or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Differentiating shoe construction
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Differentiating shoe construction - Page 2

post #16 of 18
Quote:
Opinions on Channelled v.s. Stitched Aloft?  I thought that by covering the stichings, it would prevent damage to them and protect them (from some extent) from moisture.
I don't think it makes a great deal of difference if a Goodyear sole is stitched channelled or aloft. Of course the former looks better and is also more expensive to produce, but in wear the 2 mm or so of leather, which cover the stitching, will wear off and then, there is not much difference. This applies to Goodyear where the stitching is outside the shoe. I think Blakes with the stitching going all the way through are a not suited to anything but light summer shoes. The stitching goes from the sole right inside the shoe, every stitch is a hole filled with cotton thread. If you are caught in the rain, the cotton acts as a wick to take the moisture right into the shoe. Your feet will be wet in next to no time.  (That's the problem I have with Tod's, as all their shoes seem to have the stitching right going through.)
Quote:
Here is an odd duck: I have two pairs of Bally's Scribes (purchased 97/98 before the takeover when the Scribes were still very nicely made), from the inside there are no stitches, there seems to be a "fudge welt" (as EG calls it) going all around the shoe.  The sole is weird: the front 3/4 is channeled, no stitching in sight, while towards the arch, the stitching is visible.  Would you know what type of construction it is?
I believe Bally "Scribe" are Goodyear and were at one time their superior handmade range (I presume not fully handmade.) I only ever tried on a pair a few years back in a sale - Goodness, were they big. I think what you describe is the same as a typical Ferragamo shoe. You see the stitching in the waist (where the sole has left the ground) then it burrows in like a subway train, goes all the way round, to emerge at the other side. In the case of a typical Ferragamo, they are Blake stitched but you could do the same thing (combining channelled and aloft in the same row or stitching) in Goodyear construction. "Fudge welt" or "storm welt" or "split reverse welt" is a way to prevent water penetation.
Quote:
How can you differentiate this effect from a Goodyear shoe to that described by A.Harris when a Blake shoe has a full insole lining?
Use your fingers, you usually can feel it if it's just a thin layer of leather. If the "sock" is padded you might have to pull a little away to get your fingers in.
post #17 of 18
Thread Starter 
Bengal-Stripe, you are ABSOLUTELY right about my toes getting wet in my Tod's... I found another shoe of mine that is Blake lasted: my Cole-Haan side elastic boot with combination leather/rubber sole (about 10yrs old). It seems as if my Blake lasted shoes are some of the most comfortable for long walking. Is this the main function of Blake (other than cost). You are probably right about the Scribes, I can't feel any stitching inside. As for Ferragamo, I've tended to avoid the line because it looks too trendy for me, even their demi chasse types (recently seen on sale for about Euro 150).
post #18 of 18
Thread Starter 
Originally posted by A.Harris:
Quote:
I'm not a big fan of the Blake/Rapid method. My experience has been that the sole likes to detach around the edges (the Blake seam is quite a ways in so the edge is usually affixed with glue.)
This has happened to my "Custom Grade" bookbinder leather Churchs and the shoe is Goodyear lasted. Yep, never ever again.   Are all Churches as poorly made and exorbitantly priced? Have any of you heard of Barrett shoes? http://www.barrett.it Any opinions on quality? From what I have seen they look a lot like a more conservative Mantellassi, but the workmanship looks top rate.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Differentiating shoe construction