Leather Quality and Properties

[MoneyWellSpent]



Meermin also seems to have made some design decisions purely with the cost in mind rather than aesthetics. Granted this makes them much more accessible price-wise to many more people, but they definitely don't compare to Vass.

Meermin

Alden

That extra seam Meermin adds really contributes no aesthetic value IMO, but it does allow them to use 3 smaller pieces of leather there vs 1 piece in the Aldens.

Good catch.

 

[MoneyWellSpent]

Who OEMs for Meermin, DC Lewis, Kent Wang in China? Who is Koronya using for their new RTW selections? Some brands on your list outsources shoemaking to OEMs. You are a knowledgeable man and you could figure them out better than myself. Some OEMs are wanting to get retail exposure but its a high brand marketing barrier without resurrecting a legacy brand or having authored a widely circulating book.

Meermin doesn't beat Vass in quality for a very good reason; their feet on the ground at China is either nonexistent or ineffective at manufacturing QC. And to reduce the BOM cost, Meermin had to increase leather yield by using non optimal areas of the hide.

I think I'm with you now. What you have been saying is that it is possible to make better hand-welted shoes that are better than Vass for less money, rather than that someone actually is. I can buy that as a theory. Essentially the concept rests with finding labor that is even cheaper than it is in Eastern Europe (which it is in much of Asia). The problems with this abound, however. Most have a heavy bias against the quality of items being manufactured in Asia. People around here want their shoes to be made in Europe or USA.

Ever heard of Santalum? They are in Indonesia. Their website calls their products Goodyear-welted, but watch their video and they clearly show hand-welting. The pair of boots they show in the video retail for $106.00 at the current exchange rate with the Indonesian Rupiah! http://www.santalum-indonesia.com/product/consilium-chuka-longwing

Video:

Nevertheless, I agree in theory. If there is room for a company to make hand-welted shoes through such a complex scheme as Meermin's Linea Maestro line (and sell them at less than $400 USD), then there is certainly room for the bottom rung factory that is doing most of the work to step up and sell the same product themselves and save everyone the added costs of branding and marketing. One problem with using Meermin as the example, however, is that China is only doing the assembly of the uppers, if I remember correctly. They aren't doing any of the more technical work. You are right that getting retail exposure is difficult without standing on the shoulders of a legacy brand, or some other method.

 

[RogerP]

I think I'm with you now. What you have been saying is that it is possible to make better hand-welted shoes that are better than Vass for less money, rather than that someone actually is. I can buy that as a theory.

Oh I can buy that as a theory, too. A great many things are possible. But I didn't understand that to be his original claim.

 

[dbhdnhdbh]

I like the extra seam for precisely the reason that it shows the manufacturer is using leather pieces that otherwise might be discarded as scrap too small to make into shoes. Shows a proper Yankee frugality, even though it is Alden, not Meermin, that is the New England company.

Are there any functional reasons to avoid this seam? I assume the shoes last just as long? This does not appear to be a high stress location, so I would not expect to see the seam failing. This would make even more sense if using more expensive leather, like shell.

DWF

Quote: Are there any people who come to you for work of art footwear, but then send them somewhere else for repair? Hard to imagine. I don't buy shoes anywhere near the handwelted price, but if I did, I would find it difficult to see the logic in having them resoled or otherwise repaired by anyone short of the original cordwainer. Once I am in that rarified price world, why go anywhere else?

Quote: Then do you let customers opt for machine stitching for the original manufacture? Or is "...if not as elegant." a reason to insist on handstitched soles when making the shoes?

 

[DWFII]



I like the extra seam for precisely the reason that it shows the manufacturer is using leather pieces that otherwise might be discarded as scrap too small to make into shoes. Shows a proper Yankee frugality, even though it is Alden, not Meermin, that is the New England company.

Are there any functional reasons to avoid this seam? I assume the shoes last just as long? This does not appear to be a high stress location, so I would not expect to see the seam failing. This would make even more sense if using more expensive leather, like shell.

DWF

Are there any people who come to you for work of art footwear, but then send them somewhere else for repair? Hard to imagine. I don't buy shoes anywhere near the handwelted price, but if I did, I would find it difficult to see the logic in having them resoled or otherwise repaired by anyone short of the original cordwainer. Once I am in that rarified price world, why go anywhere else?

People come to me with shoes and boots for repair that I did not make--I almost always send them elsewhere. Customers sometimes don't find it convenient to send a pair of shoes that they like and wear regular back to me for repair. Suits me--I always hated cleaning the manure off boots I had made and seeing how poorly the customer had treated them (perhaps out of necessity or even intention).

Then do you let customers opt for machine stitching for the original manufacture? Or is "...if not as elegant." a reason to insist on handstitched soles when making the shoes?

