Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread 2016 - News, Pictures, Sizing, Accessories, Clothing, etc

[mreams99]



Quote:
Meaning you dyed the leather?

Yes. I dyed these to look more like the cognac.

 

[Moose22]

I hate to say it but I totally didn't get the point of ordering something on a last unknown to you, and a balmoral to top it off when you had so many issues to start with - balsy, but kind of silly.

This all happened back in November when:

1. The information on this last was that it was like the 333, which fits me wonderfully in a bal
b. ANY other shoe that fit the price range was either a wildly different style (overlord/warwick) or a different last I've never worn.
also. The only problem I had originally was a badly made shoe. Not any of the other issues.

What else am I supposed to do? I'm totally not looking for a distressed casual shoe at the moment, and I've never worn a monk strap in my life.

At this point, it's spent money to me and, theoretically, a bargain price for shoes. Literally half price on retail. Since I paid $100 more for a pair of Larchmonts in between, getting a $195 pair of firsts seemed like it's totally worth the shot.

If AE can't get out of their own way to mail me shoes for 2 months, it really doesn't matter. That's their problem. I'll wear different shoes until I get some good ones.

At this point, I'm just going to talk to Melissa about other options. Fill a different wardrobe hole. Maybe I can give them more money and get a Merlot Jefferson for $100 off or something. Those are some pimp ass shoes.

 

[danwatts2005]

Wearing the McT's around the house in preparation for tomorrow. I have to say, these are the most comfortable out-of-the-box leather sole I've gotten yet. I was told to expect 20-30 wears to get a good break-in, but I don't think that will be the case with these.

 

[Moose22]

I felt that the forefoot was roomier than the 65 last. Otherwise, I thought they were similar.

I think they might be. Just in the toes. But from the balls of the feet back they're the same or smaller.

Totally based on ONE pair of shoes and my messed up shaped feet, but I think you're both right. Just seeing it slightly differently.

 

[ace13x]

I am having a dilemma with the strand seconds in 11D I purchased a month ago, after getting sized at the AE store. I have been wearing them twice a week. They are pinching my pinkie toe - after a days wear there is some redness on my toe. I gave them to the AE store to get them stretched, but the stretching did not help any. Do these look too narrow? I learned that the V should not be more than 0.25" (mine is 1"). The store associates did not tell me about this. I am hoping to exchange these seconds for an 11E, but those might have too much heel slippage, and it might be too late for an exchange...


pressure point here

Strand seconds. Some bowing but otherwise feels fine. 8EEE

I may be in the minority (or not), or perhaps its my personal taste, but to me neither of these examples are properly fitted. I sympathize because the 65 is not my best last either, though I can get by.

The 11E that texas9 showed in his video is much better (in fact seem to be a freakishly good V-gap improvement), but I would be worried about the looseness in the heel.

The bowing that StylinProfilin may be due to flexing his foot back but its a little disconcerting. The V-Gap, is just not right.

I think in both cases above (and in my case also) the Bartlett (201 Last) would probably be a MUCH better fit. Its made for a higher instep, and has a slightly wider forefoot (according to AE). AND, the SA should have shown both of you that model once he/she saw that fit.

Did an SA fit you with that? Glad to see the training has improved....

Did you ever try an 8.5E or 9D?

I also had an SA tell me that v-gap closure is a non-issue. A young SA which I hadn't seen before, he seemed quite uninformed. The SA who sold my first AE's had just left the store as I walked in. She was excellent.



Quote:
Originally Posted by mreams99

All of the talk in the last few days about the variation in McTavish colors got me to thinking about wearing mine. Where do these fall in the continuum?



I realize its a different shoe, but the above by mreams99 is what I consider a very good v-gap. Then again, it seems the McTavish is more forgiving on that front. For my personal tastes I'm fine with 1/2 inch or even a touch more (9/16), but a full inch is WAY too much.

 

[mreams99]

^ I agree with that also (and not because my shoes were considered a good fit example).

 

[cc808314]



Strand seconds. Some bowing but otherwise feels fine. 8EEE

Do you have flat feet?

