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

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - Page 944

post #14146 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by jns425 View Post

Where is that option?

I was told that AE would do any shoe as a custom make up for something like a $150 fee. The option is not on their website. I believe you'd have to do it through an AE dealer or order from AE directly. For all I know, they may no longer offer this service.
post #14147 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmdsimpson View Post

i agree. I guess there must be something about the licensing deal with RL. There was a similar situation with Brooks Brothers that was discussed here a while back, but they eventually covered Brooks shoes under their recrafting program.
The Italian is also disappointing, since they clearly state in the Verona description that they can be recrafted, with the "full recrafting service"
http://www.allenedmonds.com/aeonline/producti_SF49600_1_40000000001_-1
I guess they don't count the original soles as part of that?
And I should have topy'd my Veronas. They got used in wet weather, and with the thin soles, they really took a beating.

How do you like the Veronas? Those would be my first choice from the Italian line, but there are no seconds in my size. I'm going to try out the Modenas (had a pair of seconds in my size for $130) and maybe pay full freight for Verona firsts if I like the Modena.
post #14148 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by reidrothchild View Post

How do you like the Veronas? Those would be my first choice from the Italian line, but there are no seconds in my size. I'm going to try out the Modenas (had a pair of seconds in my size for $130) and maybe pay full freight for Verona firsts if I like the Modena.

I've been happy with them. I was set against the Italian shoes with Bologna construction. But I went to a store and tried on every loafer they had, and the Veronas were the most comfortable for me, by far. Plus, they look great, and I get compliments on them all the time. For a bit loafer, they really got the proportions right.

I paid full price for them in brown. I like them so much that I bought the black and the brown suede on clearance, both with the rubber soles (called the Lucca, but the same shoe, just different sole). The brown suede in particular is great with jeans.
post #14149 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by reidrothchild View Post

Well that kind've sucks as I've ordered Singleton and the Modena as part of the current sale. To me, the appeal of the Italian line is the uber-slim, flexible sole. I guess the RL thing must be something AE agreed to as part of the licensing agreement? My understanding is that the Singleton is just a Randolph made to Independence line specs, so it's not like the Italian line where they might simply not have access to the necessary materials/machinery.
Oh well, given the prices, I can't complain too much. Guess I'll just be topying both.

You could just get them recrafted by B. Nelson. They are actually a little bit cheaper and people trust them with their Aldens, EGs and J Lobbs
post #14150 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbtaylor View Post

 

Yes, I would email a particular store, they seem better about responding than the shoebank

 

I'll give this a shot. Thanks, guys. Now I just hope that Mora is still available...

post #14151 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by fiestaplatypus View Post

So, over various points over the last couple years, I'm sure I've read several opinions on the fit of the 1 last, but I could use some help on sizing.
I bought the Bayfield last year during the 2/$200 sale and picked up my usual size, a 13D. For me, a 13D in the 5 last is just about right in the toebox, but a bit too long for my foot. A 12.5E is usually a better fit, but much more difficult to come across in a ready to wear option. A 12.5D pinches too much on the pinky toes. When I received the Bayfields, I ininitally thought the fit was pretty good, but upon wearing them, I quickly realized that the toebox was very limiting, especially on the top and side of my pinky toes. The heel seemed ok, as did the length (although it is on the smaller size compared to my other AE's...closer to a 12.5).
Is this a common complaint with the 1 last across the board, or is it just something specific to the Bayfield? I'm currently looking to get in on the MTO Shell Leeds that bucksfan is organizing, but I really don't want to screw up the sizing on this one. As cordovan is typically a slightly looser fit, as I've found with my Strands and McCalisters, I have no idea what to do. I'm leaning towards a 13E, but if anyone has any opinions, I'd gladly welcome them.
Thanks in advance!
EDIT: I should add that getting to an AE store is not an easy feat for me, as I'm at least 3 hours away from the nearest one. Chances are, I won't be traveling for work anytime before the deadline for the MTO shoes.

 

I hope some others can chime in here - specifically Cold Iron, Horseyshoes and Sevenfold - I think you have Leeds and boots on the 1 last...?  but for now here's my experience.  

 

I am a 12D / 12E on the brannock device - literally on the line between D and E.  

 

I have 12D Leeds in shell and 12D Dalton boots, also in shell (also in the 1 boot last, like the Bayfields).  I also used to have 12D Dalton boots in calf.  The Leeds seem larger in the ball-of-the-foot and slightly rounder in the toe box.  The Dalton boots seem to be more pointy, with slightly less room laterally across the ball of the foot.  For reference, I am a 12D in all 5-last shoes also.  My 12D Leeds are among the best fitting shoes I have.  

 

I also have 12E Leeds in shell and 12E Bayfields in chromexcel.  The 12D Leeds are smaller than the 12E Leeds, but only by a small amount.  Basically, I just need to wear thicker socks with the 12Es and they're good.  I bought them because there was a smokin' deal and they didn't have 12Ds available in black shell at the time.  The 12E bayfields seem slightly tighter across the ball of the foot, and slightly pointier to my eye than the Leeds.  I bought the Bayfields in the larger width to accommodate thicker socks, but they actually fit slightly tighter than the 12E Leeds in shell, and a medium sock is best with the Bayfields.  

 

 
ALso, let's talk about long-term comfort and stretching of the shoes.  Shell cordovan can and does stretch slightly over time.  I have noticed this with many of my 2+ year old shell cordovans.  For the most part, this makes the shoe more comfortable and better-fitting.  The trick to not having them stretch is to let them sit for a few minutes between taking them off your feet and putting the shoe trees in (and, not having shoe trees that are too large).  
 
As you know, you can stretch shoes, but not shrink them.  If it turns out the 13D is slightly too tight, you can 1) wait for them to stretch to your foot naturally 2) use shoe trees that are slightly too large or use a sock on top of your shoe trees for a bit (I do this with my Aldens on the Barrie last), or 3) have a cobbler (or AE) put them on a stretcher.  Also, the insole will mold to the bottom of your foot, in effect loosening the upper as your foot "sinks" down into it.
 
Sorry for the long post, but based on all of the above, my recommendation would be a 13D for you.  However, you may also want to ask Kristle to see if there's a pair of shell Leeds she can send to you, in 13D or E, to try on. 
post #14152 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by fiestaplatypus View Post

So, over various points over the last couple years, I'm sure I've read several opinions on the fit of the 1 last, but I could use some help on sizing. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I bought the Bayfield last year during the 2/$200 sale and picked up my usual size, a 13D. For me, a 13D in the 5 last is just about right in the toebox, but a bit too long for my foot. A 12.5E is usually a better fit, but much more difficult to come across in a ready to wear option. A 12.5D pinches too much on the pinky toes. When I received the Bayfields, I ininitally thought the fit was pretty good, but upon wearing them, I quickly realized that the toebox was very limiting, especially on the top and side of my pinky toes. The heel seemed ok, as did the length (although it is on the smaller size compared to my other AE's...closer to a 12.5).
Is this a common complaint with the 1 last across the board, or is it just something specific to the Bayfield? I'm currently looking to get in on the MTO Shell Leeds that bucksfan is organizing, but I really don't want to screw up the sizing on this one. As cordovan is typically a slightly looser fit, as I've found with my Strands and McCalisters, I have no idea what to do. I'm leaning towards a 13E, but if anyone has any opinions, I'd gladly welcome them.
Thanks in advance!
EDIT: I should add that getting to an AE store is not an easy feat for me, as I'm at least 3 hours away from the nearest one. Chances are, I won't be traveling for work anytime before the deadline for the MTO shoes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bucksfan View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I hope some others can chime in here - specifically Cold Iron, Horseyshoes and Sevenfold - I think you have Leeds and boots on the 1 last...?  but for now here's my experience.  

