or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › can you tell by this pic if it is goodyear or hand welted?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

can you tell by this pic if it is goodyear or hand welted? - Page 4

post #46 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by reidrothchild View Post

worship.gif
My apologies for misinterpreting your post. I am certainly in no position to argue with you over the merits of $500 versus $1,000 shoes or, apparently, whether $50 shoes use "full grain leather." After reading your post, it appears that I don't know as much about uber-cheap shoes as I thought. To my untrained eye, there is a significant difference between what $100 and $500 buys one in terms of shoes. Then again, one of the main reasons I log on here virtually every day is to learn which of my previously held assumptions about men's clothing is incorrect. Thanks for sharing, DWFII.

No apologies necessary.
post #47 of 67

In my very limited experience of owning a sub GYW shoe made in SE Asia (in the $200s), and a $500 + one made in England, the upper on the one from England does seem much "better", or stronger, should I say.  I am not versed enough to describe what it means, but the SE Asian shoe (while more comfortable), when scratched, damage much more easily than the English one (for what it's worth).  By that I mean it shows the scratches much more vividly. 

 

Having said that, I think getting a perspective from a shoemaker is very helpful in understanding "quality" of a shoe.  I think many of us here are in pursuit of quality, but are fed with the wrong information and can look like brand/nationality etc. whores to you.  When I read most posts here, at least my rookie observation is that most people are looking to find quality.  For instance, many brands say their shoes are "handmade" where now, I see that they are not.  They name attributes of their shoe having superior quality, which based on your explanations, it may not be all that true.  For a newbie like me, if the general consensus of the people on a forum like this, who have spent thousands of dollars trying different types of shoes, and all saying "yes pay more you get more", I will tend to give them the benefit of the doubt, due to my lack of experience.  

 

Which is why I come to the conclusion of - thank you for providing your insight.  :)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post


I'm sorry, but I don't believe that's true. Many shoes in the $50.00 price range are full grain leather. It may not be calf skin but technically speaking a lot of the supposedly premium leather used in higher priced shoes is not calf either but closer to veal. All "full grain" means is that the hair side of the hide is still attached and hasn't been scoured or replaced with a bonded, synthetic layer.
As for the Goodyear construction, I've seen shoes with plastic welt made using Goodyear construction.
I don't want to be a cipher but I have to say that Hendrix pretty much gets it. I was startled at how cogently he described it, as a matter of fact.
The bottom line is that I'm not against $100.00-$500.00 shoes. There's a place for everything...obviously--the demand indicates it.
But as I said, I don't see the difference that commands the higher price. I don't see how shoes costing $1000.00 can be said to be worth that much more than the $500.00 shoe. Again, the construction techniques are virtually identical. So...all else being equal, do you honestly believe that there is $500.00 more value in the leather? The pieces are all going to be just about the same size and shape for any given size. So price per square foot...??!!
Given access, I can buy the best leather in the world, import it from abroad, pay shipping, customs, and brokerage fees and not feel any real pressure to charge significantly more. And I'm not at the top of the price ladder by a long shot. But then I don't sell "blue sky" either.
Brand name is what sells the $1000.00+ shoe, not a significant difference in quality. Hell, according to some here, the box itself is worth the extra $500.00. What sells is superficiality--finish, lasts shapes (as if that had any direct bearing on fit or functionality), fashion and bragging rights. Those willing to pay for those benefits are welcome to them, including the box. All I'm doing is pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes. Perhaps not a great way to win friends at court.
All that said, my perspective is as a shoemaker, not a customer...or a groupie, or a brand or nationality whore. I don't recommend or diss any brands...deliberately...for that very reason. It isn't about the price or the cachet, or the superficial appearance for me. It's about the objective quality.
Sorry to disappoint.
PS..."crap" is relative.
--
post #48 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by sklim8 View Post

if the general consensus of the people on a forum like this, who have spent thousands of dollars trying different types of shoes, and all saying "yes pay more you get more", I will tend to give them the benefit of the doubt, due to my lack of experience.  

the brand whoring is a big problem, imo.
post #49 of 67

Don't know guys, don't know...

Every single pair I bought after I start reading SF are the way better than any shoes I had before (and I still got'em, in the boxes), Like Lloyd, Boss, Bugatti, some other brands, and these were more than 100 bucks retail.

Buying at Hoertz in Germany I can compare high end brands to Loake, Lottusse and Boss, and I can see the difference not only in style but also in quality. Even my wife can see the difference, for example she said that AE has significantly less quality than C&J staying on the nearby shelves.

I agree that I pay alot for brand, but what to do? I prefer the style, the feeling and the finish of the expensive shoes more.

I can't justify paying less for the "same" cheapie shoes pretends to be the same quality as high end. Sorry, but I see the difference.

