or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › New 'top drawer' Church's range?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New 'top drawer' Church's range? - Page 9

post #121 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post
First, you can believe what you want. But the fact is that you're comparing apples and oranges.

Fosters may make bespoke shoes but they make them the same way they make RTW.

I have all along specified that if all things are equal except those aspects that relate to construction techniques...in other words comparing Goodyear welted shoes to hand welted shoes...the hand welted shoes will be heavier.

Okay, just to be clear on this:

1. Foster's RTW shoes are made by Edward Green, Crockett & Jones and other firms. They are machine-made, Goodyear-welted shoes.

2. Foster's bespoke shoes are hand-welted.

3. On comparing shoes of the same basic style (oxfords) and approximately the same size, the bespoke shoes were noticeably lighter.

I did not check every size or style of shoe. I should've asked the staff why the bespoke shoes were lighter, but they were busy. Maybe I'll try again next week.

Quote:
Since I have never seen, nor do I know of, a major manufacturer (outside of Eastern Europe) that makes hand welted shoes that are not bespoke, I think it fair to say that all hand welted shoes are bespoke (but not vice versa). I have, accordingly specified several times in this thread that I was talking about hand-welted.

Not sure this is relevant, but a couple of examples of hand-welted shoes that aren't bespoke are:

Dimitri Gomez's "Bottier" line

Cleverley's Semi-Bespoke and Anthony Cleverley lines

although I think someone said Cleverley's Semi-Bespoke shoes aren't actually hand-welted, despite what their website says.

Quote:
As for the photo...one of those shoes does not fit.

I'm sure someone...perhaps, even the owner...will assert that I cannot possibly know that. But I can.

How?

There is a "footprint" created...literally...when the foot is supporting the body's weight. It is neither wider nor narrower than the foot structure needs it to be. If properly fit, it will never change, in other words.

When a last is chosen to make a bespoke shoe the width of that footprint determines the width of the bottom of the last. In the heel, this is known as "heelseat width".

When a shoe is manufactured, a last is chosen that will accommodate (note that I did not say "fit") a variety of heelseat widths.

The heelseat width, because it determines the width of the insole, also determines the width of the outsole and, consequently, the width of the heel stack.

If the shoe, above, with the wider heel fits the foot of the owner then the narrower shoe is too narrow for the actual weight bearing, plantar surface of the foot.

And contrariwise, if the narrow heeled shoe fits the foot perfectly then the shoe with the wider heel does not. This is not to say that either or both are not comfortable...albeit for reasons that may have little to do with actual foot mechanics or fit.

But the wider last forces a wider...and, yes, heavier...heelstack.

There is no escaping the logic of this.

But again it is comparing apples to oranges in the same way that comparing a shoe with a five-eigths inch heel to one with a nine-eighths inch heel would be.

A couple of points on this:

1. I believe you said fit is subjective.

2. Doesn't this follow the same line as my logic? On the assumption that the bespoke shoe "fits", I said that its shape reduces waste. Isn't this basically the same as your points about a last for a manufactured shoe having to be chosen to accommodate a variety of heelseat widths and the wider last requiring a wider heelstack?

Quote:
I suspect, that you are arguing for the sake of argument here and I am perfectly willing to leave you to get on with it. I suspect this because it really is self-evident, if you think it through, that you cannot compare a velvet slipper to a shell ankle boot and come to any reliable conclusion about relative weights or processes. Anymore than you can you compare a size 5 to a size 12 and reach a valid determination.

If all things are equal, including construction techniques...such as Goodyear welting or handwelting...materials, size, lasts, etc., two pairs of shoes made in different facilities will weigh near-as-nevermind the same.

But once the construction techniques are factored in...Goodyear vs handwelting...once the choice of materials directly associated with those techniques are factored in--insole thicknesses or materials (leather vs cardboard), the bespoke shoe will always be a little heavier.

Well, I've now established (for myself at least, but anyone can pop into Foster's and see for themselves) that the bespoke shoe can be lighter. I don't know why, and it looks like you don't either.

Quote:
PS...I doubt you can find anyone on this board that is more specific about the ins and outs of shoemaking...to the dismay of the tweeters on SF. If you read...I mean for understanding and comprehension...all of my responses to you, they have universally fallen into the category of more detailed than general.If you think I'm generalizing you're living in dreamland.

I recognise that you've provided very detailed responses and I appreciate the time you've spent on this. My point about you possibly generalising isn't the steps/differences in the process of making a hand-made or machine-made shoe itself, but the extent to which those processes that you've outlined are actually followed on this side of the pond. Because if they aren't, then the detail isn't relevant.