I am a 12D / 12E on the brannock device - literally on the line between D and E.  

I have 12D Leeds in shell and 12D Dalton boots, also in shell (also in the 1 boot last, like the Bayfields).  I also used to have 12D Dalton boots in calf.  The Leeds seem larger in the ball-of-the-foot and slightly rounder in the toe box.  The Dalton boots seem to be more pointy, with slightly less room laterally across the ball of the foot.  For reference, I am a 12D in all 5-last shoes also.  My 12D Leeds are among the best fitting shoes I have.  

I also have 12E Leeds in shell and 12E Bayfields in chromexcel.  The 12D Leeds are smaller than the 12E Leeds, but only by a small amount.  Basically, I just need to wear thicker socks with the 12Es and they're good.  I bought them because there was a smokin' deal and they didn't have 12Ds available in black shell at the time.  The 12E bayfields seem slightly tighter across the ball of the foot, and slightly pointier to my eye than the Leeds.  I bought the Bayfields in the larger width to accommodate thicker socks, but they actually fit slightly tighter than the 12E Leeds in shell, and a medium sock is best with the Bayfields.  

 
ALso, let's talk about long-term comfort and stretching of the shoes.  Shell cordovan can and does stretch slightly over time.  I have noticed this with many of my 2+ year old shell cordovans.  For the most part, this makes the shoe more comfortable and better-fitting.  The trick to not having them stretch is to let them sit for a few minutes between taking them off your feet and putting the shoe trees in (and, not having shoe trees that are too large).  
 
As you know, you can stretch shoes, but not shrink them.  If it turns out the 13D is slightly too tight, you can 1) wait for them to stretch to your foot naturally 2) use shoe trees that are slightly too large or use a sock on top of your shoe trees for a bit (I do this with my Aldens on the Barrie last), or 3) have a cobbler (or AE) put them on a stretcher.  Also, the insole will mold to the bottom of your foot, in effect loosening the upper as your foot "sinks" down into it.
 
Sorry for the long post, but based on all of the above, my recommendation would be a 13D for you.  However, you may also want to ask Kristle to see if there's a pair of shell Leeds she can send to you, in 13D or E, to try on. 

Reading Bucksfan's post rang a bell for me, and I think I can add to this.

I had the Dundee in shell and I have the Hamptons in calf. Both are 1 last. The Hamptons fits me great and is nice and roomy in the toe box. The Dundees are so tight in the toe box that they almost feel a size smaller. I thought it was just me, or an odd pair, but I think this is consistent with what Bucksfan is saying here with boots fitting tighter than shoes on this last (correct me if I'm wrong).

Odd, but also encouraging to know that it's not just me.
post #14153 of 47086
Wondering if someone here copped these.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Allen-Edmonds-Bel-Air-Wingtip-Oxford-Mens-Shoes-11D-Retail-335-00-/121044622415?nma=true&si=BquxKcmqY%2F4tABOeGH9wwZX%2B8a4%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557





They are the old Bel Air, which is a great looking shoe, but has been out of production for a long time. They are listed as pre-owned, but look to be new; maybe tried on on store. I literally stumbled upon these with less than 2 minutes left in the auction, and I held myself back from bidding. Anyway, congrats to whoever bought them - great shoes!
post #14154 of 47086
I bought the Bel Airs a few years back. Great shoes that still look brand new.

Came home today and found my Singletons waiting for me. They are beautiful loafers. I'm not quite sure they are made to Independence standards, or at leas the leather doesn't feel the same to me. RL feels somewhere in between regular AE and Independence in softness. The burnishing on the toe is very well done. I was expecting basically the Randolph in walnut maybe with softer leather and some burnishing, but it's quite a bit sleeker IMO than the Randolph or any other loafer AE makes under its own name.

