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 47

post #691 of 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by ridethecliche View Post

Upon thinking about this some more, I'm not sure.

2 complaints:

1) The forward strap doesn't look like it can be buckled on the tightest hole. Additionally there's no elastic on the front strap. Bizarre as the one closer to the ankle has one.
2) The buckle's are very very very shiny. The copper-ish color is a good contrast to the lighter brown suede, but it really makes the shoes stand out.

1 is slightly annoying because I feel like I'd slide forward in the shoes a little bit, which is easily avoidable on my other monkstraps just by tightening the anterior strap. 2 brings a lot of attention to the shoes. I'm not sure how I could dull this at all. Any suggestions?


The suede is super nice and I quite like their shape. I'd say they're a pretty great deal, especially since I got them for 175 (potentially 155 if I rebuy after returning).

1) first buckle with leather and second buckle with elastic it's the standard (some makers don't use elastic at all, as JL William)
2) you can take a soft brass brush, cover the leather and patiently brush the buckles, I did this with metal buttons and it works perfectly.

The only think I dislike of my Cannons it's the heel heigth, I think the heel it's too low and unbalanced, the shoe looks like it's sitting on the heel.
btw It's an easy fix.
post #692 of 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by wurger View Post

My 2 pairs of Alfred Sargent monk's front buckle doesn't have elastic piece either, but those are the only 2 monks I have. Monks and loafers are the hardest to get the right fit, as they don't have laces.

 

Yeah, I have really low arches and a low instep. I gave up on wearing loafers that aren't tight fitting with elastic. They just don't work for my feet, which is unfortunate because I LOVE penny loafers :/

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexSF View Post


1) first buckle with leather and second buckle with elastic it's the standard (some makers don't use elastic at all, as JL William)
2) you can take a soft brass brush, cover the leather and patiently brush the buckles, I did this with metal buttons and it works perfectly.

The only think I dislike of my Cannons it's the heel heigth, I think the heel it's too low and unbalanced, the shoe looks like it's sitting on the heel.
btw It's an easy fix.

 

Hm. I didn't walk around that much in them since I didn't want to marr the sole so I guess it's something I'd notice in time, or maybe even not at all. They didn't feel that bad to me!

post #693 of 1242
^ It's just an aesthetic thing, the shoes are pretty confortable as they are.
post #694 of 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by techaview View Post

My short review on loake strand...

The strand after 3 wears, each wear about 8 hours on the average has been comfortable so far. Leather feel softer vs meermin from the moment I wear them. No breaking in needed. Feel the same after long hour of wearing. No sore heel or toe area tightness. Strand being an oxford shoe has been easy to wear, compared to my meermin black captoe. It could be due to the width of the shoe (strand F vs Meermin E). Those who has been wearing close lacing shoe should know what i means.

The loake leather sole felt thinner compared to meermin leather sole. When i am wearing strand, i feel more contact against the ground. For eg, when i step on a small stone or uneven ground I will tend to feel it more compared to meermin. Quality of leather is good as well with even creasing on the captoe area. Only con I felt is the last. If only they have strand in last like Meermin olfe/hiro not too squarish in the toe cap area, it should be a killer model IMO. Overall it is still a fine pair of shoe, with its versatile colour matching, I actually worn it for 3 different occasions. I have worn it with dress pant(work), chino(casual friday work) and raw denim(weekend casual) so far.
 

Great looking Strands and thanks for the short review. Burgundy sure is versatile! Do you wear the same size in both Loake and Meermin (Hiro or Olfe last)? The Olfe appears to be most similar to the Capital in terms of ball/toe width?

post #695 of 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yowzer View Post
 

Great looking Strands and thanks for the short review. Burgundy sure is versatile! Do you wear the same size in both Loake and Meermin (Hiro or Olfe last)? The Olfe appears to be most similar to the Capital in terms of ball/toe width?

i wear hiro and olfe uk8 (both width E) and loake 7.5 (Widith F)

post #696 of 1242
Took a chance on Loake cannon brown suede. Paid $188 USD with disc code.
post #697 of 1242

That is a good price! Do report on your experience as you wear it.

post #698 of 1242

I have to admit that I understand almost nothing about sizing. My Loake's Chesters are 9s and very comfortable. My Loake's Strands are 8.5 and very comfortable after two outings. I have two other size 9 pairs of shoes and 4 others size 10.  All are in UK sizing. I have to wear arch supports in all but one pair. All of them are comfortable. 