For what it's worth, I don't think the points that you've made are wrong, which is why I suggested earlier that perhaps the hand-made and machine-made shoes we're talking about here may be somewhat different to what you usually see.
post #122 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKDKid View Post
Okay, just to be clear on this: For what it's worth, I don't think the points that you've made are wrong, which is why I suggested earlier that perhaps the hand-made and machine-made shoes we're talking about here may be somewhat different to what you usually see.
You know, I appreciate the fact that you see things different than I do. I also appreciate your restraint dealing with a rough old cob like myself who sometimes loses patience with those who clearly are, shall we say, less than fully conversant. But that said, until you sit down and make a pair of shoes; until you take apart manufactured shoes and bespoke shoes; until you make those choices and deal with the materials, tools, etc., all you can do is speculate--guess, in other words, and that's all subjective. As I have said...as I have stressed...all thing being equal...there's only so much that can be done to make a shoe lighter. There's only so many factors that can be altered. The materials and the tools (lasts, for example) impose constraints than cannot be trivialized or airily dismissed. For instance, heel stacks are either going to be made of leather or they are going to be made of something else--usually cardboard or synthetic, or maybe even wood. Leather will almost certainly be heavier. Goodyear welting will always be lighter than handwelting simply because there is no need for a heavier leather insole...an insole that will hold and bear up to the stress of inseam stitching. Manufactures are not stupid, they are not going to pay for the heavier insole leather when fiberboard or a thinner insole leather will work. Parenthetically, insole leather is sold by the pound--ie. by weight. Comfort may be subjective but fit is not. If a customer's plantar heel surface is a half inch narrower than the insole on which it is sitting, there is no fit. Period. Und so weiter. If you can show me two pairs of shoes--one Goodyear welted and one handwelted, both on identical lasts, both using identical upper leathers...all other things being equal. IOW...and the handwelted shoe is lighter, I will be amazed. I will be grateful to learn something new especially if I can also learn how the hell they did it. Now I'm not saying it can't be done, mind, but I think both makers would have to deviate from SOP and/or "good practices"to achieve that result. Until then...I'm from Missouri (the "Show Me" state)
post #123 of 125
For what it's worth, I've posted photos of my Church's Lamport in another thread.
post #124 of 125

Hi guys,

 

I'm a bit new to this forum, i've hovered rather than signed up and posted, so here goes my first. 

 

I've seen and handled the new top end Church's, both the lace up and monk strap. Some of the background behind them is post-manufacture they receive another 8-12 hours of hand polishing, hence the really rich look of the leather.

 

Shoe trees are included, and last specific rather than generic and i think both pairs are fiddleback soled.

 

The box comes with a separate compartment that includes a Church's apron, plus leatherbound polishing kit, including shoe horn, laces, polish, and a brush.

 

I can't remember the name of them but my Uncle's boutique stocks them, and he visits them regularly so is pretty clued up on what they do and they're product.

 

IMG_2263[1].jpg

IMG_2264[1].jpg

 

IMG_2265[1].jpg

 

IMG_2374[1].jpg

 

IMG_2267[2].jpg

IMG_2268[1].jpg

 

post #125 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDVG View Post

Hi guys,

I'm a bit new to this forum, i've hovered rather than signed up and posted, so here goes my first. 

I've seen and handled the new top end Church's, both the lace up and monk strap. Some of the background behind them is post-manufacture they receive another 8-12 hours of hand polishing, hence the really rich look of the leather.

Shoe trees are included, and last specific rather than generic and i think both pairs are fiddleback soled.

The box comes with a separate compartment that includes a Church's apron, plus leatherbound polishing kit, including shoe horn, laces, polish, and a brush.

I can't remember the name of them but my Uncle's boutique stocks them, and he visits them regularly so is pretty clued up on what they do and they're product.

350x261px-LL-43277af4_IMG_22631.jpeg
350x261px-LL-03eaa39e_IMG_22641.jpeg

350x261px-LL-c2be3d23_IMG_22651.jpeg

350x261px-LL-1f5e9d15_IMG_23741.jpeg

350x261px-LL-9b7adeaf_IMG_22672.jpeg
350x261px-LL-fae87def_IMG_22681.jpeg

Thanks. They don't seem (Churchs) to have a lot of shoe sellers carrying them FWIW.

I notice the Irish guys have the Cheaneys for GB325. http://www.robinsonsshoes.com/cheaney-shoes/cheaney-shoes-holyrood-imperial-collection-852-93-1569.php
Edited by meister - 2/8/12 at 4:20am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › New 'top drawer' Church's range?