Originally Posted by Zapasman
I would like to ask shoemakers and cobblers about pros and cons of the following different HW inseaming techniques:
A.-Carving a holdfast with inside channel and feather.
B.-Stitching a loft.
C.-Cut an inside channel and turn-up a leather flap by hand.
D.-Cut a small and straight inside channel but no leather flap (although not clear here).
1.-Would you rely on the strenght of those B, C and D techniques if done correctly and with good quality materials
2.-Would you still consider B, C and D techniques to be of superior quality than GYW if done correctly and with good quality materials?
3.-If the welt is damaged, could it be an issue to replace it on those B, C and D shoes?.
It seems clear to me the superiority of the hand welting construction carving a holdfast but I am not sure about the rest of techniques specially C & D.
Thanks for your inputs.
Everything comes down to technique and materials. I've been saying this forever.
1) As you can see, D results in a mess if not done correctly. Or if the leather of the insole is poor or unsuitable. But the same could be said for any of them, although IMO, B and D are especially vulnerable simply because the technique leaves the thread vulnerable. And because, thinner insole leather is often employed.
2) Again the same general observations apply...good leather, skilled and mindful technique makes good shoes. But fundamentally good leather and skilled technique are contrary to the purposes and goals of GYW. So...in answer to your question...any one of these examples, "if done correctly and with good quality materials," will be better than GY. Objectively. In my professional opinion.
3) Depends on how well the work is done. It seems evident that the work was done poorly on D. Replacing welt would probably be an issue.
There's not a lot of difference, IMO, between B and D except execution and length of time in service.edited for punctuation and clarityEdited by DWFII - 5/3/16 at 5:46am