or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › ** Quintessential Crockett & Jones Thread ** (reviews, quality, etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

** Quintessential Crockett & Jones Thread ** (reviews, quality, etc...) - Page 688

post #10306 of 12776
^ nod[1].gif
post #10307 of 12776
@adebisi these boots are sweet!!
post #10308 of 12776

Hi,

 

I am thinking about getting a pair of a plain toe blucher.

 

The winner is C+J Grasmere in 325 last.

 

 

Meanwhile, I own a pair of Edward Green 202 lasted plain toe derby and C+J Sedgmoor(also a PTB) in 335 last. It is pretty clear EG 202 last and C+J 335 last are very different shape.

 

I was told that the 325 last  is bit narrower and longer than the 335 last.

 

I am afraid if EG 202 lasted PTB  and the Grasmere will look the same. 

 

 

would you say C+J 325 last and EG 202 last are totally separate and different shaped lasts?

 

 

thanks in advance!

post #10309 of 12776

I have no experience of the EG 202 but if you own a pair of shoes on the 335 last then they are very similar to the 325 so I would make that comparison if I where you.

post #10310 of 12776
Thanks for your insight.
post #10311 of 12776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhgr View Post

Hi,

I am thinking about getting a pair of a plain toe blucher.

The winner is C+J Grasmere in 325 last.


Meanwhile, I own a pair of Edward Green 202 lasted plain toe derby and C+J Sedgmoor(also a PTB) in 335 last. It is pretty clear EG 202 last and C+J 335 last are very different shape.

I was told that the 325 last  is bit narrower and longer than the 335 last.

I am afraid if EG 202 lasted PTB  and the Grasmere will look the same. 


would you say C+J 325 last and EG 202 last are totally separate and different shaped lasts?


thanks in advance!

I have had shoes and boots on both lasts. IME, while the 325 might be slightly narrower than the 335, it is not longer. If anything, the 335 is slightly longer.
post #10312 of 12776
Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenfoldtieguy View Post

I have had shoes and boots on both lasts. IME, while the 325 might be slightly narrower than the 335, it is not longer. If anything, the 335 is slightly longer.

That was not my experience, Are you sure other parameters were the same? For example both shoes had the same soles?

335 last is definitely wider and rounder but in my experiences also shorter than 341 or 325. In addition 335 toe box is more down-slopping than toe box on 325 last. This is something to consider if you have long toes.
post #10313 of 12776
Quote:
Originally Posted by laufer View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenfoldtieguy View Post

I have had shoes and boots on both lasts. IME, while the 325 might be slightly narrower than the 335, it is not longer. If anything, the 335 is slightly longer.

That was not my experience, Are you sure other parameters were the same? For example both shoes had the same soles?

335 last is definitely wider and rounder but in my experiences also shorter than 341 or 325. In addition 335 toe box is more down-slopping than toe box on 325 last. This is something to consider if you have long toes.

I wear the same size in 325 (shell and calf and grain calf) and 335 (calf). However, models in shell on the 335 have me 1/2 size down (I was actually surprised by this, at least initially - but my "regular" size provided way too much heel slippage).

The length of the 325 and 335, if different at all, is negligible, IMO. The overall fit of the 335 is more roomy, but not by a whole lot.

But feet are weird, and others may have had different experiences ....
post #10314 of 12776
Can anyone comment on the EX fitting?
post #10315 of 12776

Received my first pair of double monk boots from C&J last week, the Camberley in dark brown burnished calf, on the ever popular 348 last.

 

From my first sighting of these in the store, I knew there was something special about them. C&J have done really well with this new style and I can see myself getting many years of service out of this shoe. It is very versatile -  I've mostly been using it on weekends / casual work days, but can easily see it working within a more dressy ensemble. 

 

Fit wise, the 348 last fit was familiar and didn't seem affected by the design of the shoe. Putting the shoe on reminded me of the feeling of putting a chelsea boot on, just without any elastic, so was finding myself having to undo both buckles the first couple of wears to get my feet in. I've got a pretty good technique for it now, but do find it is slightly more annoying that a regular laced shoe, especially when going to people's houses where they demand you to take your shoes off (and not have any guest shoe trees to provide!).

 

Really like the Dainite sole, think it helps make an excellent all around autumn/winter shoe in London. Much prefer that there isn't a storm welt on the shoe, helps maintain that iconic 348 last look. Haven't owned a monkstrap before so am a bit concerned about the durability of the belt straps on the shoe as I'd imagine it be difficult to replace this?

 

post #10316 of 12776
Quote:
Originally Posted by pravda View Post

@adebisi these boots are sweet!!

THX Dude !
post #10317 of 12776
Incredible monk boots!!
post #10318 of 12776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webbo View Post

Just as I left for the airport today UPS arrived with a late birthday present to myself, a pair of Syke boots in dark brown cordovan with dainite soles. I had only seen them on the forum here along with their cousins the RL Lindrick's and never seen them in the "hide" as it where but had long lusted after a pair so in the end thought "sod it life's too short" and jumped in. I ordered direct from C&J who where very helpful and they advised me perfectly on size (10.5) as they fit great (I was panicking having never tried the 335). For me now the 335 last seems just slightly wider in the toe box than the 325 (when comparing the Coniston with the Skye) but these two lasts are pretty much similar everywhere else including the widest point of the foot. As for the boots themselves I am almost speechless, they are absolutely beautiful, solidly made with a deep dark hue that I look forward to seeing develop over the years. I realise they are only boots and as such should be treated as such and just worn but I have to say, despite the cost, they are just superb and I'm delighted I took the plunge. I will post a few pictures when I get back home and pass on some of the enabling powers these boots clearly possess. In summary my review of the Skye Cordovan boot by C&J could ( and some may say should) be condensed to just one word, QUALITY.

As promised, crappy phone pics. They don't even come close to picking up how rich the colour is. I have to say there is just something about C&J!



post #10319 of 12776
Chocolate suede Tetbury's today with jeans.

post #10320 of 12776
Hey everyone,

I have a size 8 UK in the Oscar last, and a size 9 US Linderick boot on the 325 last from C&J. What size in the 228 would I be for the snowdon GMTO? The C&J rep thinks they only size their boots down have a size for the US market, but I'm not so sure. I also have an 8 uk soller and 8 uk rain shoes that both fit well.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › ** Quintessential Crockett & Jones Thread ** (reviews, quality, etc...)