• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Status
Not open for further replies.

EdwardWilson

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
940
Reaction score
4,941
Picked up these Mac Neils 2.0 from eBay for $60. The uppers are in great shape, which is my experience with country or Scotch grain, they rarely scuff or suffer gouges. This is also why 50 year old Imperials remain so popular. This is a thicker leather that would not be suitable without the correction.

That being said, I do prefer the original Mac Neil, the 2.0 feels narrower and lacks the wide, fat look. The soles are Dainite and I’m thinking of sending to AE for double leather traditional oak soles. I rarely buy very used shoes and I’m curious if the prior owner’s imprint will be an issue for comfort.

76AB426F-9FF9-4D73-9BCF-0CA4BE1DB88E.jpeg
3DA7126A-E94D-4459-BB9B-2A98A0726998.jpeg
 

EdwardWilson

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
940
Reaction score
4,941

Thrift Couture

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
4,827
Reaction score
21,787

MrOxford

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Messages
174
Reaction score
746
In order to answer your question I must first explain....
AE is a mass producer. They have a factory mentality. Accordingly they establish procedures, policies and, services in a way that is practical for them to be viable, make a profit and, service their customers. They are also faced with the challenge of training their employees on every level to represent the company in the image they desire. They're primary business is selling new shoes. Repairs are a secondary business used as a support to sell new shoes. After-all, who is going to pay $400.00 for a pair of shoes that can't be re-crafted. IMO there is nothing wrong with that business model. So, the repairs that come in to AE have to fall within specific guidelines that they set for them to be willing to do the repair. Basically the shoes start on the assembly line go through a process which can be duplicated 100's of times per day, completed and, out the door. Anything outside the very basic realm can and most likely be rejected or condemned.
In the repair industry every pair is treated as a one-off. That's a shop mentality which is unlike a factory mentality. When "AE states that a pair of shoes can only be rebuilt 3 times" that is their claim based on what they determined but, it's not true if you factor in a quality repair shops expertise. We are used to seeing extra work that needs to be done that a factory is not set up to do. That extra work means the shoe needs to be pulled off the line which cuts into profits. It's true that AE replaces the welts as part of their re-crafting process. Replacing the welts is not always necessary. In fact it's most often not necessary. When AE replaces a welt the shoe gets put on a welting machine. That machine can pierce holes through the upper, lining and, gemming which are not where the original holes were thereby weakening the structure of the shoe.
Yes, after 3 of those processes I can see why AE (or most of the factories) would not want to repeat the process further.
In a competent repair shop welts are not replaced unless necessary and they charge extra for that. But, since they rewelt by hand they stitch through the original holes of the upper, lining and gemming no damage is done what so ever. Additionally, if the upper or lining is weak in any specific areas it gets patched and supported. If the gemming appears to be loose in some areas it gets glued back into place. I can't tell you how many times we receive shoes from a customer that were condemned for repair from the maker. It's almost 100% a typical repair for a competent repair shop.
All of it amounts to the difference between a factory mentality and a competent repair shop mentality.

Thank you for your contribution to this thread. I appreciate you making the time to draft a reply.

The AE factory mindset is to make affordable shoes. Most people just cannot or willing if they have the money to spend $2000 for hand-made shoes (bespoke) by an American shoemaker. Most people focus on price and not the actual hours required to make shoes from scratch.

All in all, I wish you a wonderful Christmas!
 

ProfilaBinding

Distinguished Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
7,540
Reaction score
31,215
Picked up these Mac Neils 2.0 from eBay for $60. The uppers are in great shape, which is my experience with country or Scotch grain, they rarely scuff or suffer gouges. This is also why 50 year old Imperials remain so popular. This is a thicker leather that would not be suitable without the correction.

That being said, I do prefer the original Mac Neil, the 2.0 feels narrower and lacks the wide, fat look. The soles are Dainite and I’m thinking of sending to AE for double leather traditional oak soles. I rarely buy very used shoes and I’m curious if the prior owner’s imprint will be an issue for comfort.

View attachment 1706007 View attachment 1706008

I like those socks. In regards to the 2.0, that insole (poron) can sometimes take up more space than a regular model. That was a common complaint about those insoles.
 

EdwardWilson

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
940
Reaction score
4,941
I like those socks. In regards to the 2.0, that insole (poron) can sometimes take up more space than a regular model. That was a common complaint about those insoles.

Yes the poron is definitely an issue. I have a pair of BB Mac Neils 2.0 that I sent to Bedo’s to remove the poron.

On this pair, the top of my toes are pushing against the top of the shoe, I assume because there is no weight pushing the poron down. It is slightly uncomfortable but I think with wear will be fine. It is also the reason for the orange and blue socks, they are my thinnest pair. I normally wear thick socks because my ankles are quite puny.

Old posts on this forum were quite vocal about the poron and sizing issues. It seems AE wanted to add more cushioning, but neglected to consider the volume of the poron. I would be curious to know if there were complaints that the standard Mac Neil felt stiff. In my experience the double leather sole provided much more cushioning than a standard single leather. These are Dainite which I find somewhat unforgiving compared to leather soles.

From my perusing of old catalogs this appears to be the only brown Mac Neil offered in the last ten years, though I could be wrong. Perhaps next year they will offer a MTO Mac Neil in natural or bourbon or tobacco. We can only fantasize.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Featured Sponsor

Do You Consider Sustainability When Purchasing Clothes?

  • Always - Sustainability is a top priority in all my clothing purchases.

  • Often - I frequently consider sustainability, but it isn't the main factor in my decisions.

  • Rarely - I seldom consider sustainability when purchasing clothes.

  • Never - Sustainability is not a factor I consider in my clothing choices.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Forum statistics

Threads
510,253
Messages
10,618,020
Members
225,177
Latest member
JSC8
Top