or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Gaziano & Girling Appreciation & Shoe Appreciation Thread (including reviews, purchases, pictures, etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gaziano & Girling Appreciation & Shoe Appreciation Thread (including reviews, purchases, pictures, etc...) - Page 876

post #13126 of 21771
By the way I was meaning to put these city rubber soles on in case anyone was interested
Sorry if I'm duplicating anything as I haven't followed this thread till now.... Anyway
They are one step sleeker than single Dainite I guess.
Possibly the nicest rubber soles as far as looking right on shoes in place of a leather sole.
Just wore these in a bit of rain in London today - very comfortable.
Similar to EG Thames soles but I think GG make them look shapely if that's the right word


post #13127 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

Given any two models...even from the same company...lasts lengths, and widths as well, can be, and often are, different.

Toe and forepart shapes can affect the overall length of the last. The critical issue...and the one that affects sizing reliability the most...is the heel to ball length.

And yes, a wider last can be slightly longer...but only slightly--you probably wouldn't even notice it unless you were comparing an A width to an E. But as a general rule, length grades up one-twenty-fourth of an inch PER WIDTH.

In standard sizing...which isn't necessary adhered to religiously regardless the size designated...lasts grade up roughly one-third of an inch in length. I'd have to check my notes but width gradations are three-sixteenths of an inch, IIRC. So the difference between an 8 and an 8.5 is one-sixth of an inch in length and 'not-a-lot' in width. (Girths are another matter.)

(Edited to correct increments.)

--

Thank you for your answear. It´s because of this i´m surprised that the shoe fit so much bigger than the other G&G I have, I have two shoes and two boots in four different lasts and all but this one feels the same. Maybe it´s just because it´s a chukka and have stretched more.
post #13128 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post

Since 3pc shoe trees are mentioned. Are the Arran suede? And pre-2010 G&G made by Alfred Sargent?

Also, since 3pc shoe tree is lasted, it would of course feel tight to squeeze the wider soft square last into a narrower pointed round toe shoes even at the same length.

English is not my native language so maybe I was a bit unclear. I have one lasted 3pc shoe tree for the MH71 and one for the DG70....I didn´t try to fit the MH71 tree into the DG70 and was surprised that it didn´t work biggrin.gif

It´s not a suede Arran pre 2010. It´s made 2013 and with grain leather.
post #13129 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

It's not necessary that we agree on everything. You have your POV, I have mine. I doubt that they will ever mesh perfectly, but at least you've earned and paid for your perspective.

Beyond that...one small correction: it's not "1/20th of an inch" it's 1/24th of an inch. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

I have been dealing directly with lastmakers and modelmakers for most of my career. I got that information from Bill Tippit who was a protege' of Wilson Schraeder (before Wilson passed), and who started and owned The Last Word and Global Footwear Solutions, before moving on to Nike.

--

you said the 1/24th right, for some reason 20th got into my head...so it was my error, not yours...
post #13130 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handmadeshoes View Post

you said the 1/24th right, for some reason 20th got into my head...so it was my error, not yours...

Maybe it doesn't make that much of a difference...or only to people who are shoemakers...but 2x1/24=1/48=1 iron.
post #13131 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

Maybe it doesn't make that much of a difference...or only to people who are shoemakers...but 2x1/24=1/48=1 iron.

Metric system FTW.
post #13132 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaves View Post

Metric system FTW.

I'm not sure what you mean here but "irons" aren't metric--they are a much older system of measurement peculiar to shoemakers.
post #13133 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by labravajazz View Post

By the way I was meaning to put these city rubber soles on in case anyone was interested
Sorry if I'm duplicating anything as I haven't followed this thread till now.... Anyway
They are one step sleeker than single Dainite I guess.
Possibly the nicest rubber soles as far as looking right on shoes in place of a leather sole.
Just wore these in a bit of rain in London today - very comfortable.
Similar to EG Thames soles but I think GG make them look shapely if that's the right word



The wen sum sole is fantastic. Looks great and outlasts leather and is rain proof. Great choice

post #13134 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

......"irons" aren't metric--they are a much older system of measurement peculiar to shoemakers.


"Irons" (1/48 inch or approx 1/2 mm) is a virtually defunct measurement, that was used to measure the thickness of leather. English shoemakers traditionally refer to the thickness of sole leather in inches (1/4" is the standard thickness of a man's leather sole). As far as I am aware, tools for setting the edges of sole and welt are also marked in inches. These days, English leather merchants have taken to offer their ware in millimetre. I presume these days, all leather thickness gauges are calibrated in millimetre:




I remember a few years back, James Ducker writing in his blog: "How much is an 'iron?'.

"Irons" is rather like the American "ounces" (for leather thickness), Nobody outside the country's boundaries does understand the term not even leather merchants: (Tony Crack of Northampton: "When Americas talk about 'ounces', I always have to look it up on a conversion table!")

Length of a last is determined with a measuring stick in 'size' (on the Continent in PP) while circumference measurements or taken with a tape in inches (or millimetre respectively).
post #13135 of 21771
Gentleman we are working on GMTO for Gaziano and Girling chelsea boot through Skoaktiebolaget. So far we have three interested parties, one in E width, one in F width and one in G width. We need the minimum five orders in the same width before we can proceed with this GMTO. Here are the rest of the specifications.

Model - Burnham chelsea wholecut boot made of single piece of letter.
Last - MH71
Color - Espresso leather but we can consider other shade of dark brown colors such as Mocha and Vintage Oak. ( @Leaves can we get please pictures of Espresso, Mocha and Vintage Oak next to each other.
Soles - single leather soles?
Width - if you are interested please let me know what width you would like, we need five orders to be in the same width.



post #13136 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengal-stripe View Post

"Irons" (1/48 inch or approx 1/2 mm) is a virtually defunct measurement, that was used to measure the thickness of leather. English shoemakers traditionally refer to the thickness of sole leather in inches (1/4" is the standard thickness of a man's leather sole). As far as I am aware, tools for setting the edges of sole and welt are also marked in inches. These days, English leather merchants have taken to offer their ware in millimetre. I presume these days, all leather thickness gauges are calibrated in millimetre:

Well, the idea that 'irons' is a defunct unit of measurement is simply not true. At least not on this side of the pond. Every shoe or bootmaker I know talks about, and understands, irons.

And the idea that tools are marked in inches is also false. All collices of English or US manufacture, that I've ever seen (and I have a fair number of various origin) are marked in irons, as are corresponding hand outsole trimming tools.

Trimmer blades and burnishing irons for Landis and Champion finishing machines are marked in irons. Always have been and continue to be AFAIK.
Quote:
I remember a few years back, James Ducker writing in his blog: "How much is an 'iron?'.

"Irons" is rather like the American "ounces" (for leather thickness), Nobody outside the country's boundaries does understand the term not even leather merchants: (Tony Crack of Northampton: "When Americas talk about 'ounces', I always have to look it up on a conversion table!")

James was mistaken in this observation, if he was talking about soling leather. No American shoe or bootmaker that I know orders outsole or insole leather in ounces. Saddle skirting, yes. Upper leather yes. But even heel lifts and rubber toplifting is measured in irons.

I am confused about what you think James was saying, however (I didn't see that installment). Isn't he saying that irons are a standard of measurement in the UK? (he has to convert) And how does that square with 'irons' being "virtually defunct?"

Maybe 'irons' are only defunct among the lay public. ??
Quote:
Length of a last is determined with a measuring stick in 'size' (on the Continent in PP) while circumference measurements or taken with a tape in inches (or millimetre respectively).

In the US, last length is usually measured in inches or millimeters which may be converted to the nearest standard size, or not...depending on whether a size designation is relevant (for bespoke makers, not so much).

Having said all that, almost every finder, grindery, and leather wholesaler has their own version of a chart that converts between millimeters, inches, ounces, and irons, which they give out as promotional items....and have done for decades.

Maybe, despite those decades, the case could be made that things are changing and "irons" are not as much of a standard as they once were, but straight from the bench, I can't think of the last time a finder or another shoemaker was not wholly conversant with the term. And used it.

--
Edited by DWFII - 10/7/14 at 10:38am
post #13137 of 21771
Don't some shoemakers still uses stick as a unit for shoe sizes?
post #13138 of 21771
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post

Don't some shoemakers still uses stick as a unit for shoe sizes?

Maybe. I tend to refer to last length as "the stick." But in theory the length of the foot (measured with an actual measuring stick) rather than the last, is the "stick." So my usage of the term may be suspect, I suppose...although lastmakers do sometimes use a stick to measure the last.

In recent years...particularly with my students...I refer to last length as "SLL" (standard last length) as measured in millimeters, and foot length as "LOF" (length of foot)...again in millimeters. Millimeters are just easier to do math operations on. I take measurements and girths in inches and convert to metric simply because I'm used to the Imperial tapes that are common in the States.

--
Edited by DWFII - 10/7/14 at 8:15am
post #13139 of 21771
post #13140 of 21771
Can't say I'm a fan... bored.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Gaziano & Girling Appreciation & Shoe Appreciation Thread (including reviews, purchases, pictures, etc...)