 

PS I'm not addicted to the particular brand, I prefer to have many (still on the way).

post #50 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdolina View Post

Don't know guys, don't know... Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Every single pair I bought after I start reading SF are the way better than any shoes I had before (and I still got'em, in the boxes), Like Lloyd, Boss, Bugatti, some other brands, and these were more than 100 bucks retail.
Buying at Hoertz in Germany I can compare high end brands to Loake, Lottusse and Boss, and I can see the difference not only in style but also in quality. Even my wife can see the difference, for example she said that AE has significantly less quality than C&J staying on the nearby shelves.
I agree that I pay alot for brand, but what to do? I prefer the style, the feeling and the finish of the expensive shoes more.
I can't justify paying less for the "same" cheapie shoes pretends to be the same quality as high end. Sorry, but I see the difference.

PS I'm not addicted to the particular brand, I prefer to have many (still on the way).

understand the game first and then talk again... it's görtz not hoertz, btw.
post #51 of 67

Hello dear

The shoe that is shown the picture is a purely a consrtuction we call as goodyear welted shoes  , it does not make sense wehterh  it is  done by hand or by machine 

there may be chances that hand welding may or may not be accutate but  other machine may be accurate

matter is not concerned with  quality but as  far as contruction is  matter then goodyear welted is a construction which is done by hand or by machine 

just like we do lasting of upper whether it is done by hand or by machine it does not matter .

post #52 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rinku Arora View Post

Hello dear
The shoe that is shown the picture is a purely a consrtuction we call as goodyear welted shoes  , it does not make sense wehterh  it is  done by hand or by machine 
there may be chances that hand welding may or may not be accutate but  other machine may be accurate
matter is not concerned with  quality but as  far as contruction is  matter then goodyear welted is a construction which is done by hand or by machine 
just like we do lasting of upper whether it is done by hand or by machine it does not matter .

So sorry...all of that is completely bogus. Either you don't know anything about inseaming and lasting or you need a much higher standard.

It does matter....especially when it comes to inseaming...but of course, only for those who care about quality, longevity, and reliability.
post #53 of 67

tell me what  is the goodyear welted  for you means :   is goodyearwleted is the only  done by machine 

machime came later it was done by hand since times it is now done by hand and machine 

i have my own factory where we do welting in shoes by hand  and we are planning to  take machine .

post #54 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rinku Arora View Post

tell me what  is the goodyear welted  for you means :   is goodyearwleted is the only  done by machine 
machime came later it was done by hand since times it is now done by hand and machine 
i have my own factory where we do welting in shoes by hand  and we are planning to  take machine .

Yes, "Goodyear welting" is a machine process. It was named after Charles Goodyear who invented the machine to take the place of traditional hand welting and make the job faster, less labour intensive, less expensive, and reduce the need for skilled (and highly paid) workers.

Compared to traditional hand welting the results are always inferior...partially because Goodyear machines use a chain stitch whereas hand welting is a "shoemaker's stitch." Partially because, in modern usage, the inseam is sewn to a canvas rib known as "gemming" which is glued to the insole. And partially because, at bottom, Goodyear construction relies on the glue more than the stitching.

Other factors which affect overall quality are that both thickness and the quality of the insole. Many modern Goodyear shoes don't use leather insoles at all anymore but substitute paperboard or, depending on availability, perhaps "leatherboard." If you look carefully at every company who ever started as a hand welted workshop and went to a Goodyear or machine-centric operation such expediencies and compromises appear to be almost inevitable. The philosophy...indeed, the inescapable business logic...seems to always come down to: "Why pay more for good quality leather when glue and canvas and a brainless construction methods make leather too expensive and too labour intensive?"

Prior to the late 1800's...when the Goodyear machine was invented...welting a shoe was just "inseaming". It wasn't called Goodyear, it wasn't called anything except "inseaming." Today some people wrongly conflate Goodyear welting with hand welting--I've even seen the term "Hand Sewn Goodyear" bandied about. That's a meaningless concept and technically a wrong and wrong-headed one. Some folks do inseam using gemming and glue but by definition Goodyear uses a Goodyear stitching machine.

And, BTW, it's not just what "Goodyear welted" means to me (although I've been making Traditionally inseamed, bespoke shoes and boots, full time, for over 40 years)--what I've described above is what Goodyear Welted means to the Trade.

Anything else is gibberish.