Most who invest this kind of money don't mind the extra for handstitching. So the question seldom arises and I like handstitching--I am getting really, really good at it, but I'm not fast. But, yes, there is a tacit option (sometimes spoken sometimes not) to have the original outsoles machine stitched.

The seam on the Meermin is not prima facie dysfunctional. Philosophically it may be indicative of some other, more fundamental malaise...or not, depending on your perspective.

 

[dbhdnhdbh]

Quote: What a way to treat DWF footwear! But I keep forgetting you made (still make??) boots for real working cowboys.

So you are you guys implying that Meermin has identified one hallmark of top quality, handwelting, and is delivering that while cutting corners elsewhere? Are people buying these shoes because they are handwelted, assuming that all the other craftspersonship DWF describes is there, but are actually getting shoes made to less lofty standards?

As I said, visible signs of authentic frugality appeal to me. If someone made shoes to really great manufacturing standards, but one paid nothing more for their beauty, style, wholecut construction, etc, then I would at least be interested. It would still depend on price.

 

[DWFII]



As I said, visible signs of authentic frugality appeal to me.

With all due respect, it doesn't appeal to me. I've seen it done and I've even done it in certain circumstances where there was no other choice.

But all other things being equal it comes back to a quip that I am almost famous (or infamous) for:

When you get into this business you have to make a choice--either to make shoes or to make money. Because you can't do both. Every subsequent decision will pivot off that first one." And the outcomes, as well as the road traveled, will be significantly different...even mutually exclusive when viewed from the long perspective.

And the corollary to that is that every time a customer makes a choice between excellence and frugality, favouring frugality, they limit their own future choices and the future choices of everyone else.

Of course the same thing applies to makers--every time a maker decides to switch to GY he is simultaneously making a choice to switch from good leather to mediocre leather (even if it doesn't happen immediately) and ultimately from mediocre leather to leatherboard. And eventually you end up with a situation where there is only one tannery left in the entire world (where once there were hundreds) which produces the quality of leather insole that Baker produces...and Baker's continued existence is not assured.

And so it goes until corrected grain leather is more common than calf, until heel bases, and toe and heel stiffeners are all paperboard or plastic. Until all the skilled inseamers and bottomers are gone. Until even the makers of hand tools are are forced out of business for lack of demand--like Geo. Barnsley not too many years ago.

And then what? The answer is right in front of our faces--plastic shoes with thermo-injected outsoles. Tres chic in some circles even now.

It's all driven by demand and ignorance.

The customer has a choice too--maybe the final, irrevocable choice: to be a brand whore or to be someone who understands and is knowledgeable...and as a result, necessarily protective of...quality shoemaking. Whether they can afford it or not--the knowledge and the understanding is what is at issue here. We may not be able to stop progress but the least we can do is deplore its excesses.

--

 

[RogerP]

With all due respect, it doesn't appeal to me. I've seen it done and I've even done it in certain circumstances where there was no other choice.

But all other things being equal it comes back to a quip that I am almost famous (or infamous) for:

When you get into this business you have to make a choice--either to make shoes or to make money. Because you can't do both. Every subsequent decision will pivot off that first one." And the outcomes, as well as the road traveled, will be significantly different...even mutually exclusive when viewed from the long perspective.

And the corollary to that is that every time a customer makes a choice between excellence and frugality, favouring frugality, they limit their own future choices and the future choices of everyone else.

Of course the same thing applies to makers--every time a maker decides to switch to GY he is simultaneously making a choice to switch from good leather to mediocre leather (even if it doesn't happen immediately) and ultimately from mediocre leather to leatherboard. And eventually you end up with a situation where there is only one tannery left in the world (where once there were hundreds) which produces the quality of leather insole that Baker produces...and Baker's] continued existence is not assured.

And so it goes until corrected grain leather is more common than calf, until heel bases, and toe and heel stiffeners are all paperboard or plastic. Until all the skilled inseamers and bottomers are gone. Until even the makers of hand tools are are forced out of business for lack of demand--like Geo. Barnsley not too many years ago.

And then what? The answer is right in front of our faces--plastic shoes with thermo-injected outsoles. Tres chic in some circles even now.

It's all driven by demand and ignorance.

The customer has a choice too--maybe the final, irrevocable choice: to be a brand whore or to be someone who understands and is knowledgeable...and as a result, necessarily protective of...quality shoemaking. Whether they can afford it or not--the knowledge and the understanding is what is at issue here. We may not be able to stop progress but the least we can do is deplore its excesses.

Make shoes or make money, be a brand whore or a devotee of quality shoemaking - you are the master of the truly absurd false dichotomy. I'm sure that in your mind the world is divided by bright lines into separate and incompatible categories - but it's only in your mind.

