or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Church's v C&J and misc. style questions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Church's v C&J and misc. style questions - Page 2

post #16 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quantimil View Post

I have the Armfield oxfords from Alfred Sargent, and they're fantastic. C&J Connaught may be a tad more conservative in terms of last design, so that might be a plus, depending on what you're after.

The Connaught from Crocketts is indeed their classic last and probably longest and best selling model in all Chestnut & Black calf.

For me the toe too rounded - the 348 the best ever.

post #17 of 35
I think Meermin deserves a mention.
My choice would be one of the following two styles, or a pair MTO on the Olfe last, which is slightly sleeker than Hiro.

http://www.meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=2033
http://www.meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=4042
post #18 of 35
I find my Church's to be fair in quality. I'm a fan of AS and if you do as much walking as I do in NYC, you'll be surprised as to how durable their soles are; the uppers are closer to C&J HG standard (than BG). I find C&J good shoes but their soles do not wear as well and I admit I view their BG leather to be average. Vass is an excellent value if you find the right last/fit for you.

Depending on what type of law you practice, cap toes might be favored over plain toes. Most of my shoes are EG because their lasts fit me best but AS would probably be my mid-range go to brand.

Alden also makes some decent shoes if you want to stay USA.
post #19 of 35

^ Oak tanned soles make all the difference. The AS Exclusive, C&J Handgrade and Edward Green soles that I've walked on have been damn near indestructible compared to, say, non-oak tanned Loake or Trickers soles. C&J Benchgrade doesn't have them.

post #20 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis XIV View Post

I think Meermin deserves a mention.
My choice would be one of the following two styles, or a pair MTO on the Olfe last, which is slightly sleeker than Hiro.

http://www.meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=2033
http://www.meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=4042

What's the consensus on Meermin's quality?  I walk extensively around New York and my shoes need some stamina.  Thanks.

post #21 of 35
They are solid.
The greatest upcharge you pay in more expensive shoes is for design and handwork, which does not make a shoe more durable.
post #22 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis XIV View Post

They are solid.
The greatest upcharge you pay in more expensive shoes is for design and handwork, which does not make a shoe more durable.

That's debatable isn't it? Some will argue that a hand-welted shoe is more durable since it isn't prone to gemming failure. Others will argue that gemming failure never happens anyway, so a hand-welted shoe isn't really more durable.

post #23 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis XIV View Post

They are solid.
The greatest upcharge you pay in more expensive shoes is for design and handwork, which does not make a shoe more durable.

 

Actually, the greatest up charge is for brand name.

 

Material and handwork does make a shoe more durable, i.e., hand lasting, hand welting, higher grade leather upper, higher grade leather sole, less canvass more leather, less plastic more leather, wider gemming, etc.

 

Durability is hard to measure as we have plenty of collectors of 50+ shoes taunting their shoes lasts 30+ years, which is mathematically equivalent to owning 10+ shoes for 6+ years...

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Water4thePool View Post

What's the consensus on Meermin's quality?  I walk extensively around New York and my shoes need some stamina.  Thanks.

 

Quality is very good in my experience but the manufacturing variance is high. 

post #24 of 35

Anyone looking for a workhorse black shoe- captoe, etc- would be wrong to neglect Cheaney and Loake 1880. They are cheaper than C&J benchgrade and last longer.

 

I would never buy a C&J benchgrade as a workhorse shoe as they are relatively fragile shoes. In the case of a black shoe a CJ BG is an even worse idea, as one of CJs best selling points are uppers that start out with nice colours and are good enough to gain beautiful 'patinas' as they age i.e as you polish them with some nice cremes
 

post #25 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinpeaks View Post

Anyone looking for a workhorse black shoe- captoe, etc- would be wrong to neglect Cheaney and Loake 1880. They are cheaper than C&J benchgrade and last longer.

I would never buy a C&J benchgrade as a workhorse shoe as they are relatively fragile shoes. In the case of a black shoe a CJ BG is an even worse idea, as one of CJs best selling points are uppers that start out with nice colours and are good enough to gain beautiful 'patinas' as they age i.e as you polish them with some nice cremes

 

I disagree with all of this - especially that Loake 1880 will outlast C&J benchgrade. Where you have got this from I have no idea. My black C&J Connaughts were my first pair of 'good' shoes - I got them when I turned eighteen three years ago and have worn them regularly since - and they still look almost new. Cheaney shoes are fine, but not significantly cheaper than C&J any more. I find them a bit soulless, but that's another conversation.

And I appreciate black leather that is good enough to take a deep shine just as much as patinated brown. More, actually.
post #26 of 35
For the most part I think the differences between most of the mentioned brands are not too much. C&J BG vs. Chuch's, it would come down to preference; C&J BG vs. EG, then things can be pointed out but the price discrepancy makes that fairly obvious.

Find a style you like, decide on a last that is appealing, determine the proper size, and wear them for a couple of years. Should you find the shoes don't work out, you can always buy another brand/style down the line. If you like it, then you have a few resoles to revive the original pair.
post #27 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pembers View Post


I disagree with all of this - especially that Loake 1880 will outlast C&J benchgrade. Where you have got this from I have no idea. My black C&J Connaughts were my first pair of 'good' shoes - I got them when I turned eighteen three years ago and have worn them regularly since - and they still look almost new. Cheaney shoes are fine, but not significantly cheaper than C&J any more. I find them a bit soulless, but that's another conversation.

And I appreciate black leather that is good enough to take a deep shine just as much as patinated brown. More, actually.

I dont think it is possible to be a true shoe aficionado and like black shoes.

post #28 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinpeaks View Post

I dont think it is possible to be a true shoe aficionado and like black shoes.

In England it is still improper to wear non-black shoes in the city, or to work, or to any event that begins after 6 pm, or to any formal event in the daytime. That used to be the case in America too, I believe until the 1960s, or later. Take that into consideration before you make such a narrow-minded statement. As an Englishman, I believe a pair of perfectly-shined, black oxfords to be one of the most important items in an elegant man's wardrobe.
post #29 of 35

I live in England but thank god I was not raised here so I don't have hangups about non-black shoes. In any case, neither do many of my English friends. I have worn brown and burgundy shoes all my professional life here to no apparent detriment.

 

The majority of people who think black shoes are 'the' 'professional' shoes are either of a certain age, of a restricted profession or not knowledgeable about international business wear.

post #30 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinpeaks View Post

I dont think it is possible to be a true shoe aficionado and NOT like black shoes.

 

FIFY.

 

iGents can enjoy brownies somewhere else

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Church's v C&J and misc. style questions