or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › **The Official Shoe Care Thread: Tutorials, Photos, etc.**
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

**The Official Shoe Care Thread: Tutorials, Photos, etc.** - Page 700

post #10486 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

That was a very interesting question, and answer.  Thank you both.

I can't help but wonder if the bottom pic in Crat's post is showing an apposite hint of gemming failure?  Though as he appears to have wide banana feet like me, maybe it's just stretching from his big toe; I get the same.

It appears he's overhanging the welt and the insole significantly in the lateral ball area. Not a good situation all other things being equal. But I don't see...nor do I think you would...any structural problems.
post #10487 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post


It appears he's overhanging the welt and the insole significantly in the lateral ball area. Not a good situation all other things being equal. But I don't see...nor do I think you would...any structural problems.

 

I get the "feet overhanging the welt" situation in some shoes. Does that weaken the shoe? Or is it bad for my feet?

post #10488 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepyinsanfran View Post

I get the "feet overhanging the welt" situation in some shoes. Does that weaken the shoe? Or is it bad for my feet?

It does weaken the shoe to some extent...maybe not critically although it can contribute to gemming failure.

It is not particularly good for the foot, but again not catastrophic unless you have foot problems.

I have a Morton's Neuroma from jumping out of a two story barracks window to avoid KP when I went to Parachute Rigger's School...hit a rock badly.

Years later I started getting pain between my third and fourth metatarsal head. I was pretty new to making shoes and boots at the time and didn't realize how important tread width was. I went to a podiatrist (?) / foot doctor who told me it would cost over $1k (this was 40 some years ago) to surgically remove the neuroma...and no guarantees it wouldn't come back.

I went back to the bench and widened my last while maintaining my joint girth. No more problem... for 40 years...except very rarely when I'm "waltzing with my darlin'" and up on my toes with the rise and fall.
post #10489 of 19259

When i used to work as a cobbler, cemented shoes were very problematic because if you got caught in the rain the sole might separate from the rest of the shoe (i live in the UK and its always raining here) or there would be a need to occasionally glue back a few bits here and there. I noticed the problem quite extensively for the brand Bally. I won't say cemented construction is crap, but i would personally just use them as summer shoes. Glue can break down over time and water sure doesn't help.

post #10490 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by OREO View Post

When i used to work as a cobbler, cemented shoes were very problematic because if you got caught in the rain the sole might separate from the rest of the shoe (i live in the UK and its always raining here) or there would be a need to occasionally glue back a few bits here and there. I noticed the problem quite extensively for the brand Bally. I won't say cemented construction is crap, but i would personally just use them as summer shoes. Glue can break down over time and water sure doesn't help.

Sounds like those stories where outsole channel flaps splitting open and need to be cemented down...
post #10491 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by OREO View Post

When i used to work as a cobbler, cemented shoes were very problematic because if you got caught in the rain the sole might separate from the rest of the shoe (i live in the UK and its always raining here) or there would be a need to occasionally glue back a few bits here and there. I noticed the problem quite extensively for the brand Bally. I won't say cemented construction is crap, but i would personally just use them as summer shoes. Glue can break down over time and water sure doesn't help.

I agree with you...but it bears repeating: GY is also fundamentally a cement job. If cement "can break down over time" (and it can), it can beak down (and it does) for any application over time...including gemming on rolls--it gets stale, IOW.

--
Edited by DWFII - 8/29/14 at 2:48pm
post #10492 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post

Sounds like those stories where outsole channel flaps splitting open and need to be cemented down...

I wish I knew an answer for that. Esp. one that was non-toxic and devoid of VOCs. I use waterproof PVC (TiteBond III) sometimes and when I get good pressure on the channel while it dries, it works really good. A sandbag will sometimes do the trick.

But there is no natural, sure-fire, or esp. Traditional, solution short of a vertical channel...like a curved needle stitcher makes (except cut by hand)...and there you don't need any adhesive.

That I know of...
post #10493 of 19259
Here is an image of the underside of a J.M. Weston GY welted insole. Very solid. Not hand welted, rather machined. I doubt it will fail.
The inseam stitching (waxed-or-not) will fail long before gemming as we have seen in an earlier picture. After the welt is attached everything is cemented together. Then it gets stitched (out-sole to welt) holding all of the components together. If the cement gets stale it can cause loosening of fit and or a squeaking in other areas.
post #10494 of 19259
Several comments:

Great photo.

This represents one of the earliest iterations of the GY technique. Few if any manufacturers still use it, however, simply because it requires a thicker and better quality insole--almost as good as with HW. And that's expensive. It also requires more time and that too is expensive.

And, after all is said and done, because the fibers of the leather holdfast have been turned perpendicular to their natural "lie," they tend to break more easily. On edge this way, there's a lot of unnatural stress that is put upon the holdfast. It's like bending a piece of wire coat hanger back and forth until it breaks.

The earliest versions of GY created holdfasts entirely of leather and the canvas reinforcing was not used. GY manufacturers, however, quickly realized that the leather was going to break...sooner rather than later...and tried to reinforce the holdfast with canvas. Because the reinforcement was so inadequate--it did not solve the problem of the leather holdfast breaking--the cut holdfast was abandoned altogether as unnecessary, and an unnecessary expense, and the process evolved into using the canvas gemming alone. This is the most common GY technique today.

Those are some of the reasons why using a turned leather holdfast is the exception...a rare exception...in the world of GY manufacturing, rather than the rule. But it has to be said that the theory was, at least superficially, good.

One of the greatest weaknesses with the GY technique is gemming failure. We don't talk about "holdfast" failure, we talk about gemming failure. Mostly because there is no real holdfast.

The photo however, is instructive...here it is--a pristine insole, representative of the GY process (albeit of an older and fairly rare version), and already the gemming is failing!! Coming loose. Not solid at all.



Further to the point, while some people may focus on the stitching fraying or breaking or coming loose, the more obvious and salient point is missed, namely that such issues...such problems...are part and parcel of the fundamental weakness of the GY welting technique. They cannot be separated out to take the blame for what is, relatively speaking (by comparison, IOW), a flawed technique overall. GY is a flawed technique--it doesn't make any difference what the causes are...unless we suddenly want to get all analytical and objective about it...heaven forbid!

But, OK, FWIW...the reason the thread fails is because GY is a machine process and as such, has limitations which are insurmountable.

The thread itself is generally a synthetic, at least in this day and age. It should be impervious to rot. So any thread damage has to come from other forces.

Additionally, the machines that do the stitching employ a chain stitch--a fundamentally, critically, less sound or stable stitch than a lock stitch...by an order of magnitude.

And just as importantly, the machines that do the stitching cannot wax the thread to prevent whatever rotting might occur. The machine cannot apply a wax thick enough or tacky enough to adhere to the synthetic thread. But while waxing was important in preventing rot it was not the only reason inseaming thread was, and should be, waxed. Proper wax locks the stitches and seals the inseam.

Because there is no wax to seal the thread or the inseam and because what wax (or more likely, "thread lubricant") is used has no "tack," the stitches cannot lock together even if a lock stitch were employed. So, the stitching is vulnerable...in a sense, loose...right from the outset.

But the point is, that such vulnerability is built-in to GY...it is inescapable. These problems are not an issue with HW or, AFAIK, with Blake-Rapid.

Any thread will fray and come apart if precautions are not taken to prevent it---look at the photo again, in the waist, the gemming...and the thread that comprises the gemming...is already fraying despite the cement that supposedly bonds the fibers of the gemming together and the gemming to the insole. And it has never even been subjected to the stresses of being worn!

Good photo.

--
Edited by DWFII - 8/30/14 at 8:24am
post #10495 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

Several comments:

Great photo.

This represents one of the earliest iterations of the GY technique. Few if any manufacturers still use it, however, simply because it requires a thicker and better quality insole--almost as good as with HW. And that's expensive. It also requires more time and that too is expensive.

And, after all is said and done, because the fibers of the leather holdfast have been turned perpendicular to their natural "lie," they tend to break more easily. On edge this way, there's a lot of unnatural stress that is put upon the holdfast. It's like bending a piece of wire coat hanger back and forth until it breaks.

The earliest versions of GY created holdfasts entirely of leather and the canvas reinforcing was not used. GY manufacturers, however, quickly realized that the leather was going to break...sooner rather than later...and tried to reinforce the holdfast with canvas. Because the reinforcement was so inadequate--it did not solve the problem of the leather holdfast breaking--the cut holdfast was abandoned altogether as unnecessary, and an unnecessary expense, and the process evolved into using the canvas gemming alone. This is the most common GY technique today.

Those are some of the reasons why using a turned leather holdfast is the exception...a rare exception...in the world of GY manufacturing, rather than the rule. But it has to be said that the theory was, at least superficially, good.

One of the greatest weaknesses with the GY technique is gemming failure. We don't talk about "holdfast" failure, we talk about gemming failure. Mostly because there is no real holdfast.