 

[sinnedk]

Hey Guys,

I started reading this thread in the beginning when it had 1-2 pages and found it pretty interesting. I also found that the leather discussed is mostly calf (i may be mistaking). Since i did not follow the thread for the past 40 pages and my questions were asked then please just direct me to the right page.

1. What are considered best leathers in terms of quality for shoes? For example, shell cordovan, horse, calf, donkey, kangaroo, stingray, bison, etc. Maybe toughest would be the better question?
2. Which leathers age the best? Which would be best for longevity?

I am curious because i know MC shoes focus mostly on calf and shell cordovan. Of course there is alligator, crocodile, etc, I personally find those a bit tacky but thats just me. However, sw&d makes such as CCP, MA+, Guidi, A1923 have various other options. I notice Kangaroo, donkey, bison etc. I like the looks and the different graininess those leathers have. But i shy away because i simply dont know the longevity. Hence, i am asking this thread why calf and shell cordovan? Are they proven to be the better lasting or easier to obtain?

curious to find out some thoughts

@DWFII, as i understand you make shoes for a living? maybe you have the most insight...

 

[DWFII]



Make shoes or make money, be a brand whore or a devotee of quality shoemaking - you are the master of the truly absurd false dichotomy.  I'm sure that in your mind the world is divided by bright lines into separate and incompatible categories - but it's only in your mind.

You know what? I don't recall anyone in this entire thread asking your opinion--your blind, flies in the eyes opinion.

You just keep jumping in like some self-centered, whiny child who feels like he's being neglected.

You don't like my opinion--one founded on many years of experience; of actually doing not just mouthing off, of getting dirty; of literally blood sweat and tears, there's an app for that.

 

[RogerP]

You know what? I don't recall anyone in this entire thread asking your opinion--your blind, flies in the eyes opinion.

You just keep jumping in like some self-centered, whiny child who feels like he's being neglected.

You don't like my opinion--one founded on many years of experience; of actually doing not just mouthing off, of getting dirty; of literally blood sweat and tears, there's an app for that.

Hi D,

I don't need an invitation to participate in this or any other thread. And I don't need your permission, either. I do have a theory that would comprehensively explain your obsession with both horrible stench and flies in your eyes, but I'll let you figure it out. Besides, I prefer to leave the childish name-calling to you - it amuses me no end.

It's not a matter of liking your opinion or not - it's that what you have said here makes no sense whatsoever. You can either make shoes or make money? Seriously? So any individual maker or company actually making enough money to stay in business isn't really making shoes? Ridiculous. If many years of experience led you to that and other patently absurd conclusions, then you did not put those years to best use.

By the way - just a point to consider - quoting yourself is generally regarded as an act of intellectual masturbation - best to keep that kind of thing private.

Be well.

 

[DWFII]



Hey Guys,

I started reading this thread in the beginning when it had 1-2 pages and found it pretty interesting. I also found that the leather discussed is mostly calf (i may be mistaking). Since i did not follow the thread for the past 40 pages and my questions were asked then please just direct me to the right page.

1. What are considered best leathers in terms of quality for shoes? For example, shell cordovan, horse, calf, donkey, kangaroo, stingray, bison, etc. Maybe toughest would be the better question?
2. Which leathers age the best? Which would be best for longevity?

It depends on what purpose and what your preference is. Each leather you mentioned has its own unique characteristics. i don't care for shell--technically it's not even leather in the sense that we commonly associate with calf or any other tanned skin.. Horse donkey are not readily available here in the states although mule used to be a staple. Kangaroo is thin, lightweight and yet has the greatest tensile strength of any leather known to man given its thickness. Stingray has probably the loosest fiber mat of any skin I've ever encountered.

Calf is the staple. Not cow. In all leather the younger the animal the denser the fiber mat and the finer the finish.

Longevity is more a function of maintenance, tannage and usage rather than the inherent quality of the animal skin. Some leathers are more durable and scuff resistant with elephant and large reptiles being at the top of the list and kid/goat sheep at the bottom.

I am curious because i know MC shoes focus mostly on calf and shell cordovan. Of course there is alligator, crocodile, etc, I personally find those a bit tacky but thats just me. However, sw&d makes such as CCP, MA+, Guidi, A1923 have various other options. I notice Kangaroo, donkey, bison etc. I like the looks and the different graininess those leathers have. But i shy away because i simply dont know the longevity. Hence, i am asking this thread why calf and shell cordovan? Are they proven to be the better lasting or easier to obtain?

Cordovan has a relatively fine break. This is due to the density of the fiber mat. cordovan can also be somewhat easy to tear (one of the reasons I'm not fond of it). Good quality calf perhaps just behind it with better tensile strength and stretch (some is good). Leathers like bison tend to have a coarser fiber structure and generally stretch more...and in my opinion are not as successful for strictly dress shoes although if vegetable tanned they can make a very nice casual to dress shoe. The break on them will never be a non-trivial issue.