--
Edited by DWFII - 10/10/13 at 7:09am
post #55 of 67

I read that the original process patented by C Jr Goodyear (in 1869 I think) included a machine incorporating the mechanism for stitching the insole, via a rib cut into the insole, to the uppers and welt. The process also included another machine to stitch the welt to the outer sole. I am not clear whether Goodyear patented one or several machines, or whether it was the process in its entirety that was patented (involving several machines). I am being lazy, of course - I should read the original patent. But 19C patents are not easy to read. I understand that the leather insole rib has now been replaced by most shoemakers using this welting style by gemming. However, the "Société Romanaise de Chaussure" in France patented a process (in the 30s perhaps) whereby the canvas/tissue strip used in gemming was not only glued to the insole but stitched also. This method was used by Clergerie (in Romans) when making GYW mens' shoes. I suppose this would go some way to counteracting the inherent weakness of gemming using gluing. Any opinions regarding the patent issue or the stitched/glued gemming combination ?

post #56 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelonius View Post

I read that the original process patented by C Jr Goodyear (in 1869 I think) included a machine incorporating the mechanism for stitching the insole, via a rib cut into the insole, to the uppers and welt. The process also included another machine to stitch the welt to the outer sole. I am not clear whether Goodyear patented one or several machines, or whether it was the process in its entirety that was patented (involving several machines). I am being lazy, of course - I should read the original patent. But 19C patents are not easy to read. I understand that the leather insole rib has now been replaced by most shoemakers using this welting style by gemming. However, the "Société Romanaise de Chaussure" in France patented a process (in the 30s perhaps) whereby the canvas/tissue strip used in gemming was not only glued to the insole but stitched also. This method was used by Clergerie (in Romans) when making GYW mens' shoes. I suppose this would go some way to counteracting the inherent weakness of gemming using gluing. Any opinions regarding the patent issue or the stitched/glued gemming combination ?

You're correct about that original machine but it soon became apparent that turning the channel vertically to make a rib, created so much stress that the rib soon broke out...leaving a hole or major depression in the insole but also no way to repair or refurb.

Manufacturers then tried reinforcing the leather rib with canvas and inconsistent results eventually led to abandoning the leather rib idea altogether as well as the added bonus of not having to use the thicker and/or more expensive leather required to cut the rib and then eventually to no even using leather at all.

As far as stitching the gemming to the insole the issue there is that with a substantial insole--one capable of making a footbed--only machines making a large stitch can sew through that kind of thickness. This not only creates a line of stitching that can be felt, it perforates the insole. Lighter "insole" materials may be stitched with thinner less obtrusive thread but then the question arises as to whether the insole has enough substance to function as an insole...think "backbone of the shoe"...or is just a glorified sock liner.

And either way companies feel compelled to cover the stitching with a real sockliner.

All of which is more time, more components, more materials, & more expense.

There is...although I can't provide much more detail than that I've seen the results...a machine out there that can sew welt which, at first glance, looks like handwelted. An angled channel is cut in good, to really good, leather, from the interior of the insole out toward the feather edge. Instead of pulling that channel upward to make a rib, as with the original GY, a machine that will sew virtually horizontally stitches the inseam and welt all at once leaving the inseam buried under the channel.

From what I've heard it is crazy hard to master ...almost as difficult as good hand welting...and the machine itself has a limited stroke making some stitches almost disastrously tight and some too long. And it gets out of adjustment easily.

All of which, again, makes the process more expensive in manpower and materials.
post #57 of 67

Thanks DWFII. Apparently both the French makers JM Weston and Paraboot use the hand sewn, no gemming, technique for their Norwegian and Goodyear constructions. For Weston a video can be seen here: http://www.jmweston.com/les-collections/chaussures/lignes/richelieu-flore-bout-golf-perfore-cousu-goodyear-rabattu.html.

post #58 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelonius View Post
 

Thanks DWFII. Apparently both the French makers JM Weston and Paraboot use the hand sewn, no gemming, technique for their Norwegian and Goodyear constructions. For Weston a video can be seen here: http://www.jmweston.com/les-collections/chaussures/lignes/richelieu-flore-bout-golf-perfore-cousu-goodyear-rabattu.html.

 

JM Weston is using the previous iteration of GY welting; i.e., no hand carved holdfast but a turn up holdfast from leather insole thats reinforced by gemming.

post #59 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post

JM Weston is using the previous iteration of GY welting; i.e., no hand carved holdfast but a turn up holdfast from leather insole thats reinforced by gemming.

That's right. At least that's what is shown in the video. It's not the machine that I was talking about.

Two other small points...niggling points but important to people like me. The video claims that the Weston tannery is the only tannery left in the world tanning with entirely natural barks. That's a suspect claim, in my opinion. AFAIK, Baker leather in England and Baker uses all oak bark, and has been in business for longer in one spot than any other tannery in the world. From what the video states, Weston is using barks from South America.

And on the positive side...depending on your POV...Weston is using slab cork---that's not going to migrate out from under the foot like the more common granulated cork.
post #60 of 67

OK, the holdfast is not hand-carved, but is cut by the machine. But it's the holdfast that is sewn through (yes, backed by a canvas strip), by hand, and acts as the main rib holding the insole to the other parts. Even though it is reinforced by a canvas strip, I don't think it's correct to call this gemming in this case. The video states that the insole leathers are 5 mm at the end of preparation before being cut. For shoes costing around 650-700 euros their techniques seem to be laudable, no ?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › can you tell by this pic if it is goodyear or hand welted?