or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › LOAKE APPRECIATION & SHOE P0RN THREAD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LOAKE APPRECIATION & SHOE P0RN THREAD - Page 110

post #1636 of 2465

The Strands are great shoes - especially in the Burgundy! They are made on the Capital last. If you like the shape and the fit, you might want to look at the Buckinghams, too. 

post #1637 of 2465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
 

The Strands are great shoes - especially in the Burgundy! They are made on the Capital last. If you like the shape and the fit, you might want to look at the Buckinghams, too. 

 

The Buckinghams look great too for sure. I wear jeans more often then not though, so I was thinking about the Chester for a wingtip.

post #1638 of 2465

The Chester's are a great buy too. As you will know, they are quite heavy and clunky but very comfortable when they are worn in.  They go with most things, except, perhaps, formal suits. I have Buckingham's and Chester's. The former are a bit like the latter but the Buck's are single soled and much narrower.  I'm happy wearing Buckingham's with jeans. 

post #1639 of 2465

The Langdales are a bit of an experiment for me into brouged bals with jeans. If I feel i can pull it off, the brown Buck's will prob go to the top of the list!

post #1640 of 2465

Just an odd observation. I have a pair of Strands and two pairs of Buckinghams. Both are made on the same last. The Strands fit much better than the Buckinghams. What is that all about, then? I wondered if it might be about the different broguing on the two models. 

post #1641 of 2465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
 

Just an odd observation. I have a pair of Strands and two pairs of Buckinghams. Both are made on the same last. The Strands fit much better than the Buckinghams. What is that all about, then? I wondered if it might be about the different broguing on the two models. 

I wouldnt of thought so, the seams can strengthen the area but shouldnt actually make it tighter, just harder to break in at that point. as theyre made by hand there will always be some variance, the uppers can sometimes not be as tight as others when on the last. Id be more inclined to say thats the reason and a coincidence with yours, Im only speculating though.

post #1642 of 2465
How suit worthy do you guys think Loake Mitchums are (black leather)? I'm not a huge shoe guy, so what's the quality on them?
post #1643 of 2465

I don't know the answer to this, but I love the phrase 'suit worthy' !  :)

post #1644 of 2465

It was a quiet  night on the Loake thread. In the distance, a dog barked...

post #1645 of 2465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
 

It was a quiet  night on the Loake thread. In the distance, a shoe-loving menswear dog barked...

 

post #1646 of 2465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
 

The Chester's are a great buy too. As you will know, they are quite heavy and clunky but very comfortable when they are worn in.  They go with most things, except, perhaps, formal suits. I have Buckingham's and Chester's. The former are a bit like the latter but the Buck's are single soled and much narrower.  I'm happy wearing Buckingham's with jeans. 

 

Do you have pics of the Buckinghams with jeans?

 

Also, any chance for a comparison shot or 2 of the Chester vs Buck?

 

Thanks Munky!

post #1647 of 2465

Sorry, Simply, but I don't have photos of the Bucks or the Strands and have no means of taking any. I must be the last dinosaur not to have either a camera or a mobile phone. All I can say is that I wear both with blue and with  tan chinos and blue jeans (but, see proviso, below). I prefer the tan Bucks to the brown ones but the Strands are a wonderful colour - made even better,in my opinion - by the occasional polish with dark red cream. I have tan Chester's, which will go with anything. They are really solid shoes and need a bit of breaking in, but soon become very comfortable. The B's and the S's are single soled shoes while the Chester's are double soled and with a storm welt. 

 

Just by way of elaboration, the Strands (in burgundy) go best with dark blue chinos and jeans. They don't look so good with tan pants. The tan Bucks go with both tan and navy chinos and with blue jeans. The mid brown Bucks go with, er, most things but don't look very exciting, to my eye. But I really prefer tan shoes. My favourite shoes of all are a pair of red and a pair of green Tricker's.  Also a pair of mahogany Sander's Jude's. Both Tricker's and Sander's look similar but on closer inspection, the difference between the two becomes much more evident.  The Tricker's are much more finely made. The Tricker's are nearly £400 and I got the Sander's in a sale for £130 (reduced from c £240). You have to like clunky shoes to like any of these. 

 

I love your dog. 

post #1648 of 2465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post

I love your dog. 

 

Not MY dog, but the menswear dog :) The most stylish K9 on the web!

 

http://mensweardog.tumblr.com/

post #1649 of 2465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
 

Sorry, Simply, but I don't have photos of the Bucks or the Strands and have no means of taking any. I must be the last dinosaur not to have either a camera or a mobile phone. All I can say is that I wear both with blue and with  tan chinos and blue jeans (but, see proviso, below). I prefer the tan Bucks to the brown ones but the Strands are a wonderful colour - made even better,in my opinion - by the occasional polish with dark red cream. I have tan Chester's, which will go with anything. They are really solid shoes and need a bit of breaking in, but soon become very comfortable. The B's and the S's are single soled shoes while the Chester's are double soled and with a storm welt. 

 

Just by way of elaboration, the Strands (in burgundy) go best with dark blue chinos and jeans. They don't look so good with tan pants. The tan Bucks go with both tan and navy chinos and with blue jeans. The mid brown Bucks go with, er, most things but don't look very exciting, to my eye. But I really prefer tan shoes. My favourite shoes of all are a pair of red and a pair of green Tricker's.  Also a pair of mahogany Sander's Jude's. Both Tricker's and Sander's look similar but on closer inspection, the difference between the two becomes much more evident.  The Tricker's are much more finely made. The Tricker's are nearly £400 and I got the Sander's in a sale for £130 (reduced from c £240). You have to like clunky shoes to like any of these. 

 

 

No worries! I need to add a pair of brown wingtips since I have AE Daltons in wlanut and the Loake Langdale in Tan already. Will probably happen in August or Sept :)

post #1650 of 2465

Hi all

 

I'm looking to purchase either the Loake Burford (dainite sole) OR Fisher MTO (commando sole).

 

Those that own Allen Edmonds, how does the width measure up on the Loakes? Reason is after owning both the AE Dalton and Strands for a month, I couldn't get a perfect fit on my feet and the constant discomfort wasn't worth keeping the shoes. It was more in the toe area that feel squished after 2 hrs of wearing. If I went one size up, it'd be too loose.

 

I've read somewhere where English boots run a little wide so hoping the Loake Burford would be a perfect replacement for my AE walnut Dalton (loved the boot/color but couldn't stand the fitting issue).

 

Also, I typically wear size 9 for all my dress shoes so per Pedigree guide, I should order a UK size 8?

 

Thanks in advance.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › LOAKE APPRECIATION & SHOE P0RN THREAD