If I could only choose one leather for my "one" shoe, it would be a really good grade of calf--probably the best mix of strength, durability, finish and conformity to the requirements of the foot.

@DWFII, as i understand you make shoes for a living? maybe you have the most insight...

Only if you don't give any weight to ignorant speculation...

Seriously, I hope this helps.

 

[chogall]

I think I'm with you now. What you have been saying is that it is possible to make better hand-welted shoes that are better than Vass for less money, rather than that someone actually is. I can buy that as a theory. Essentially the concept rests with finding labor that is even cheaper than it is in Eastern Europe (which it is in much of Asia). The problems with this abound, however. Most have a heavy bias against the quality of items being manufactured in Asia. People around here want their shoes to be made in Europe or USA.

Ever heard of Santalum? They are in Indonesia. Their website calls their products Goodyear-welted, but watch their video and they clearly show hand-welting. The pair of boots they show in the video retail for $106.00 at the current exchange rate with the Indonesian Rupiah! http://www.santalum-indonesia.com/product/consilium-chuka-longwing

Video:

Nevertheless, I agree in theory. If there is room for a company to make hand-welted shoes through such a complex scheme as Meermin's Linea Maestro line (and sell them at less than $400 USD), then there is certainly room for the bottom rung factory that is doing most of the work to step up and sell the same product themselves and save everyone the added costs of branding and marketing. One problem with using Meermin as the example, however, is that China is only doing the assembly of the uppers, if I remember correctly. They aren't doing any of the more technical work. You are right that getting retail exposure is difficult without standing on the shoulders of a legacy brand, or some other method.

It doesn't make sense for Meermin to only do clicking and closing in China; the most labor intensive part is the inseaming and welting. And, if, say, Meermin tightened up their QA and jack up their LM BOM/labor by 20% and keeping the same margin profile, the price will be around $550 retail, including import duty. That is cheaper than Vass but unfortunately it does take additional fix cost outlays.

I said Vass is mediocre because they do make shoes according to the spec for €400 retail price. Very fine shoes for the spec, but cost savings in materials must be expected. I do not doubt that Vass is capable of producing shoes at the spec similar to Saint Crispins, but Vass won't be able to sell those at the current pricing scheme without taking a loss. At the OEM world, you do more or less get what you paid.

 

[chogall]

It depends on what purpose and what your preference is. Each leather you mentioned has its own unique characteristics. i don't care for shell--technically it's not even leather in the sense that we commonly associate with calf or any other tanned skin.. Horse donkey are not readily available here in the states although mule used to be a staple. Kangaroo is thin, lightweight and yet has the greatest tensile strength of any leather known to man given its thickness. Stingray has probably the loosest fiber mat of any skin I've ever encountered.

Calf is the staple. Not cow. In all leather the younger the animal the denser the fiber mat and the finer the finish.

Longevity is more a function of maintenance, tannage and usage rather than the inherent quality of the animal skin. Some leathers are more durable and scuff resistant with elephant and large reptiles being at the top of the list and kid/goat sheep at the bottom.
Cordovan has a relatively fine break. This is due to the density of the fiber mat. cordovan can also be somewhat easy to tear (one of the reasons I'm not fond of it). Good quality calf perhaps just behind it with better tensile strength and stretch (some is good). Leathers like bison tend to have a coarser fiber structure and generally stretch more...and in my opinion are not as successful for strictly dress shoes although if vegetable tanned they can make a very nice casual to dress shoe. The break on them will never be a non-trivial issue.

If I could only choose one leather for my "one" shoe, it would be a really good grade of calf--probably the best mix of strength, durability, finish and conformity to the requirements of the foot.

Only if you don't give any weight to ignorant speculation...

Seriously, I hope this helps.

Talking about reptiles, what's the difference between Cayman, Croc, and Alligator? I read that quality wise Alligator being the highest, Croc in the middle and Cayman is the low price/quality alternative. What are your thoughts?

 

[DWFII]



Talking about reptiles, what's the difference between Cayman, Croc, and Alligator?  I read that quality wise Alligator being the highest, Croc in the middle and Cayman is the low price/quality alternative.  What are your thoughts?

I'd put croc at the top, alligator next and I'd never make a pair of shoes or boots from caiman.

Not much difference in alligator and croc--you'd almost have to work with it and feel it to see the difference. Crocodile usually has smaller, somewhat rounder tiles relative to size than alligator.

Caiman has brittle inclusions (can't think of the technical name) that not only make the leather rigid but subject to deep cracking anywhere the leather is flexing across them.