or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Bal vs Blucher
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bal vs Blucher

post #1 of 2
Thread Starter 

I've finally decided to start investing in some nice kicks and have started with a couple of pairs of AE - Strand (Walnut) & McAllister (Black).  I loved them so much I ordered a pair of McGregors in brown and am not happy with them.  It is just now that I'm realizing what the difference is between a Bal-type and a Blucher/Derby type and I think I'm coming to the conclusion that I don't like the Blucher/Derby type.  Perhaps is because they are less formal looking, but I also find that they also 'cinch' up a bit near the bottom of the laces causing an unsightly wrinkle (?) in the leather.  Perhaps the McGregor simply doesn't fit my foot as nice as the first two AEs I bought.  Regardless I'm sending them back.

 

So what says the hive about Bal vs Blucher?  Is it simply a matter of formality vs casual, or is there a comfort or style issue as well.  I've always felt that it is better to be over dressed than under, so I never see the harm is going more 'formal' than needed.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

P.S.  This is my first post - YAY!

post #2 of 2
Welcome to styleforum!
I too prefer oxfords/balmorals over derbys.
The only derbys I own and do not mind wearing are 3 eyelet plain toe (shoes or boots) for their sleek appearance.
That said, there are are some shoes that look amazing in a derby design; i.e. cordovan brogues.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Bal vs Blucher