The photo however, is instructive...here it is--a pristine insole, representative of the GY process (albeit of an older and fairly rare version), and already the gemming is failing!! Coming loose. Not solid at all.



Further to the point, while some people may focus on the stitching fraying or breaking or coming loose, the more obvious and salient point is missed, namely that such issues...such problems...are part and parcel of the fundamental weakness of the GY welting technique. They cannot be separated out to take the blame for what is, relatively speaking (by comparison, IOW), a flawed technique overall. GY is a flawed technique--it doesn't make any difference what the causes are...unless we suddenly want to get all analytical and objective about it...heaven forbid!

But, OK, FWIW...the reason the thread fails is because GY is a machine process and as such, has limitations which are insurmountable.

The thread itself is generally a synthetic, at least in this day and age. It should be impervious to rot. So any thread damage has to come from other forces.

Additionally, the machines that do the stitching employ a chain stitch--a fundamentally, critically, less sound or stable stitch than a lock stitch...by an order of magnitude.

And just as importantly, the machines that do the stitching cannot wax the thread to prevent whatever rotting might occur. The machine cannot apply a wax thick enough or tacky enough to adhere to the synthetic thread. But while waxing was important in preventing rot it was not the only reason inseaming thread was, and should be, waxed. Proper wax locks the stitches and seals the inseam.

Because there is no wax to seal the thread or the inseam and because what wax (or more likely, "thread lubricant") is used has no "tack," the stitches cannot lock together even if a lock stitch were employed. So, the stitching is vulnerable...in a sense, loose...right from the outset.

But the point is, that such vulnerability is built-in to GY...it is inescapable. These problems are not an issue with HW or, AFAIK, with Blake-Rapid.

Any thread will fray and come apart if precautions are not taken to prevent it---look at the photo again, in the waist, the gemming...and the thread that comprises the gemming...is already fraying despite the cement that supposedly bonds the fibers of the gemming together and the gemming to the insole. And it has never even been subjected to the stresses of being worn!

Good photo.

--




Thanks DW, I just want to point out though....
The picture was taken in the J.M.W. shop on Madison Ave. It's of a sample that they use to show customers and explain about the construction for those that are interested. So, it's constantly being flexed without the support of the other components holding it together (as intended by the manufacturer). In addition, it's several years old and is exposed rather than being sealed.
The point you made and showed has merit regarding what could happen, I submit that it would be highly unlikely that it would happen if the sample were used as it was intended, not as a sample.

I don't recall ever seeing the inseam failing then the neighboring stitching unraveling like a button stitched to s cheap shirt. I do see the inseam stitch fail the neighboring stitches snap, not unravel.
Perhaps this may be bc once one stitch tears the stitches before and after it are no longer strong enough to hold in place.

I agree, thread lube is used. It has a mild form of wax content in it. It has to main purposes, it helps the machine glide smoother while preforming it's task and it helps strengthening the thread.
I'm not saying the thread will be as strong as hand waxed thread (if done properly). But, the thread lube does aid in strengthening the thread.

Different companies have different criterion. Some focus on making a product based on a certain price-point. Others are not as concerned with price-point rather they want to manufacture the best possible product then determine it's price. The there is everything in between. Of course they are all in business to make a profit. We all are.

In Weston's case I know for a fact that they were unhappy with a certain thread that they were using for certain hand-stitched processes. So they hand make there own thread for those processes. They have there own tanneries in order to maintain the quality of their brand.

I know for myself, I source products and materials throughout Europe that my suppliers don't carry. Some they never heard of....
This can be very time consuming. Why? because that's what my customers expect from me. I'm certain you do the same thing and, if I'm right you know what I'm talking about.
Why do I bring this up? Because in a case such as Weston you can be sure they have figured out an effective thread wax. Something that is time tested and will not tarnish the integrity of their brand.

There is a lot that goes into it but, with the final product not much of it is seen or realized by the customer.
post #10496 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick V. View Post


The picture was taken in the J.M.W. shop on Madison Ave. It's of a sample that they use to show customers and explain about the construction for those that are interested. So, it's constantly being flexed without the support of the other components holding it together (as intended by the manufacturer). In addition, it's several years old and is exposed rather than being sealed.
The point you made and showed has merit regarding what could happen, I submit that it would be highly unlikely that it would happen if the sample were used as it was intended, not as a sample.

You can make that point but if you can't support it, it is speculation and fantasy, nothing else. All you have to do to "give the lie" (it's just an expression) to such speculation is go back and read the blog (I posted a link in one of these threads you were involved in) about the recrafting of a pair of EG...at EG. There the shoe...not just the insole...had been used as it was intended and all "the other components" (which, with the exception of the outsole, don't do anything to hold it together) were indeed in place "as intended by the manufacturer." And yet the GY inseaming/gemming had failed to the extent that EG determined it needed to be completely rewelted.
Quote:
I don't recall ever seeing the inseam failing then the neighboring stitching unraveling like a button stitched to s cheap shirt. I do see the inseam stitch fail the neighboring stitches snap, not unravel.
Perhaps this may be bc once one stitch tears the stitches before and after it are no longer strong enough to hold in place.

I don't ever recall seeing as much thread breakage as you apparently see. Some, but not all that much. But I can allow as it might be a problem. I can even envision the mechanics of how it might come to pass. But that only underscores my contention that GY is a flawed technique. And parenthetically I have never seen any, excepting the once that I already detailed, in my own work...nor for that matter, done properly and all other things being equal, in the HW work of other makers.
Quote:
I agree, thread lube is used. It has a mild form of wax content in it. It has to main purposes, it helps the machine glide smoother while preforming it's task and it helps strengthening the thread.
I'm not saying the thread will be as strong as hand waxed thread (if done properly). But, the thread lube does aid in strengthening the thread
.

I don't believe this. I have used thread lube...a lot...and there is no way that it does anything to strengthen the thread. You might make a questionable case that the insignificant amount of wax (paraffin, no doubt) ...combined with oils...strengthens the stitch (nah, even that's a stretch). But!!...there is no mechanism, biological or otherwise, for the lube (oil-based as it is) to strengthen the thread. Most of the photos you've posted depicting thread damage show the thread badly frayed and unraveled. The only way for any compound to strengthen the thread would be to ensure that such unraveling did not happen. Good wax will do that, oil will not.

Quote:
I know for myself, I source products and materials throughout Europe that my suppliers don't carry. Some they never heard of....
This can be very time consuming. Why? because that's what my customers expect from me. I'm certain you do the same thing and, if I'm right you know what I'm talking about.
Why do I bring this up? Because in a case such as Weston you can be sure they have figured out an effective thread wax. Something that is time tested and will not tarnish the integrity of their brand.

More power to them...but I'm suspicious. I'm from Missouri--The Show Me State. It's like the old saying "photos...or it never happened." People can speculate and make unsubstantiated claims until the cows come home (and do...esp. here) but if proof or at least a logical explanation of how a thing is supposed to be possible, much less work, is not forthcoming, it doesn't mean squat. It's hearsay. I could be wrong, but I don't think Weston is in the top tier of GY RTW makers. How can they afford to source all these rare raw materials as well as go to the effort of by-passing techniques that are part and parcel of the standard GY process...and still be competitive? Just because they use old, fully depreciated, machinery doesn't tell us anything.

Maybe some of the N'hnts makers need to take a closer look.

--
Edited by DWFII - 8/30/14 at 10:34am
post #10497 of 19259

JM Weston are pretty expensive, that's how they can afford it!  But I've never owned a pair, so whether they're actually better than, say, Church's, Cheaney, C&J or Alfred Sargeant, is something on which I'm unable to offer informed opinion.  Some of them are pretty, and sometimes that's enough - if the price is right.  For me, I've never been able to justify $1000+ shoes from EG, JL, G&G or JM Weston for that matter.  I love G&G's lasts, but unless they are on some awesome clearance in my size, I'm not going there.    

 

My new self-imposed rule is a $200 ceiling for GY shoes.  I might make a slight exception for MTO, or boots, or shell cordovan or something else that's inherently "more".  Not that I never have spent more than that - many times, and much more.  But I'm starting to think it's a good discipline.  As hand-welted Vass cost about $600, I can't see the value added in twice that for a more industrial product, and I'm trying to be more disciplined about buying shiny things for the shine alone.  Anyway, each to his own.  But it's nice to be informed, and this thread just keeps on giving.

post #10498 of 19259
Is JM Weston in the same league...aesthetically or price-wise...as G&G or EG? I don't know, I pretty much stick to one maker (all HW) for my own footwear. smile.gif
post #10499 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

Is JM Weston in the same league...aesthetically or price-wise...as G&G or EG? I don't know, I pretty much stick to one maker (all HW) for my own footwear. smile.gif

 

They are a notch or two below with their claim to fame as the French company using imported American Goodyear Welting technology.

post #10500 of 19259
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post

They are a notch or two below with their claim to fame as the French company using imported American Goodyear Welting technology.

thanks...fing02[1].gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › **The Official Shoe Care Thread: Tutorials, Photos, etc.**