 

Is it a case of different lasts making a difference to shoe sizes? Or is it down to idiosyncratic sizing by different companies?  I am particularly surprised by the difference in fitting of the Loake's shoes. With the Chesters, I had to have the local cobbler stretch the toe area to make it fit comfortable. The Strands are half a size down and do not need any adjustments at all. The Strands are also narrower shoes when compared with the Chesters. How does all this work?

post #699 of 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
 

I have to admit that I understand almost nothing about sizing. My Loake's Chesters are 9s and very comfortable. My Loake's Strands are 8.5 and very comfortable after two outings. I have two other size 9 pairs of shoes and 4 others size 10.  All are in UK sizing. I have to wear arch supports in all but one pair. All of them are comfortable. 

 

Is it a case of different lasts making a difference to shoe sizes? Or is it down to idiosyncratic sizing by different companies?  I am particularly surprised by the difference in fitting of the Loake's shoes. With the Chesters, I had to have the local cobbler stretch the toe area to make it fit comfortable. The Strands are half a size down and do not need any adjustments at all. The Strands are also narrower shoes when compared with the Chesters. How does all this work?

 

I think that's pretty bizarre, to be honest. Did you try the 9's before you bought the size 10's?

Although, there is last variation, usually it involves moving up or down a half size to maybe 1 size in extreme circumstances, but usually a half size change and/or a change in width are okay.

 

However, if you need arch support etc, then getting those to fit in properly often changes the sizing even more.

 

Lasts could be part of the issue as could width. It's possible that you are sizing up/down to accommodate different widths in the last, although that is sub optimal. If you're wearing multiple sizes in the same last, then that would make me question QC for the manufacturer.

post #700 of 1242

Thank you for your prompt response, Ride. Yes, I have always tried on different sizes before settling on the one that fits. From shoe adverts, I seem to recall messages such as 'runs true to size' and so on. My guess is that often the size difference is down to the manufacturers interpretation of what constitutes a particular size. 

 

I do find the Loake issue odd, though. One pair 8.5 and the other 9. The 9s are heavier and wider and the 8.5 narrower and lighter. Both fit very well. 

post #701 of 1242
I am a 8 EEE in most AE (5 last) - I think I should be sweet in cannon 7.5uk.
post #702 of 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munky View Post
 

Thank you for your prompt response, Ride. Yes, I have always tried on different sizes before settling on the one that fits. From shoe adverts, I seem to recall messages such as 'runs true to size' and so on. My guess is that often the size difference is down to the manufacturers interpretation of what constitutes a particular size. 

 

I do find the Loake issue odd, though. One pair 8.5 and the other 9. The 9s are heavier and wider and the 8.5 narrower and lighter. Both fit very well. 

 

8.5 and 9 are not a big deal at all. I thought you said you were 8.5 in some loakes, 9 in others, and 10 in some other still. THAT would be bizarre.

post #703 of 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by md2010 View Post

Took a chance on Loake cannon brown suede. Paid $188 USD with disc code.

Which online store to buy

post #704 of 1242

No, Ride, the size 10s are not made by Loakes. The size 10s are exactly the same shoes - by a different maker - but in four different colours. . Thanks for your thoughts on sizing, though. Munky.

post #705 of 1242

This may have been covered before, but Loakes make both a cream and a wax to match all of their shoe finishes. The obvious advantage of this is that they offer an exact match. They are available on Amazon. For those, like me, who are allergic to turpentine, the cream seems to be free of it. 

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