 

[M635Guy]

Quote:

Agree
Quote:
You did a pretty good job! Certainly presents pretty close to cognac, but a little more tan/orange.

 

[Neo1]

@Moose22 You know we're high arch buddies right? I get where you're coming from, not trying to give you a hard time. This might sound really weird, but did you consider the Michael carter and trying to darken the green eyelet?

 

[StylinProfilin]

Originally Posted by cc808314


Do you have flat feet?


I do not.

 

[Neo1]

Flat feet? With that gap more like anti-flat feet.

 

[mreams99]

This may seem like a strange question:
Is there a shoe like the Strand, but without the toe medallion? I swore I saw something like that a while back.

 

[StylinProfilin]

I may be in the minority (or not), or perhaps its my personal taste, but to me neither of these examples are properly fitted. I sympathize because the 65 is not my best last either, though I can get by.

The 11E that texas9 showed in his video is much better (in fact seem to be a freakishly good V-gap improvement), but I would be worried about the looseness in the heel.

The bowing that StylinProfilin may be due to flexing his foot back but its a little disconcerting. The V-Gap, is just not right.

I think in both cases above (and in my case also) the Bartlett (201 Last) would probably be a MUCH better fit. Its made for a higher instep, and has a slightly wider forefoot (according to AE). AND, the SA should have shown both of you that model once he/she saw that fit.





I also had an SA tell me that v-gap closure is a non-issue. A young SA which I hadn't seen before, he seemed quite uninformed. The SA who sold my first AE's had just left the store as I walked in. She was excellent.



Quote:
Originally Posted by mreams99

All of the talk in the last few days about the variation in McTavish colors got me to thinking about wearing mine. Where do these fall in the continuum?



I realize its a different shoe, but the above by mreams99 is what I consider a very good v-gap. Then again, it seems the McTavish is more forgiving on that front. For my personal tastes I'm fine with 1/2 inch or even a touch more (9/16), but a full inch is WAY too much.

Are you saying that the 65 last just simply isn't a good fit for me and the 201 might be a better match or should I try to move to a different size and if so, what would that be from my current 8EEE.

 

[M635Guy]

Wearing the McT's around the house in preparation for tomorrow. I have to say, these are the most comfortable out-of-the-box leather sole I've gotten yet. I was told to expect 20-30 wears to get a good break-in, but I don't think that will be the case with these.

I'd say mine are well ahead of that schedule. My first two pairs were both were very comfortable out of the box and have only been getting better. My latest pair actually feels even more tailored to my foot, but the leather feels a little thicker and thus will need a little more break-in. I'm pretty sure all of them are going to be excellent comfort-wise

The bowing that StylinProfilin may be due to flexing his foot back but its a little disconcerting. The V-Gap, is just not right.

I think in both cases above (and in my case also) the Bartlett (201 Last) would probably be a MUCH better fit. Its made for a higher instep, and has a slightly wider forefoot (according to AE). AND, the SA should have shown both of you that model once he/she saw that fit.


I also had an SA tell me that v-gap closure is a non-issue. A young SA which I hadn't seen before, he seemed quite uninformed. The SA who sold my first AE's had just left the store as I walked in. She was excellent.

All three of my McT's have decent closure - the most recent cognac pair (the "tan cognacs") are probably the best. My other 5-last shoe, the Rush Street, has a pretty extreme V that isn't much improved by going to either a 11.5 E or a 11 EE (and the foot position is very wrong in the 11 EE). I guess I have a really high instep, but it is pretty apparent to me that the cap-toe design in the 5-last isn't going to give folks like me tight closure in the balmoral styles.

On a strange side-note, my Woodlore Epic trees that fit my tan and cognac McT's don't seem to want to fit inside the "tan cognac" pair...

 

[cc808314]

I only very briefly tried the Cornwallis and I don't think the 1943 is at all similar to 65. Compared to 65, it's not as long, it has much less volume in the toe/vamp area, and the middle section (underneath the arch) of the shoe is slightly wider. I need to play with it more, but I think people with flat, low instep, low arch, and low volume feet may like it. I am in this group and 65 just doesn't work in any size, unless I start playing with insoles, pads, etc. On the contrary, the Cornwallis felt pretty good.