or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › John Lobb Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

John Lobb Appreciation Thread - Page 9

post #121 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post


What is it that makes it ridiculous? That you don't want to hear it? That it's not a matter of opinion or speculation but of hard concrete facts? If you talk about shoes in any context but superficialities, somewhere along the line you have to talk about how they are put together. Issues of substance in other words.

If you control this thread, let us all know so that we may tailor our remarks to your wishes.


Pretty simple. This thread is about Lobb appreciation. There are a jillion other threads discussing the merits of gemming, there is absolutely no reason to turn this thread into yet another quagmire about it and drown out all the Lobb stuff. Period.

post #122 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post


Okay. No gemming. But do you know your JL RTW shoes uses heat formed plastic for toe buff and heel counter? All while bespoke makers like JL Paris bespoke uses only leather toe buff and heel counter? Do you?


Yep, sure do.

post #123 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by gegarrenton View Post


Pretty simple. This thread is about Lobb appreciation. There are a jillion other threads discussing the merits of gemming, there is absolutely no reason to turn this thread into yet another quagmire about it and drown out all the Lobb stuff. Period.

You mean "pull your head out of the sand."

I repeat...for those who didn't catch it first time around...I didn't raise the issue, I just answered the questions that were posed.

Now if you can get everyone in this thread to talk about shines and lines, and the merits of boxes, there'd be no need to worry. Nothing of substance would crop up and you could go back to cooing over your shoes.

And BTW...with respect to Lobbs...I regard John Lobb, St. James St. as one of, if not the premium maker of men's dress shoes in the world. And John Hunter Lobb--the president of Lobbs on St James--has said "we have turned our backs to the machine."

I believe that includes Goodyear machines.

And, AFAIK, if you're not talking about Lobbs on St. James, you're talking about Hermes.
post #124 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post


You mean "pull your head out of the sand."

I repeat...for those who didn't catch it first time around...I didn't raise the issue, I just answered the questions that were posed.

Now if you can get everyone in this thread to talk about shines and lines, and the merits of boxes, there'd be no need to worry. Nothing of substance would crop up and you could go back to cooing over your shoes.

And BTW...with respect to Lobbs...I regard John Lobb, St. James St. as one of, if not the premium maker of men's dress shoes in the world. And John Hunter Lobb--the president of Lobbs on St James--has said "we have turned our backs to the machine."

I believe that includes Goodyear machines.

And, AFAIK, if you're not talking about Lobbs on St. James, you're talking about Hermes.


Gents,

 

Lets put all this conversation to bed - And start adding some of your great JL shoes to revive this thread. 

 

 

In summary:

 

Goodyear Welted - Machine

John Lobb RTW

EG

C&J's

Barkers

Church's

 

 

Welted - Hand Welted

Vass

Saint Crispin

post #125 of 1809

Now for some JL p0rn...Double Buckles means Double Trouble.

 

Chapel vs John Lobb Saint Ccrispin 2010 - Field report

 

Construction: Goodyear welted (machine) = C5 / SC5

 

Waist: Both have similar sleek curved bevel = C5 / SC5

 

Lining: I prefer the lining of the Chapel than the SC 2010, it's softer and feels like their Moroccan goat skin they used to have on the MTO  = C5 / SC4.5

 

Last: the Chapel on the 8000 last where as the SC 2010 on the 7000, my personal preference always been the 8000, so a little biased here already. Just like the BMW E62 - it looks amazing in every single viewpoint and angle. = C5 / SC4.5

 

Cost:  Chapel £980 and the SC2010 £1000+  = C5 / SC4.5

 

Leather and Cut: Both are wholecut buckles made from 1 piece of leather. The leather on the Chapel is softer and has the marble effect called the Museum calf. Both shoes is well trimmed and finished and you can see there a touch more hand labour involved in the inseam stitched of the SC2010 (see 3rd picture). C4.5 / SC5 

 

Overall rating: Chapel = 29.5 / 2010 SC = 28.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

post #126 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by gegarrenton View Post


Yep, sure do.

 

Great!  Than do you know whats the thickness/weight/irons of JL RTW insole?  And I can't seem to find those information.  And what's the difference between JL's PET and EG's PET?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JermynStreet View Post

DFW I understand what you are saying and I don't think we are in disagreement. From all of the sources that I have looked at, modern welting-goodyear or handseaming-was not invented until after Mr. Goodyear invented the goodyear welt. In other words, before goodyear, soles were simply sewn to the bottom of the upper. When the sole was gone, so was the shoe. I understand Goodyear welting to not really refer to quality of materials (whether it's sinew or nylon or whatever), but rather to the type of construction-an insole connected to an upper with welting, and which welting is connected to the outer soul. Traditional inseaming is superior to machined goodyear welts, but the now "traditional" inseaming method was not invented until after goodyear had the idea to connect the outer soul to the welt. Thus the traditional inseaming is still a goodyear style welt-just a superior form. I don't think we're disagreeing on the quality, I think we are disagreeing on the terminology. All of St. Crispins, Lobb and G&G have goodyear process welting that is done with the highest quality materials and by hand, but it is still goodyear.

