C&J lasts

[Kaplan]

What is your favourite Crockett & Jones last? Which do you find too oldfashioned, which are too fashion forward and which are just right and will remain timeless classics?

To me, the 332 (and maybe even the 236) seem a bit too 'grandpa'ish' - I think they look good, but just a little boring.

The 337 and the slightly rounder 341 looks just right to me: Classic and elegant.

I'm a bit torn on the 348 - I like the overall design, but am wondering if it's crossing over into the fashion forward mold, where you might end up thinking in a couple of years 'What was I doing with a shoe that elongated?' (I think it looks really great in pictures, but on my foot it feels a little too long.)

I can't find the 358 or 351 lasts on C&J's site, but they are even more elongated, with almost pointy toes. What do you think of these?

So, for classic timeless yet elegant shoes, which lasts do you prefer and which do you stay clear of?

 

[grimslade]

For round-toes, I think the 325 and the 330 are under-rated. I used to like the 337, but I've gone off it a bit. Not enough to stop wearing the three or four pairs I have, but... Whatever last the Holland jodhpur is on is nice; I prefer it to my 337-lasted Redding chelsea boots.

EDIT: 325:

 

[DocHolliday]

I find C&J lasts difficult to judge from online pics. I have a pair of monks on the 348 and they're pretty elongated. The shape's not so far out you'll wonder what you were thinking, but definitely as elongated as I'd want to go. Maybe a little too elongated for my tastes, really. I have another pair of monks on 248, and they seem stubby in comparison.

I have to admit, most C&J lasts don't set me on fire.

 

[Holdfast]

337 happens to fit me great.

 

[Tarmac]

Of the mid-priced brands, they have the best mix of classics and slightly fashion-forward. They seem to abandon truly dated shapes pretty quickly. As opposed to makes like Tricker's or Church's which seem to intentionally continue to use old-style lasts.

They also never go too much forward, either with materials, colors, shapes, designs, etc.

In short, they offer two kinds of shoes: Utterly classic designs on classic lasts. Or utterly classic designs on slightly modern lasts.

Personally I'm a big fan of the 330, 337, 341, and the 325. I like the 348 and the 350 series from pics but I don't own any yet.

 

[adambparker]

Agreed. 337 is terrific.

Speaking of C&J, Barney's now has some C&J on sale in their NYC store.

When I was there this AM, they had Belgraves for $399, Ashdowns for $339 and Kemptons for $429.

Not earth-shattering prices, but if you're into trying things on and in NYC, it's not much worse prices than plal.com.

 

[mimile]

What about the 317 ?

 

[AntonioG]

For me the 337 has both: fit & style.

 

[sartort]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

I find C&J lasts difficult to judge from online pics. I have a pair of monks on the 348 and they're pretty elongated... I have to admit, most C&J lasts don't set me on fire.
Doc, Do you have the Monktons? Regardless, would you mind posting a pic when you get a chance. I'd love to see some non stock photography of the 348. I know there are a few pics here and there on the board, but the more the better imo. I tried on the Merton loafer, also on the 348 and it was definitely too long for my liking, but I think that has to do with the fact that it was a loafer. I will admit though that it has left me somewhat hesitant about the 348 though maybe being too long for my tastes. Otherwise, I think it's a good last, I am sure I will eventually get a pair on this last. Re: the 358, I'd love to see comparison pics versus the 348 if anyone has them. They look identical to me in the new catalog, the difference being the 358 seems to be used for handgrades while the 348 seems to be used for benchgrades. Lastly, I have 2 pairs of 337 lasted shoes and I think it is a very attractive last. I think it has a very nice soft square toe. I wish there was less volume throughout though. Only when I compare the 337 to my EG 888s does the 337 lose some of its charm.

 

[Spatlese]

Originally Posted by AntonioG

For me the 337 has both: fit & style.

+1 for me. I really need to see the 351 and 358 live though.

 

[AnGeLiCbOrIs]

T&A in NYC has a new wholecut with "wingtip brouging" on one of the new lasts. It looked longer and narrower than the Weymouth. It was nice but did not call out to me.

How about the 318 last? Is it used for anything but BB?

 

[Baron]

I have the 337, 348, 330 and 318. I think the 318 (Dartmouth blucher) is a very nice last that C&J seems to use very rarely. The 330 is a great round toe last. Like Doc, I'm cooling to the 348 over time. I'm wearing it today (Merton loafer) and I'm finding it to be just a hair more elongated than I like. The 337 is just about perfect in my eyes and in fit on my foot.

 

[Groover]

I have 5 pairs on the 337 (Aintree x 2, Weymouth, Leeds x 2)

1 pair on the 348, Highbury

1 pair on the 325, Onslow


The 337 fits me the best, but only on a Derby cut, my high instep it not suited too well to the Weymouth.

The 348, Highbury is my inclement weather shoe (Dianite Sole). The last doesn't suit my foot as well as the 337 and also where the toe stiffner is fitted creases right down on my big toe making it a bit uncomfortable after wearing them all day

The 325, Onslow another inclement weather shoe, very comfortable and a better fit for me than the 348.

Overall, the 337 is by far the best, I like the 325 and find the 348 looks better in the catalogue than on my foot.

 

[AnGeLiCbOrIs]

360 last anyone?

 

[corskc]

Originally Posted by mimile

What about the 317 ?

317 seems like something that can fit me, as I have wide feet.