Thought I post a few pics for anyone thinking about them. A few comparo shots with the cordovan Randolph:







An interesting detail on the back:



Was super excited about them until I pulled out the other shoe and noticed the apron ffffuuuu.gif



I've never returned a pair of 2nds due to a defect, but I think this is too much for me. I'd be annoyed every time I looked down, so back these will go. Undecided on whether I'll exchange for another pair and hope for a less noticeable defect, get the Verona, or maybe try the brown cordovan Norwich.

Can anyone comment on the fit of the Norwich? I know it's on the 222 last, which does not fit me well. But, as has been discussed recently, some shoes on the 1 fit differently, so I was wondering if anyone could speak to the fit of the calf and/or the cordovan Norwich and whether is as uncomfortably narrow as other shoes on the 2.
Edited by reidrothchild - 1/4/13 at 8:12pm
post #14155 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by reidrothchild View Post

Can anyone comment on the fit of the Norwich. I know it's on the 222 last, which does not fit me well. But as has been discussed recently, some shoes on the 1 fit differently, so I was wondering if anyone could speak to the fit of the calf and/or the cordovan Norwich.

 

The Norwich tends to run narrow, as far as I can tell. I tried them on in my regular size (10.5D) and the SA advised me to go to a 10.5E. It wasn't super uncomfortable but I did notice that it was pretty tight in some areas when wearing my normal size.

 

Still waiting for the 10.5E to arrive at my house so I can't attest to its fit yet.

post #14156 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucksfan View Post

I hope some others can chime in here - specifically Cold Iron, Horseyshoes and Sevenfold - I think you have Leeds and boots on the 1 last...?  but for now here's my experience.  

I am a 12D / 12E on the brannock device - literally on the line between D and E.  

I have 12D Leeds in shell and 12D Dalton boots, also in shell (also in the 1 boot last, like the Bayfields).  I also used to have 12D Dalton boots in calf.  The Leeds seem larger in the ball-of-the-foot and slightly rounder in the toe box.  The Dalton boots seem to be more pointy, with slightly less room laterally across the ball of the foot.  For reference, I am a 12D in all 5-last shoes also.  My 12D Leeds are among the best fitting shoes I have.  

I also have 12E Leeds in shell and 12E Bayfields in chromexcel.  The 12D Leeds are smaller than the 12E Leeds, but only by a small amount.  Basically, I just need to wear thicker socks with the 12Es and they're good.  I bought them because there was a smokin' deal and they didn't have 12Ds available in black shell at the time.  The 12E bayfields seem slightly tighter across the ball of the foot, and slightly pointier to my eye than the Leeds.  I bought the Bayfields in the larger width to accommodate thicker socks, but they actually fit slightly tighter than the 12E Leeds in shell, and a medium sock is best with the Bayfields.  

 
ALso, let's talk about long-term comfort and stretching of the shoes.  Shell cordovan can and does stretch slightly over time.  I have noticed this with many of my 2+ year old shell cordovans.  For the most part, this makes the shoe more comfortable and better-fitting.  The trick to not having them stretch is to let them sit for a few minutes between taking them off your feet and putting the shoe trees in (and, not having shoe trees that are too large).  
 
As you know, you can stretch shoes, but not shrink them.  If it turns out the 13D is slightly too tight, you can 1) wait for them to stretch to your foot naturally 2) use shoe trees that are slightly too large or use a sock on top of your shoe trees for a bit (I do this with my Aldens on the Barrie last), or 3) have a cobbler (or AE) put them on a stretcher.  Also, the insole will mold to the bottom of your foot, in effect loosening the upper as your foot "sinks" down into it.
 
Sorry for the long post, but based on all of the above, my recommendation would be a 13D for you.  However, you may also want to ask Kristle to see if there's a pair of shell Leeds she can send to you, in 13D or E, to try on. 

