or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › RM Williams Boots - Everything You Wanted to Know
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RM Williams Boots - Everything You Wanted to Know - Page 81

post #1201 of 4005
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR88 View Post
Anyone have knowledge/experience with converting RMW sizes for ladies? My wife likes my Comfort Craftsman and would like a pair of her own. I know RMW has a ladies' line (Wimmera, Durack, Kimberlye, etc.), but would, say, a 4.5G Comfort Craftsman also work for her? (She's a 7.5 in U.S. ladies.) I suppose this is a roundabout way of asking whether, generally, women can wear "men's" shoes if they size down appropriately. Any perspective on this would be greatly appreciated, especially in the context of RMW.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey View Post
this might help http://www.alternativeoutfitters.com...sionTable.html US 7.5 ladies converts there to AUS 5.5 mens i don't see any reason why a woman could not wear these. i've met big women that wear aldens and make it look cool. if the shoe fits ...
My wife normally wears size 6.5-7 US. She tried on a pair of Craftsman in the RMW store last year and it seemed like RMW 4F fit her well. We did not buy her the boots then but I picked up another pair a few months later, also Craftsman in 4F and after wearing them once she said they are too big all around. We may try RMW 3.5 next, in whatever width we can find. I think BootsOnline recommends sizing down 3 whole sizes when converting US ladies sizes to RMW.
post #1202 of 4005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmax View Post
My wife normally wears size 6.5-7 US. She tried on a pair of Craftsman in the RMW store last year and it seemed like RMW 4F fit her well. We did not buy her the boots then but I picked up another pair a few months later, also Craftsman in 4F and after wearing them once she said they are too big all around. We may try RMW 3.5 next, in whatever width we can find.

I think BootsOnline recommends sizing down 3 whole sizes when converting US ladies sizes to RMW.

^ to be clear, your wife wears 6.5 US ladies, or 7 US ladies, and she believe that RMW 3.5 ladies will fit her best?

If I have that right then wow, that conversion chart is worthless. It suggests that 6.5 US women = 5 AUS women. And you are saying 6.5 US women = 3.5 AUS women.

Maybe the boots are so wide, they wear like longer and narrower US dress shoes. Does your wife wear a 6.5 in Luchese boots?
post #1203 of 4005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmax View Post
My wife normally wears size 6.5-7 US. She tried on a pair of Craftsman in the RMW store last year and it seemed like RMW 4F fit her well. We did not buy her the boots then but I picked up another pair a few months later, also Craftsman in 4F and after wearing them once she said they are too big all around. We may try RMW 3.5 next, in whatever width we can find.

I think BootsOnline recommends sizing down 3 whole sizes when converting US ladies sizes to RMW.

Thanks -- this is perfect.
post #1204 of 4005
Hope I made the right choice -- went for broad applicability: Comfort Craftsmen in Whiskey.

If someone has the same, I'd appreciate a bit of reassurance...
post #1205 of 4005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey View Post
^ to be clear, your wife wears 6.5 US ladies, or 7 US ladies, and she believe that RMW 3.5 ladies will fit her best? If I have that right then wow, that conversion chart is worthless. It suggests that 6.5 US women = 5 AUS women. And you are saying 6.5 US women = 3.5 AUS women. Maybe the boots are so wide, they wear like longer and narrower US dress shoes. Does your wife wear a 6.5 in Luchese boots?
Yes, I the chart you linked to is probably incorrect. Bootsonline suggestion to size down 3 roughly correlates with my experience. I don't think she owns any Luchese or other cowboy boots but I don't really pay as much attention to her closet as my own.
post #1206 of 4005
Trying to convert RM Williams sizes based on the following shoes:

Alden unlined Chucka Boot, size 9D
Alden Straight tip Blucher Flex Welt 9D
Cole Haan Adrian Penny 9E

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Ben
post #1207 of 4005
^ I'd say 8G.

I just received (from Nungar) my second pair of Comfort Craftsmen in 8.5G. (I am a 9.5D US.) Frankly I am a bit surprised at the variance in fit. My second pair is noticeably roomier -- slightly wider toebox and wider through the arch/across the vamp. But length appears to be the same. That said, both pairs are extremely comfortable.
post #1208 of 4005
So is the 8G for the Style Forum edition or for the regular craftsmen model?
post #1209 of 4005
^ Regular Comfort Craftsman. If I'm not mistaken, the forum special is actually a Turnout (rounded toe) and the conventional wisdom is to go up a size and down a width to make it look sleeker.
post #1210 of 4005
If I ordered the style forum model, will it still fit the same as the 8G regular model? What I am trying to ask is if I order the style forum model, I am a lot more concerned about the fit and feel than the actual look of the boot. Would you still recommend the increas in size and the decrease in width for the SF model?
post #1211 of 4005
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR88 View Post
^ I'd say 8G.