 

You are flat out wrong regarding your history and terminology.  Even Michael Rollig calls Saint Crispins' welting process "hand sewn welted" instead of Goodyear welted.  If I were you, I would use the same terminology as the person that founded Saint Crispins and Zonkey Boots...

post #127 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilovelobbs View Post

Now for some JL p0rn...Double Buckles means Double Trouble.

Chapel vs John Lobb Saint Ccrispin 2010 - Field report

Construction: Goodyear welted (machine) = C5 / SC5

Waist: Both have similar sleek curved bevel = C5 / SC5

Lining: I prefer the lining of the Chapel than the SC 2010, it's softer and feels like their Moroccan goat skin they used to have on the MTO  = C5 / SC4.5

Last: the Chapel on the 8000 last where as the SC 2010 on the 7000, my personal preference always been the 8000, so a little biased here already. Just like the BMW E62 - it looks amazing in every single viewpoint and angle. = C5 / SC4.5

Cost:  Chapel £980 and the SC2010 £1000+  = C5 / SC4.5

Leather and Cut: Both are wholecut buckles made from 1 piece of leather. The leather on the Chapel is softer and has the marble effect called the Museum calf. Both shoes is well trimmed and finished and you can see there a touch more hand labour involved in the inseam stitched of the SC2010 (see 3rd picture). C4.5 / SC5 

Overall rating: Chapel = 29.5 / 2010 SC = 28.5





























Those are lovely pictures, but may I ask why the SC has shoetrees from Vass? Doesn't the shoe come with a special shoe tree for the model?
post #128 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilovelobbs View Post

Now for some JL p0rn...Double Buckles means Double Trouble.

 

Chapel vs John Lobb Saint Ccrispin 2010 - Field report

 

Construction: Goodyear welted (machine) = C5 / SC5

 

Waist: Both have similar sleek curved bevel = C5 / SC5

 

Lining: I prefer the lining of the Chapel than the SC 2010, it's softer and feels like their Moroccan goat skin they used to have on the MTO  = C5 / SC4.5

 

Last: the Chapel on the 8000 last where as the SC 2010 on the 7000, my personal preference always been the 8000, so a little biased here already. Just like the BMW E62 - it looks amazing in every single viewpoint and angle. = C5 / SC4.5

 

Cost:  Chapel £980 and the SC2010 £1000+  = C5 / SC4.5

 

Leather and Cut: Both are wholecut buckles made from 1 piece of leather. The leather on the Chapel is softer and has the marble effect called the Museum calf. Both shoes is well trimmed and finished and you can see there a touch more hand labour involved in the inseam stitched of the SC2010 (see 3rd picture). C4.5 / SC5

 

Overall rating: Chapel = 29.5 / 2010 SC = 28.5

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very interesting.  What do you think about the heel stack and the edge trim?  I much prefer Chapel's edge trim as the naked/burnished edges of SC2010 is too raw to my eyes.  But the biggest letdown of both monks is the heel stack; its the standardized JL heel stack thats a bit too sturdy looking for such refined shoes/lasts.

post #129 of 1809

JL Norwegian camel split toes.  Norway, Chambord, Barros.

 

Processed By eBay with ImageMagick, R1.1.1.||B2||T0JKX0lEPTVjYTFhYjFlYTI0NzI0MjgwNTA2YzliODJjY2M1OTA1MDhkZmI5MjE0Y2NhfHxTRUxMRVJfTkFNRT1raGNsb3Zlcnx8T1JJR0lOQUxfRUJBWV9RVUFMSVRZX1NDT1JFPTR8fENSRUFUSU9OX0RBVEU9My8yMS8xMyA5OjE5IFBN

 

 

post #130 of 1809
Good way to get us back to photos of good looking shoes.
post #131 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by chogall View Post

 

Very interesting.  What do you think about the heel stack and the edge trim?  I much prefer Chapel's edge trim as the naked/burnished edges of SC2010 is too raw to my eyes.  But the biggest letdown of both monks is the heel stack; its the standardized JL heel stack thats a bit too sturdy looking for such refined shoes/lasts.


