Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › C&J Tetbury: creasing problem?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

C&J Tetbury: creasing problem? - Page 3

post #31 of 40
Sized up a half too (compared to 337 last).
post #32 of 40
Are people sizing up on the 348 because of the narrow fit though?
post #33 of 40
Yes. Sorry, my answer was rather short: I have wide feet and a high instep.
post #34 of 40
You guys who sized up must feel like you're wearing skis, no? That shoe is already so elongated with a lot of unused space at the toe... Anyhow, my feet are not wide but my instep is high, so the shape and closure of a chukka lets me get into a smaller shoe and still accommodate my high instep. My other 348 needed a half size up. Sizing advice is so dependent on foot shape that it becomes pretty useless very fast.
post #35 of 40
Yes, they feel big.

And +1 on the advice issues.
post #36 of 40
I had a different experience with the size in the Suede Tetbury Chukka. I sized down 1/2 and its been OK at the beginning. After some use and specially after starting to use a shoe tree they became small and I wish I had order regular size. I hink the suede has strecth a bit and now my feet is moving a bit forward and the toe is unconfortable.

The cresing, yes, maybe the creases a re bit more pronounced than in a shorter chukka but not a big deal
post #37 of 40
Originally Posted by Claus View Post

Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post
Even stranger since I meant the opposite. I recommend to size down 1/2 for Tetburys
Just checked my available data. Here are the average nominal allowences (the difference between the max. feet length and the nominal last length):
  • Any 348 last by Crockett & Jones:~ 1.3 sizes
  • Any last by Crockett & Jones: ~ 1.9 sizes
  • Any last with a UK size: ~ 2.0 sizes
That appears to confirm your impression to size down half a size. Note, however, that my sample of ratings for the first two groups is rather small and has a large varience. On a personal note: I believe, noone should go below a nominal allowence of 1.5 sizes for the UK or US systems.

What does he mean with feet length and the nominal last?


For example my feet are 28cm / 11 inch. Does this men I have to buy a UK 9 C&J (11-1.9= 9.1)


Nominal last length is that the outer sole, inner sole length?

post #38 of 40
Originally Posted by dijor View Post

What does he mean with feet length and the nominal last?

Foot length is not last length.

To walk properly you need empty space (allowance) in front of the toes, How much allowance is correct is a matter of never-ending quarrels. It depends an toe shape, preference, fashion, school of last/shoemaking etc. The shoe size refers to the length of the last (not the foot).

An English "size" is 1/3 " (8,5 mm). 1 !/2 sizes (1/2" or 13 mm) is probably the the absolute minimum required to prevent your toes hitting the front of the shoe every time you take a step.
post #39 of 40

Sorry for my ignorance but what should that mean if the inside of the sole is e.g. 30cm? My feet should be 28.5cm than?

post #40 of 40
If your feet are 28 cm long and the insole (measurement taken inside the shoe) is 30 cm long, that particular shoe has a toe allowance of 20 mm. This is in no way extreme, particular in connection with a 'smart' toe shape.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › C&J Tetbury: creasing problem?