My Adventures in (DIY) Shoemaking -- Part 22

I have been carrying on a long-time effort to learn shoemaking; alas, the last year and a half have been a fallow period, as other things have occupied much of my time.

In any event, here is my latest pair of shoes, which are a plain toe oxford, with a square waist, a chisel toe, and a hand sewn outsole. These are on the same last as most of my previously posted shoes, though not the same last as my most recent pair -- shown in this thread: http://www.styleforum.net/t/307851/my-adventures-in-diy-shoemaking-part-21.

The color of this pair is a mahogany brown.

Wonderful! They look really well lasted. Could use another coat of edge dressing though, I think.

impressive!

Impressive! I'm glad to see you back to work. Well done!!

Shoefan, long time no see!

Good work! you are really die hard fan of shoes!

One question, why the right shoe facing are sew together, but not laced? how to cover those holes afterwards?



Fishball said:

Shoefan, long time no see!

Good work! you are really die hard fan of shoes!

One question, why the right shoe facing are sew together, but not laced? how to cover those holes afterwards?

Click to expand...

This is the way the London closers do the facings. The holes are small (just a needle hole, and would basically disappear after removal of the thread. Also, the holes will be underneath/behind the shoelaces when the shoes are laced up.

I've been told the reason for this approach is that if you last shoes with the laces in, it can stretch/distort the lacing holes, since so much tension is created during the lasting process.



shoefan said:

This is the way the London closers do the facings........I've been told the reason for this approach is that if you last shoes with the laces in, it can stretch/distort the lacing holes, since so much tension is created during the lasting process.

Click to expand...

I was given another explanation: by keeping the threats short and edge to edge closed very tightly there is less likelihood that the two quarters can shift against each other (like tectonic plates). If one quarter ends up somewhat higher than the other one, all the laces, although parallel if the eyelets were punched correctly, will run slightly up- or downhill and will no longer be at right angle to the shoe's centreline. The longer the bridging distance of the lacing is, the grater the potential problem that the quarters (tectonic plates) shift against each other.

That said, although most West-End shoemakers use that technique, not all of them do. It was not only yours truly who said to Tony G not to do it on a forthcoming pair of shoes, but as Tony said, quite a few Japanese customers had complained. I know, that Tony has now stopped using that method and all the closers working for G&G are instructed of the firm's preference.

The problem is, that some of the West-end closers can be rather ruthless. Here is a correspondence I had recently with a forum member who is a regular customer of one of the top West-End firms (name of the firm deleted):

On another pair the holes they used for drawing the uppers tight during lasting (*** does not use lace holes for this purpose) were so big and asymmetrical that it looked as if someone was being purposefully sloppy.

Click to expand...

I have always wondered, why not make the best of both worlds and fix the tight fitting method with it's additional holes on the underside of the upper. Then when the shoe is finished, snip the threat with a tiny pair of scissors and use tweezers to pull the thread-ends. But never have come around and actually asked for a pair of uppers to be finished that way. Shoefan, there is no patent on this idea, you can try it out and tell us if it works.

By the way, nice pair of shoes!

Looking good. Awesome shade of brown too!



bengal-stripe said:

I have always wondered, why not make the best of both worlds and fix the tight fitting method with it's additional holes on the underside of the upper. Then when the shoe is finished, snip the threat with a tiny pair of scissors and use tweezers to pull the thread-ends. But never have come around and actually asked for a pair of uppers to be finished that way. Shoefan, there is no patent on this idea, you can try it out and tell us if it works.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I can visualize what you're talking about or how it could be implemented. ?? Care to elaborate?

That said, I think the idea that lasting the shoes with the facings apart is...as you said...a invitation for problems. I try to last with the facings as close together as possible. If you use old inseaming threads that are waxed with a good pitch based handwax/coad, you can lace the shoes...as Shoefan has done on the left...with remnants of those threads and the wax will prevent the thread from slipping. Thus minimize the distortion at the eyes.

On edit...of course that assumes that the facings are backed (as well as lined).