+1. My left foot is 11.5 on the Brannock, while my right is between 11 and 11.5. The Leeds in 11.5D simply would not work for me because of MAJOR heel slip on my right foot. I ordered 11.5D in the Malvern (also on the 1), thinking I'd be wearing thicker socks, so the heel slip wouldn't be as bad. The Malvern was crazy tight on in the toe box on both feet. Had to return and size up to a 12D, which fits great. If you hold the Leeds next the Malvern, the toe area of the Leeds actually looks much more boot like IMO than the Malvern. I've not tried on any other AE boots, but I can only assume that boots on the 1 last just fit differently than the shoes.
post #14157 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogejo321 View Post


Thought I would get the forums thoughts on a new pair of merlot park aves I just received. Got them straight from AE, and I generally like to hit them with some cleaner/conditioner before wearing. I was wondering if anyone had this experience of a somewhat scaley finish on the leather. The front cap toe and front of the shoe is fine and polishes well, but the back seems rough. I saw this on one other pair I received and sent back because of that and other reasons. I am going to grab some polish and try that tomorrow, but wondering if anyone else has experienced something like this. Will it clear up with polish, or is this something worth trying to send back? Thanks!

Any ideas on this? Thinking I may bring them by the AE store in NYC tomorrow, but would like to hear if anyone has any experience with an issue like this. Not only does the leather seem dry, but it also seems darker than the cap and front of the shoe. Thanks for input!
post #14158 of 47086
the color difference is what would bother me. If you are unhappy, I would return.
post #14159 of 47086

<p>
    Let me start off by saying that the service at AE's Madison avenue branch in new york is excellent and I am very pleased with the store experience.</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    I was wearing contact lens when I was buying these walnut strands, so I did not notice these small little details.</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    It's the most expensive shoe I've bought in my life, so I'm a little paranoid. Paid full retail for these.</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    Here are the photos:</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    Inner side of right shoe. Seems like it was not cut properly. (brown part, not the black part.)</p>
<p>
    <a href="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627307/" id="yui_3_7_3_1_1357365472034_1131"><img alt="" data-id="627307" data-type="61" src="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627307/width/500/height/1000" /></a></p>
<p>
    <a href="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627308/" id="yui_3_7_3_1_1357365472034_1598"><img alt="" data-id="627308" data-type="61" src="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627308/width/500/height/1000" /></a></p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    Roughness on the outside of the left sole. I have no issue with this if the color can be filled in with polishing.</p>
<p>
    <a href="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627309/" id="yui_3_7_3_1_1357365472034_2091"><img alt="" data-id="627309" data-type="61" src="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627309/width/500/height/1000" /></a></p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    What do you guys think?</p>
 

post #14160 of 47086
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veridis View Post

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

<p>
    Let me start off by saying that the service at AE's Madison avenue branch in new york is excellent and I am very pleased with the store experience.</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    I was wearing contact lens when I was buying these walnut strands, so I did not notice these small little details.</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    It's the most expensive shoe I've bought in my life, so I'm a little paranoid. Paid full retail for these.</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    Here are the photos:</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    Inner side of right shoe. Seems like it was not cut properly. (brown part, not the black part.)</p>
<p>
    <a href="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627307/" id="yui_3_7_3_1_1357365472034_1131"><img alt="" data-id="627307" data-type="61" src="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627307/width/500/height/1000" /></a></p>
<p>
    <a href="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627308/" id="yui_3_7_3_1_1357365472034_1598"><img alt="" data-id="627308" data-type="61" src="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627308/width/500/height/1000" /></a></p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    Roughness on the outside of the left sole. I have no issue with this if the color can be filled in with polishing.</p>
<p>
    <a href="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627309/" id="yui_3_7_3_1_1357365472034_2091"><img alt="" data-id="627309" data-type="61" src="http://www.styleforum.net/content/type/61/id/627309/width/500/height/1000" /></a></p>
<p>
    &nbsp;</p>
<p>
    What do you guys think?</p>

 

 

I think you need to go back and reformat that.

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