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

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - Page 1069

post #16021 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by polojock615 View Post

I've been inspired by eveyone's pictures of shell lately.  I got a chance to run outside to go outside and take a picture of mine:

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

AppleMark

 

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

AppleMark

 

 

 

 

 

Also, here are pictures of new burgundy shell versus the old one, but outside.  The Macneils are new, the Leeds are old.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

AppleMark

 

 

 

Great variety in your collection and great pics.  Your shoes/boots look spectacular!  Thanks for sharing.

post #16022 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by polojock615 View Post

I've been inspired by eveyone's pictures of shell lately.  I got a chance to run outside to go outside and take a picture of mine:

 

AppleMark

 

AppleMark

 

Also, here are pictures of new burgundy shell versus the old one, but outside.  The Macneils are new, the Leeds are old.

 

AppleMark

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BootSpell View Post

Great variety in your collection and great pics.  Your shoes/boots look spectacular!  Thanks for sharing.

And I agree, Very nicely done and well thought out purchases! And so are your Exotic Leathers. Thank you very much for the great pictures.

 

I just ordered the PA in black shell a week or so ago and wish I would have done it sooner. 

post #16023 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by dddrees View Post

Maybe not, but more importantly the bags will keep the dust off of them.
I keep my shoes in their boxes, so I only really use the duster bags when I'm traveling.
post #16024 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston S. View Post

I keep my shoes in their boxes, so I only really use the duster bags when I'm traveling.

 

I keep my dress shoes in their boxes and bags. But my casual Rough Collection shoes stay out with my other "everyday" shoes under a shoe bench. I considered keeping them in bags to prevent them getting dusty, but I figure I should be wearing them often enough that dust isn't a problem.

post #16025 of 46870
is conditioner and neutral wax ok for the brown burnished RL sandersons?
post #16026 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliebrown2 View Post

is conditioner and neutral wax ok for the brown burnished RL sandersons?

 

Their ShoeCareReference.pdf lists Conditioner/Cleaner and Brown Carnauba Wax for most Brown Burnished Calf shoes, but I think that's just because that particular color wax matches well. There are plenty of brownish colors that list Neutral Carnauba Wax: Medium Brown, Tan, Walnut, Chili, etc. In short, I see no reason neutral wax wouldn't be safe on any leather for which a specific colored wax is recommended.


Edited by kentyman - 2/17/13 at 11:17pm
post #16027 of 46870

I'm gonna continue using the following abbreviations for AE shoe care products in this thread. Might as well just put this all in one place:

 

 

Hopefully this'll make referencing the ShoeCareReference.pdf and discussing their recommendations a little easier.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kentyman View Post

Whoa. Any catch? They say guaranteed first quality, and returns are accepted. I'm going to try the Brown Neumoks.

 

Anyway, I just noticed on the PDF for Brown Neumoks that for cleaning they list LL and for polishing they list SS. I was surprised they didn't have CC for cleaning. I realize that these columns are more suitable for smooth calfskin shoes and they sorta need to shoehorn (if you will) these rougher leathers in. Am I right to assume that CC is safe anywhere LL is, and vice versa? Or at the very least, if SS won't remove the finish, then CC certainly won't? I'm having a hard time understanding how they pick between CC and LL for certain leathers.

 

I'm also a bit hesitant to try SS after all the previous discussion about them ruining some shoes. Then again, the Cognac McTavishes they ruined do not have SS listed, and others have warned that we might be a little too down on SS.

 

Finally, I realize WP is useful for waterproofing and when going for a high shine, but why would one use SC over a standard CC/LL/PP routine?

post #16028 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacktasticGDogg View Post


Looks good! Are they 9D samples?

Yup.  9 D samples!  They were the only ones up there on the shoebank list so not sure how people can get them anymore.

post #16029 of 46870
Thanks kent. would brown cream cover/ruin the burnishing? Im scared it will that's why Im thinking about skipping the cream and only using neutral wp.
post #16030 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliebrown2 View Post

Thanks kent. would brown cream cover/ruin the burnishing? Im scared it will that's why Im thinking about skipping the cream and only using neutral wp.

 

I hope someone else with more experience chimes in, but my guess is it will not, especially since the PDF seems to imply that AE would recommend it. To be really sure, you could ask AE, but there's a good chance whoever you talk to follows the same logic I did. If it makes you feel better, I have Bourbon Strands which are basically burnished Walnut Strands, and the Walnut PP that they recommend does not seem to cover up the darkness of the Bourbon.

post #16031 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by kentyman View Post

 

I hope someone else with more experience chimes in, but my guess is it will not, especially since the PDF seems to imply that AE would recommend it. To be really sure, you could ask AE, but there's a good chance whoever you talk to follows the same logic I did. If it makes you feel better, I have Bourbon Strands which are basically burnished Walnut Strands, and the Walnut PP that they recommend does not seem to cover up the darkness of the Bourbon.


yea i tried asking them about the burnished walnut kenilworth and they said "according to the pdf...just walnut premium polish". I asked follow up questions and kept getting referred to the pdf.  Didn't really give me much confidence...

post #16032 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliebrown2 View Post

Thanks kent. would brown cream cover/ruin the burnishing? Im scared it will that's why Im thinking about skipping the cream and only using neutral wp.

I only use Renovateur on my brown Chukkha boots and intend to do the same with the new RL Singletons I just picked up.  Absent a need cover something up with color, this is all I do for certain dark brown shoes.

post #16033 of 46870

AE baby's first steps. Hope it won't disappoint me! 

post #16034 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by polojock615 View Post

I've been inspired by eveyone's pictures of shell lately.  I got a chance to run outside to go outside and take a picture of mine:

 

 

AppleMark

 

AppleMark

 

 

Also, here are pictures of new burgundy shell versus the old one, but outside.  The Macneils are new, the Leeds are old.

 

 

AppleMark

 

Thanks for posting that.  The difference in the old and new finishes on the burgundy shell really do show an amazing difference.  Question on your shell PA's.  Are they a custom make-up?  I ask becasuse I didn't think they came with a split-reverse welt like yours show in the picture. 

post #16035 of 46870
Quote:
Originally Posted by kentyman View Post

I'm gonna continue using the following abbreviations for AE shoe care products in this thread. Might as well just put this all in one place:

 

 

Hopefully this'll make referencing the ShoeCareReference.pdf and discussing their recommendations a little easier.

 

 

 

Anyway, I just noticed on the PDF for Brown Neumoks that for cleaning they list LL and for polishing they list SS. I was surprised they didn't have CC for cleaning. I realize that these columns are more suitable for smooth calfskin shoes and they sorta need to shoehorn (if you will) these rougher leathers in. Am I right to assume that CC is safe anywhere LL is, and vice versa? Or at the very least, if SS won't remove the finish, then CC certainly won't? I'm having a hard time understanding how they pick between CC and LL for certain leathers.

 

I'm also a bit hesitant to try SS after all the previous discussion about them ruining some shoes. Then again, the Cognac McTavishes they ruined do not have SS listed, and others have warned that we might be a little too down on SS.

 

Finally, I realize WP is useful for waterproofing and when going for a high shine, but why would one use SC over a standard CC/LL/PP routine?

 

Yes, I believe that conditioner/cleaner is just as safe as leather lotion.  Yes, if saddle soap is safe on the finish, then the conditioner/cleaner certainly is.  I think the reason why they choose leather lotion over conditioner/cleaner has more to do with the stitching than the leather.  Even though they say that the leather lotion will do some "cleaning" of the leather, it is really only on the level that running water over your hands will "clean" them.  The action of applying a material and then wiping them off will inevitably carry away some dirt but the leather lotion doesn't have a true "cleaning" agent in it.  Because of that, it is arguably more gentle on the shoes, but in a very minimal way because AE's conditioner/cleaner is about as gentle as they come.  All that said, I think they lean towards leather lotion on the shoes with contrast stitching that may have the potential to be affected by even a minimal amount of color bleed.  If there isn't much concern over color bleed, they generally say to use conditioner/cleaner.  I agree with Cold Iron's comment from a couple of days ago when he mentioned that there seems to be some illogical recommendations to first clean a shoe with conditioner/cleaner and then follow with saddle soap.  Saddle soap should accomplish the cleaning and conditioning in one easy step for shoes that don't need any color restoration such as the natural tan Dublin leathers from the Rough Collection. 

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