• 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!

Cheaney

Quadcammer

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
2,970
Reaction score
302
Originally Posted by rabiesinfrance
I've actually just bought a pair of Cheaney Pennine IIR boots. I'm going to return them because they are a tad too small, but overall I think the quality is excellent. The stitching and the finishing is superb, they are nicely burnished, and the Itshide sole unit is good. I'm no expert on leather quality, but it looks and feels excellent.

Price range is a dodgy call: in 2007 a C&J Coniston boot was £285, now it's £350. The Cheaney boot is £270. They are placing their shoes below C&J and stealing a march on Grenson and Alfred Sargent. There's no point pitching against the big boys. Below that, of course, you have Loake, Barker (who make some nice shoes), etc.

I've owned the Coniston and I'd say that it is a slightly better quality boot, though not by much in fact. Photo finish. If you want a dress boot look at C&J, a robust boot look at Cheaney. The boot is miles better than AS's Culford, which I've also owned.

The Cheaney boot is a bit like an old fashioned British ammo boot. It's a bastard to put on and is a very close fit (it would probably be better with ski hooks), but still.

There's genuine pride at Cheaney - the website is not just bullshit marketing spin. I believe this comes through in the product which feels fresh and lively, and there's real attention to detail. When you've handled lots of shoes you can pick it up at once.


don't you know they use leathers from india...or at least that look indian.

how stuuuupppiddddd are youuuuu
 

Ich_Dien

Distinguished Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
6,692
Reaction score
1,247
TBH I've got a lot of time for Cheaney, the oldest pair of shoes still in my rotation are by them and they're holding up great. Refurbished at the Cheaney factory once. Five years old now?
 

entrero

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
1,082
Reaction score
12
Originally Posted by Quadcammer
don't you know they use leathers from india...or at least that look indian.

how stuuuupppiddddd are youuuuu


Does Cheaney make shoes for toddlers, I didn't know. Where's your source, if any?
AFAIK Cheaney doesn't have a lower end line like Loake, Grenson etc. There's an article somewhere about Loake outsourcing to India. The issue was, manufacturers outsource to 3rd world countries and ship it back for finishing and still be able say "made in England". If I remember correctly, