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

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread - Page 1283

post #19231 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by motelhound View Post

I see many gentlemen are stripping down their cordovan shoes and trying to achieve a high shine from the leather. I always took cordovan leather to be used on more casually styled shoes. Wouldn't the high shine be going against the grain? I tend just to keep my pairs clean with Venetian cream and let them take on a natural patina.

Obviously, it comes down to personal preferece. AE tends to really coat theirs with a lot of cream at the factory, and this heavy cream finish masks the shell in many cases. Once this is gone, it is easy to keep a nice shine with brushing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cold Iron View Post

Well done bucksfan, sometimes I almost forget that you have calf too smile.gif

Great job on that coat and I really like that lining. Assuming this is the same tailor that did your sharkskin suit you are a very lucky man to have such a great tailor. 

Thanks! I have 4 pair in calf I think - though I am actively looking for replacements of 2 of them, the black tassel loafers shown, and my black calf Park Aves. I also have walnut grain Macneils and bourbon McAllisters.

Yes, the sport coat is from the same tailor - I have been happy with the suit, so I decided to get a couple coats, as most of my business meetings are done in a sport coat / blazer and slacks as opposed to a suit. I'll post up the other sport coat when I next wear it. The only problem is that these are eating into my shell cordovan budget!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cold Iron View Post

jvc44 thanks for the PSA on the Townley's, they are great and at $300 for shell an unbelievable deal. However seeing how I suffer from AEAD - Allen Edmonds Acquisition Disorder it may cost me more like $1,000 when it is all done, provided things go well.
And I had the same thought as well..... With CXL Bayfield:




About a year ago someone posted a picture of a burgundy shell Bayfield that was custom made (top):



And doing some digging found a post on AAAC from Dec 2009 where the CEO of AE said: "We haven't planned to bring the Bayfield back in shell cordovan at this point." So it sounds like at one time the Bayfield was actually available in shell.


Black calf Bayfields fit me pretty well, slightly snug at the ball of the foot. My CXL Bayfields are tighter yet, and I can not wear heavier socks with them. Even with normal socks they are pretty snug across the ball of the foot. IF the Bayfield in shell was an option today I'd want to make sure they aren't too tight to wear with heavier wool socks. Shell can be and usually is a bit looser fitting than calf, but not always. I don't want to go up in size or width so much that I get heel slip. I am a 10D in the Bayfield and most of my shoes and boots. When I have tried a 10.5 in other footwear they are too long. Going to an E usually means heel slip. Not sure that would happen with a shell version of the Bayfield though because it is so sung to start with. Any thoughts on which size would be best?

As you know, I sized up in width for my CXL Bayfields, from 12D to 12E and am happy with the results after my first winter in them. If shell Bayfields were available, I would do the same. However, I will note that this is on my foot, which is right on the border between D and E width anyway. Good luck! Are you considering burgundy shell or brown shell Bayfields?
Quote:
Originally Posted by masernaut View Post

GOR-GEOUS. Where can I get one?

The question I've been asking for a year now... they are elusive, unless you are the right size and find an old pair bouncing around the AE retail shelves somewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by md2010 View Post


AE
L-R
Strands, Players, Fift St
Mora, Fift Ave, Grayson

RL
L-R
Singleton , Saunders
Slaton Black, Slaton Burnished tan, Sanderson

Great collection, thanks for sharing!
post #19232 of 46419

 

 

I have received my Bourbon McAllisers, Tap Sole today from the Anniversary sale.  Nice shoes.

 

In back, you can see a 15 year old Fairhaven in Cognac (I think).  The McAllisters fit very close, both are 11E.  The Fairhavens are cracking, which is probably a result of my abuse and lack of caring for them over the years.  Use your AE Conditioner and Cleaner!  That stuff does wonders.   I love how the colour aged and burnished over time.  

post #19233 of 46419

Just picked up my park avenues from the Cobbler's. After a few wearings, it looked like the sole was using up way too fast at the toe. Should be fixed with those toe taps.

 

post #19234 of 46419

Quick question on fit for balmorals. 

 

Are the uppers supposed to be laced completely shut so the edges are together?  My insteps are way too prominent for this to happen with any semblance of comfort. 

 

I have seen photos of both, for example:

 

 

 

 

versus

 

 

Clearly the first photo's fit looks a lot clearner, just wondering if the second photo's fit is a big no-no.

post #19235 of 46419
For AE shoes in general and specifically shoes in the 5-65 last. Does a half size up in D width give you the same width as the same shoe half size down in E width?

In other words, does a 10D have the same width as the 9.5E?

TIA.
post #19236 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeynuts View Post

Quick question on fit for balmorals. 

 

Are the uppers supposed to be laced completely shut so the edges are together?  My insteps are way too prominent for this to happen with any semblance of comfort. 

 

I have seen photos of both, for example:

 

 

 

 

versus

 

 

Clearly the first photo's fit looks a lot clearner, just wondering if the second photo's fit is a big no-no.

The second photo shows the shoes are criss-crossed laced instead of straight-bar laced as the first photo shows.

 

It has been said that most of us in the beginning use the tennis shoe approach to lacing our first sets of high quality dress shoes - which is a no-no among those who know (and generally will not tell us).

 

Here is a You Tube Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcyw_U7iv50

 

All my best,

David

post #19237 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellyhungry View Post

For AE shoes in general and specifically shoes in the 5-65 last. Does a half size up in D width give you the same width as the same shoe half size down in E width?

In other words, does a 10D have the same width as the 9.5E?

TIA.

It can.  But it varies from shoe company to shoe company, as well as from AE shoe model to AE shoe model.

 

The most assuring way to verify is to visit Nordstroms of another official AE retailer for a professional measurement or fitting.  That is how I found out that my size 11.0 eee was a better fit than the actual measurement of my foot (which is 11.5).

 

If you are not near an official AE retailer, then you can call AE customer service, and they will send you what they think will fit you with a free return postage label to try another size - or refund.

 

All my best,

 

David

post #19238 of 46419
Hi, I'm thinking of taking advantage of the AE sale on the McAllister. and I am trying to figure out which color will give me more mileage (Merlot or Bourbon). I figure a Merlot pair is the answer however wanted to see if anyone would care to share their opinion.

Thanks.
ps. I have a pair of Chili Fairfax and British tan Cole Haan Madison.
post #19239 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellyhungry View Post

For AE shoes in general and specifically shoes in the 5-65 last. Does a half size up in D width give you the same width as the same shoe half size down in E width?

In other words, does a 10D have the same width as the 9.5E?

TIA.

See if this helps any - according to the 2005 AE catalog: "Length increases 1/16" between half shoe sizes and girth increases by 1/4". The difference in girth between width increments in the same shoe size (C and D for example) is 3/16". Given the statement above it is pretty close - a difference of 1/16" - of course moving up or down sizes shifts the location of the widest part of shoe.
post #19240 of 46419

Quote:
Originally Posted by hollyb View Post

Hi, I'm thinking of taking advantage of the AE sale on the McAllister. and I am trying to figure out which color will give me more mileage (Merlot or Bourbon). I figure a Merlot pair is the answer however wanted to see if anyone would care to share their opinion.

Thanks.
ps. I have a pair of Chili Fairfax and British tan Cole Haan Madison.

 

Either one is a good choice.  Merlot I believe can be dressed up more easily as it has a rich dark color.  Bourbon is quite dark and the burnishing is quite heavy, I think it works well as a more casual shoe.  Bourbon looks great with denim.  IMO depends on what you put more miles into in terms of casual or formal occasions.

post #19241 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeynuts View Post

Quick question on fit for balmorals. 

 

Are the uppers supposed to be laced completely shut so the edges are together?  My insteps are way too prominent for this to happen with any semblance of comfort. 

 

I have seen photos of both, for example:

 

 

 

 

versus

 

 

Clearly the first photo's fit looks a lot clearner, just wondering if the second photo's fit is a big no-no.

 

I prefer (and would aim for something closer to) the first picture, but often times even if you have the width correct, a high instep will lead to the kind of separation seen in the second picture.  It's not the end of the world, but I think the first picture looks cleaner.

post #19242 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenfoldtieguy View Post

I hope those are not first quality. The spots are quite noticeable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Shoes1 View Post

You bought them on EBay for pennies. Keep them or return them. Don't be that guy that tries to negotiate a lower price. Trying to remember, didn't you get them for only $300?

 

$375, actually. Not trying to be "that guy", but I believe the seller was likely dishonest when he said they were firsts. Does anyone know if AE marks the soles in any other conditions than seconds as he claimed?

 

Regarding the blotches, does anyone know what causes this? Were they improperly dyed in the first place, or did something get on them? Regardless of the origin, do you think there's any chance of removing them?

post #19243 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenfoldtieguy View Post

I hope those are not first quality. The spots are quite noticeable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Shoes1 View Post

You bought them on EBay for pennies. Keep them or return them. Don't be that guy that tries to negotiate a lower price. Trying to remember, didn't you get them for only $300?

 

$375, actually. Not trying to be "that guy", but I believe the seller was likely dishonest when he said they were firsts. Does anyone know if AE marks the soles in any other conditions than seconds as he claimed?

 

Regarding the blotches, does anyone know what causes this? Were they improperly dyed in the first place, or did something get on them? Regardless of the origin, do you think there's any chance of removing them?

 

Looks like the seller purposely did not take a photo of the dye markings. I would say you have an argument for either a return or some sort of discount, raise hell… I would.

post #19244 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by bellyhungry View Post

For AE shoes in general and specifically shoes in the 5-65 last. Does a half size up in D width give you the same width as the same shoe half size down in E width?

In other words, does a 10D have the same width as the 9.5E?

TIA.

My guess would be that the 9.5E is wider than the 10D. When I compared an 11.5D macneil to an 11E, the 11E was a bit wider.
post #19245 of 46419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gauss17 View Post

My guess would be that the 9.5E is wider than the 10D. When I compared an 11.5D macneil to an 11E, the 11E was a bit wider.
Agreed.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread