As @MattRiv stated (i think it was him) it seems like volume issue but I'm not sure which is causing it. When I had this issue it was a shoe that was too long for me.
I disagree with the volume assessment. The spacing of the eyestays looks good. It looks like the left shoe has some thinner leather, possibly cut closer to the belly. That leather will crease in more places, and usually even feel different to the hand. Just my $0.02...
The recent posts about grey Allen-Edmonds shoes reminded me that I have what may be the rarest Allen-Edmonds grey shoes, grey Voyagers.
Bought these a few years ago from the most popular eBay Allen-Edmonds shoe seller for less than $30.00. They are a pair of blue Voyagers that somehow turned grey. There is still a little bit of blue left in a few places on both shoes. (They came with orange laces which eventually wore out so I replaced them.)
In my humble opinion, I would say that that the leather is thinner/less supple on the left shoe. I have two pairs of PAs and my right shoe did that sort of creasing on one pair but not the other. All four shoes out of the two pairs fit perfectly.
You gotta be kidding me....so I was just saying that my Aberdeens were taking quite a beating - one of my most comfortable pairs, seeing way more wear than others, plus pulling double duty as a rain / bad weather shoe. I was saying the only other option I could think of was the Clark Street but I couldn't get another denim shoe, it would have to pull double duty with denim and with gray slacks, but I had no idea how that would look.....and there it is, looking really good as a matter of fact. Well, I missed my chance on these now. Where were you when I needed you?
(Wouldn't have pictured you as a truck guy....I'm a MB guy myself).
Since you and Andy both asked about these and now that I have a little more time, figured I'd give you my full nine yards on the three...
I tried on the Randolph before I owned many pairs of AEs at all. Tried in on in calf, tried multiple pairs, tried in in shell. Compared to the 65 they definitely run wide. With the 65 size, the heel felt large (not exceedlingly large, but large), the toe felt very roomy, and I had quite a bit of bowing. At the same time, the vamp pressed down on the top of my feet just a little too much. Could I have gotten by? Yeah after some stretching, but the shoe just felt wrong - like I was clopping around in something too big but at the same time uncomfortable for high arches. The shell pair fit marginally better but very similarly. If you have wide feet and feel like the 65 isn't too roomy already, these will probably work for you. I would guess if you drew a random sample of people and asked them to try these, the majority would say they were good.
The Patriot was the first loafer that I felt actually fit. The heel fit is incredibly narrow - more than any other shoe I've tried from AE. The combination of the short vamp and full toebox makes it work for high arches. I can't believe the proliferation of the 2042 (which is very similar) and the ads stating "barefoot, good for high arches, etc.). Yeah, maybe, but bad in many other ways I'm sure for most people. The Patriot is a shoe that I would suspect the majority of people would NOT like. Another thing is that like the Cavanaugh and Kenwood, the Patriot is a really classic, casual look. It doesn't look like a sleek dressy loafer.
The Presidio is the full-up prime time 222 last in its finest. I measure a C and almost thought I'd need an E they ran so narrow. First wear and I kid you not, they bruised each and every one of my toes to the point that they were dark black. No pain, no gain. Once broken in, they fit me like a glove and they look really sleek too. There's a reason why they can never get rid of their stock and why these continue to show up online - I bet the large majority of people would hate them. If you really do want to try them, consider going up a width, a half a size, or maybe even both.
Nice! I love blue!! Wonder what last they are on?