True - the SC2010 is too naked without the stitches, Chapel is well finished with.  The SC2010 actually has no lining so the leather thicker to compensate,

and to me feels unrefined in many ways.

 

The vass trees were used - because I left the original Red JL Trees in the office.

post #132 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post

And John Hunter Lobb--the president of Lobbs on St James--has said "we have turned our backs to the machine."

I believe that includes Goodyear machines.

It's a well known fact, that John Lobb (London) does get a not inconsiderable royalty for every pair of Goodyear-welted ready-to-wear shoes produced by Hermes under the 'John Lobb' name in Northampton . I have heard sums mentioned, but, of course, I'm not privy to the terms of the 1976 contract, so I have no idea whether or not these figures are correct.

Considering that JL&Co (the official name of the Northampton factory), produces somewhere in excess of 800 pairs per week (40,000 a year), that royalty will amount to 'a nice little earner' for the London company, keeping the wolf at bay.

Now, would the London company want to turn their backs to the loot coming from the machines?
post #133 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWFII View Post


I don't know what your sources are but it's simply not true. Look this over good:



(click to enlarge if you cannot read the text)

1500 AD is the rough date for inseaming. At that time welt was sewn to the upper, and the insole simultaneously. It is still done that way today.

Charles Goodyear Jr. doesn't come along until 369 years later. And, IIRC, Goodyear welting, as we know it today, doesn't really get rolling until after WWI. There is nothing traditional about Goodyear welting techniques; Goodyear has its origins with hand welted inseams, not vice-versa. That's fact.

In terms of technique and quality, Goodyear does not sew the welt and the upper to the insole but rather to a strip of linen that is glued to the insole.

If shoes were compared to woodworking, the difference would very literally be the difference between a dovetailed join and a simple white glue join (perhaps with brads).
Completely bogus...and, no disrespect intended...ignorant as well. More than that, it's really an outrageous statement to make. Goodyear is pretending to be hand welted. As a technique, it...and those who adopt and sell their product without drawing a clear distinction....are trying to deliberately deceive the uneducated customer into believing that Goodyear is as good as a hand sewn inseam.
Sorry bogus again. One of the makers you mentioned does, AFAIK, hand welt their inseams, but it is not now and never was referred to as "Goodyear."

The other two may offer premium MTM lines where some, occasional, hand inseaming is done. But the rest of their shoes are goodyear welted, by machine to glued gemming.They are not now and never were done by hand.

--

 

DFW-I stand corrected. Your explanation was very helpful and I understand now. I also want to give a hat tip to Justin from http://www.theshoesnobblog.com/ for helping clear up this issue for me, as well. PM me and I can send you the Saphir, or will gladly make a donation to a charity in your name for $21.95. 

 

-JermynStreet

post #134 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengal-stripe View Post


Now, would the London company want to turn their backs to the loot coming from the machines?

I don't know and I don't know what that has to do with it, either.

There is a tendency among people who don't really understand what shoemaking is all about...not to mention "best practices", "quality" and/or substance vs. superficiality...to confuse issues and completely miss or conflate what is important and what is irrelevant.

I suspect this is one of those instances.

On edit...No one of us has any right to judge whoever sold the Lobb name to Hermes. Some might make the point that it has, if only ever so slightly, tarnished that name. But I would point out that, even if that is so, they did not compromise the quality of their shoes. Maybe it was just a way to keep the Traditions and the company afloat in hard times. If so, it says something significant about them and about their integrity, if nothing else.

What Hermes does is really neither here nor there... nor does it accrue to John Lobb St. James.

in that context, it's worth considering that if John Lobb, St. James had an empty room upstairs and leased it out to a chef, it too would bring in a tidy sum. But I doubt anyone would consider Lobbs responsible for the food.
--
Edited by DWFII - 3/24/13 at 9:13pm
post #135 of 1809
Quote:
Originally Posted by JermynStreet View Post

DFW-I stand corrected. Your explanation was very helpful and I understand now. I also want to give a hat tip to Justin from http://www.theshoesnobblog.com/ for helping clear up this issue for me, as well. PM me and I can send you the Saphir, or will gladly make a donation to a charity in your name for $21.95. 

-JermynStreet

No worries!

My objective is simply to help people understand a Trade that I love and revere and wish to see respected and preserved...maybe open a few eyes, make people think beyond what appears obvious. It's never been to make you or anyone else look small.

I salute you for at least listening and learning, some people never can.





Well, my job here is done...crackup[1].gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › John Lobb Appreciation Thread