PS. I commented on the shoes on the CC but, it bears repeating-- I like them and I like the leather especially.



bengal-stripe said:

I was given another explanation: by keeping the threats short and edge to edge closed very tightly there is less likelihood that the two quarters can shift against each other (like tectonic plates). If one quarter ends up somewhat higher than the other one, all the laces, although parallel if the eyelets were punched correctly, will run slightly up- or downhill and will no longer be at right angle to the shoe's centreline. The longer the bridging distance of the lacing is, the grater the potential problem that the quarters (tectonic plates) shift against each other.

Click to expand...

I guess that makes some sense.

I have always wondered, why not make the best of both worlds and fix the tight fitting method with it's additional holes on the underside of the upper. Then when the shoe is finished, snip the threat with a tiny pair of scissors and use tweezers to pull the thread-ends. But never have come around and actually asked for a pair of uppers to be finished that way. Shoefan, there is no patent on this idea, you can try it out and tell us if it works.
!

Click to expand...

Although you cannot see them there are threads both on top and underneath the facings -- the latter being the bobbin thread. Also, the holes go all the way through, so I don't think this approach would give results any different than the way I did it.

I've seen someone (Bestetti, I think) who seems to close the upper with the lining bridging the facings -- i imagine this is trimmed after the shoe is made. This lining seems to be what holds the facings in the proper position. Personally, I can't imagine how I could even get close to having that work out for me.

By the way, nice pair of shoes!

Click to expand...

Thanks!



shoefan said:

Although you cannot see them there are threads both on top and underneath the facings -- the latter being the bobbin thread. Also, the holes go all the way through, so I don't think this approach would give results any different than the way I did it.

Click to expand...

I didn't even know that this particular lacing is attached with a sewing machine. I always presumed they were stitched by hand. That obviously shows that I never seriously enquired about it.

I was thinking of doing something like this; once the upper is finished, you fold the tongue out of the way and hand-stitch a hemming stitch from the inside, holding the two edges tightly together.



If you use a curved needle, you should be able to place the sections under the surface into the lining leather and to half the depth of the slip beading, but avoid the stitches showing on the outside. Finally, once the shoe is off the last, you pull the thread with scissors and tweezers.

I have never harassed my closer to do it like this and I don't know if it will work; but it might be worth a try.



bengal-stripe said:

I didn't even know that this particular lacing is attached with a sewing machine. I always presumed they were stitched by hand. That obviously shows that I never seriously enquired about it.

I was thinking of doing something like this; once the upper is finished, you fold the tongue out of the way and hand-stitch a hemming stitch from the inside, holding the two edges tightly together.

If you use a curved needle, you should be able to place the sections under the surface into the lining leather and to half the depth of the slip beading, but avoid the stitches showing on the outside. Finally, once the shoe is off the last, you pull the thread with scissors and tweezers.

I have never harassed my closer to do it like this and I don't know if it will work; but it might be worth a try.

Click to expand...

Given a strong enough thread I think it's a great idea. Seriously. You ought to commission a pair like that--I'd be interested in seeing the result.

PS...I have a fitter's model for a friend of mine who wants to take lessons with me, coming up in a month or two and may give it a shot myself.



bengal-stripe said:

I was thinking of doing something like this; once the upper is finished, you fold the tongue out of the way and hand-stitch a hemming stitch from the inside, holding the two edges tightly together.

Click to expand...

As I got to studying on this several problems presented themselves...I don't know if they would be insurmountable or not;

First, unless I'm misunderstanding, sewing just to the lining would tend to pull the lining away from the facings and/or the facing backings. If nothing else, this could distort the facings as badly, or worse, than any other method.

Second, and probably the easiest issue to address, is the fact that the stitches would lie under the facings when the shoe was lasted. Somewhat inaccessible. If the stitching were tight enough to keep the facings together during lasting, then it would be hard to clip those stitches. And you would need to do that to get the last out of the shoe.

There may be no good answer to the problem of keeping the facing together while lasting without leaving some sort of "tool marks."