the 1 is uncomfortable. A 9D in the 1 is unwearable Oh well ....

 

Consider me surprised as well. Of the 3 lasts I tried on, the 2 fit the best, but the best fitting shoe was a 8.5D in all three. My left foot is a tad wider than my right but they are the same length.

post #12057 of 53190
I have found a couple of ae for 150$. Problem is that the size is 11A and i have 11D. I have a tight budget since I'm building a new wardrobe and i was wondering if they still will fit or be totally useless. What do you guys think. Otherwise I will go with Ct shirts shoes.
post #12058 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feta View Post

I have found a couple of ae for 150$. Problem is that the size is 11A and i have 11D. I have a tight budget since I'm building a new wardrobe and i was wondering if they still will fit or be totally useless. What do you guys think. Otherwise I will go with Ct shirts shoes.

You can get AE seconds from the shoe bank on sale for around $150.
post #12059 of 53190
We're do I find the shoe bank? When I Googled it it was just an outlet in us. I live in Sweden I'm afraid.
post #12060 of 53190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feta View Post

I have found a couple of ae for 150$. Problem is that the size is 11A and i have 11D. I have a tight budget since I'm building a new wardrobe and i was wondering if they still will fit or be totally useless. What do you guys think. Otherwise I will go with Ct shirts shoes.

 

More experienced members will surely weigh in, but I would venture to say that trying to squeeze your D foot into an A width shoe would be a cruel Tower of London style affair.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread