Edward Green Appreciation: Pictures, Info, and Where to Buy - Page 141

I was advised the 82 last is about a 1/4 to 1/2 inch longer than the 202 last. It may not be enough to size up or down but perhaps just enough to compromise that "perfect" fit. When I order my boots I will likely size down half a size from my 202 s.

I take the same size in both, however, the 202 is slightly larger - not going to be noticeable for your average (non-SF wearer). If you are snug in the 202, the 888 might not fit.

According to EG the 888, 82 & 202 are all basically the same save the toe shape. I have shoes in all three lasts and can tell you that they all pretty much fit the same fit-wise. Where the difference, IMHO, comes in is how the different toe shapes behave when walking. Since the 888 is more squared at the toe it will bend in a more uniform manner whereas the rounded toe shapes will react slightly differently, add to that the way you walk. This can be illustrated by the vamp creases on all three of my shoes (will not post a pic).

Also, remember that SFers may deem the 888 as more narrow because the most offered discounted pairs came via US retailers and were made in D widths. For instance, My 202 & 82 lasted shoes are 12/12.5E whereas my 888 lasted pairs are 12.5/13D. YMMV

^ do not agree

 

UK9,5

888 width E - snug

202 width D - excellent fit

Another thing you are forgetting/overlooking is the materials used and the style of the shoe. That brogue on the 888 will fit more snugly than the chukka on the 202 due to the materials/construction. You can own 5 pairs of EG shoes on the same last and have them all fit differently. Mainly because of the materials and the style/cut.

+1 I have a pair of dovers and a pair of chleseas both on 202 both 8.5 d but the dovers have a little more room in them.

That's because the chelsea is a balmoral and the dover is a blutcher.

So bals are usually tighter than blutchers? Is this across different manufactures as well? I thought perhaps the double sole on the Dover had something to do with it?

I can size down .5 in 888 from 82, and 202. The 202 is the more roomier of the three. I have all three lasts and have had various widths in each.

Funny Ialways thought the 888/82 and the 202/606 were two separate families since the former were designed my Mr. Gaziano. However, when I received trees from recently purchased EGs, the ones that came with 82 is exactly the same as trees purchased for the 202 (also reps at EG at Jermyn St. say that their trees fit all the smart shoe lasts). I also tried out the 202 trees and they fit my 888/82 shoes fine (except obviously the trees do not fill up to the toe box). I can take pics if anyone cares.

So maybe the 888/82 and the 202/606 are more closely related than we think, at least in the vamp/waist area?

I stay pretty consistent with my 888, 82, and 33. Makes shopping easier.

It provides a different feel. A balmoral definitely has less room for error because the vamp and eyestays are stitched together whereas a derby has more flexibility. Also, from my experience, some designed (i.e., cap toe ) makes the toebox feel tighter.

+1 as to last sentence. I size up 1/2 size and down 1 width in the 888.

750 and 850

FYI, Tony Gaziano has already said that the 888 was developed from the 202 but with a longer and narrower toe box. Then the 82 was developed as a round toe version of the 888.

Quick question where should the shoe crease on a pair of 202 Chelsea s? I've heard that anything on the cap or below means the shoe is too small but too far up indicates the shoe is too large. Ideally how far up should the crease occur. Thank You for the help.

Even a shoe that fits properly will crease differently on different people (depending on the way they walk, the way their foot flexes etc...).

The best way to determine whether a shoe fits properly is to look at how it fits your foot at the various appropriate places (heel, toes etc) rather than focussing on creasing.