I just received (from Nungar) my second pair of Comfort Craftsmen in 8.5G. (I am a 9.5D US.) Frankly I am a bit surprised at the variance in fit. My second pair is noticeably roomier -- slightly wider toebox and wider through the arch/across the vamp. But length appears to be the same. That said, both pairs are extremely comfortable.
@JR88 : is it same leather ? same color ? Do you have the same measurements of the outsoles ?
post #1212 of 4005
Quote:
Originally Posted by bah0916 View Post
If I ordered the style forum model, will it still fit the same as the 8G regular model? What I am trying to ask is if I order the style forum model, I am a lot more concerned about the fit and feel than the actual look of the boot. Would you still recommend the increas in size and the decrease in width for the SF model?

Sator's beginning post (the very first post in this thread) contains the answer to this, I believe. I have no experience with the forum special but the turnout has a bigger toebox than the craftsman to begin with; so that combined with the generally ample width of G sizes means you should be fine going down a width, but to compensate for the slightly narrower toebox you should go up a length. This will make your shoe a bit longer than you may be used to. Hence, "sleek". Someone will correct me if I'm wrong about all this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alemex View Post
@JR88 : is it same leather ? same color ?
Do you have the same measurements of the outsoles ?

Same leather. Different color. They are both 8.5G.
post #1213 of 4005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mugnut View Post
How close are RMW and Blundestone sizes?

To the extent this may help: I wear 9D in almost all U.S. Dress shoes, and usually go up to 9.5 in US boots to accomodate thicker socks.

I wear 8.5 AUS in Blundstones. I very rarely wear them with thin socks. Blundstones only increase in width by half size, not length; 8.5 is essentially an "8 wide." With boot socks and insoles, Blundstone 8.5 is fine.

I have RMW Yard boots in 8G. I love the Yard Boots, but I can only wear them with thin dress socks, and even then, they are snug (esp. in length). To wear them as I typically wear boots, I think 8.5H would be perfect, but haven't gotten around to replacing them yet.

I wear 8G in regular Craftsman. That gives me a snug, but not tight, "dress shoe" fit. IMHO, the Craftsman last wears slightly longer on the foot than the Turnout last.

My personal sizing guide for RMW now after trial and error: 8.5G in Turnout last with dress socks; 8.5H for thicker socks; 8G in Craftsman last, though I think 8.5G would be fine too (would probably go to 8.5G in the Drover - which is the chisel toe work boot if I ever get them). Bear in mind I have high arches which take up more volume than a flatter foot.

On the whole, assuming dress/thin socks - it seems to me that .5 size down from your standard US dress shoe size is your best bet. There's a lot of anecdotal evidence out there to this effect, and my own trial and error seems to confirm it.

Thanks muchly for this info! Gave me the confidence to pick-up a cheap pair of chisel-toe craftsmen in 10G, which is the same as my Blundy size. The fit is bloody perfect! Oh, and I wear a 9.5 is Doc Martins. Cheers!
post #1214 of 4005
I'll add another two datapoints on sizing for the Comfort Turnout. I am an exact 10D on one foot and a bit under a 10.5C on the other (measured by a Brannock with the socks I wear them with).

Ordered a pair in kangaroo about a year ago in AUS 9F. Comfortable, not particularly snug fit on the 10D foot. Kind of snug in width on the 10.5C, but length seemed okay (albeit "just" okay). I figured since it was a width issue they'd break in okay and be perfect. Didn't happen: as they broke in my foot slid forward over a few weeks and the problem was slightly inadequate room in the toe box. Began to drive me crazy and I had to Ebay them after a month or so.

Ordered a pair in Yearling last week in AUS 9G. I figured going up a width would widen the toe box a bit. Looks like the exact same fit issue. The thicker yearling leather makes the 9G fit identical to the kangaroo 9F (perhaps even a bit more narrow). Initally the fit on the almost 10.5C foot seems like a minor width issue but after wearing them for a couple of hours I can see the same thing happening as before and the issue becoming a slight length problem. On Ebay now (if you're a 10D, I think they'll end up being a good deal).

My (hard-earned) observations (again for the Comfort Turnout):

- One size down from US to AUS
- G width = D width in yearling, drop a width for Kangaroo (F=D)
- When trying on, keep in mind that the heel on these boots is somewhat higher than you might be used to. As a result your foot will probably slide forward more as they break in. "Just enough" toe room when you try them on will probably not be enough over time.
post #1215 of 4005
I just received my Craftsman in Chestnut Yearling. I'm a 10.5 D and I tried them on in NYC. The standard 9.5G wasn't long enough and the 10G was too big (width-wise). I had the same problem with Blundstones; that move down a size recomendation was too short for me; maybe I'm a "long" 10.5. I ordered a 10F and it seems to be pretty good with plenty of width. I'm actually suprised width-wise as I was expecting it to be kinda tight for a bit. Great looking boot with a bit more heel than my shoes. My Blunstones get a lot of wear and are my go to casual shoe. I expect these RM Williams to replace those as they are much more graceful than my Blunnies. I know some do, but I can't see wearing them with a suit...maybe a sportcoat.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › RM Williams Boots - Everything You Wanted to Know