Do manufacturer trees prevent creasing more effectively?

In the aftermath of the Woodlore Epics massive group buy, I just wanted to ask if some here have actually purchased manufacturer trees to ensure a good fit for very high end shoes (ex. Purple Label shoes from Grapevinehill).

To recap, I bought some Epics along with everyone else, but was dismayed by how wide and fat they were. They seemed to have stretched out the sides of a pair of chukkas to the point that the insole was exposed, with the exposed edge making walking uncomfortable. I also think they stretched out the waist of a pair of Lobb prestige monks, moving them from snug to loose.

Out of concern for the latter Lobbs, I find myself actually considering getting a pair of Lobb trees, if only to be sure. I've tried Rochester generic trees from various discount stores like C21 and compared them to Purple Labels and their manufacturer's trees, and there is definitely some value to having a solid instep, heel and a more defined shoe tree toe shape (as opposed to the generic tree's oblong).

From a past thread, I recall the following comments:

Will, I believe, opined that manufacturer's shoes and their inflated price give you some value in the form of peace of mind regarding fit. Of course, the most obvious benefit is simply the aesthetic appeal (though you're probably the only person who will see those trees).

Aportnoy is satisfied with Woodlore Epics and Bexleys.

Finally, someone else reported that he actually replaced an older pair of Purple Label hinged trees for Epics because he felt the former did not provide sufficient tension. (I definitely have the opposite experience.)

So, does anyone here actually go out of their way to buy manufacturer trees, whether for purely aesthetic or actual functional reasons?

it all depends.

just get a bunch of nordstrom rack shoe trees.

your trees did not stretch out your lobbs, your wearing them did.

dont think too hard on these. they are just shoe trees.

Considering that the shoes were new when the Epics were put in, I seriously doubt they had given that much.

Shoe is right: unless spring-loaded shoe trees are grossly oversized and forced in by a muscleman a la Ahnold Schwahtzenneggah, they don't have enough power to stretch leather. It is truly difficult to imagine that new, dry boots were stretched by spring-loaded shoe trees. I have shoes fitted with some pretty tight-fitting spring-loaded trees and have yet to experience stretching. I also stretched a lot of shoes for customers when I sold footwear and can attest to the fact that those shoe stretchers have to be cranked HARD in order to really stretch the leather.

I use Epic Woodlores almost exclusively and I have had absolutely no problems whatsoever. Going on 6 months for about 15 different pairs. wholecuts, boots, suede, nubuck, shell, whatever.

I think to avoid any stretching you need to use bespoke shoe trees. Meanwhile, I buy my plastic shoe trees at Target for $3.99.

Originally Posted by tiecollector

Click to expand...

I think to avoid any stretching you need to use bespoke shoe trees. Meanwhile, I buy my plastic shoe trees at Target for $3.99.

PLASTIC? you heathen!

On every measure (save appearance) a crumpled-up sports page is superior to any shoe tree (including bespoke at $400 a pop).

Originally Posted by Teacher

Click to expand...

Shoe is right: unless spring-loaded shoe trees are grossly oversized and forced in by a muscleman a la Ahnold Schwahtzenneggah, they don't have enough power to stretch leather. It is truly difficult to imagine that new, dry boots were stretched by spring-loaded shoe trees. I have shoes fitted with some pretty tight-fitting spring-loaded trees and have yet to experience stretching. I also stretched a lot of shoes for customers when I sold footwear and can attest to the fact that those shoe stretchers have to be cranked HARD in order to really stretch the leather.
I understand what you're saying, but it's not quite relevant to the points I raised.

First, sure, those springs would have to be wound pretty tight to stretch even current Lobb Prestige shoes' softer leather. However, it's not so much the sides of the shoes, the points you normally stretch, that got me annoyed with the Epics. Rather, it's the waists, and I thought they stretched the shoes out a bit such that they effectively had a higher instep than they used to.

Second, I was wondering whether shoes with a solid instep stretch the vamp out better than your generic discount store trees and their generic oblong shapes.

Finally, Tarmac, a small number of people reported similar concerns with the Epics. The difference is that we are all in a size that seems too small for the Smalls but too large for the Mediums. As I said, aportnoy reported no problems as well, and that's a pretty large sample size unto itself.

I believe I'm about the same size as you, US 9.5 D.

I have 3-4 pairs of Small epics, the rest are Medium. Certain shoes for whatever reason don't fit the mediums, I put smalls in those. For example, BB Peal wholecuts in 9.5 have smalls in them. The rest have Medium. I like to have about 1/2 inch gap space between the heel block and the forefoot block.

I'm a smaller size.

Oh good god please make it stop.

Originally Posted by kidkim2

Click to expand...

On every measure (save appearance) a crumpled-up sports page is superior to any shoe tree (including bespoke at $400 a pop).

This arguments sounds familiar.

I have whittled down the sides of Woodlore shoe trees that I felt were distorting the shape of the shoe's upper. Was it better for the shoe? I don't know. Did it make me feel better? Yes.

I also got rid of the hinged RLPL trees for my EG shoes because I didn't think they fit the shoe as well as the spring-loaded Woodlores and I didn't think the varnished wood on the RLPL trees was as good for moisture/odor absorption as the unfinished cedar of the Woodlore trees. A little over the top? Perhaps. Worthy of another SF thread? I doubt it.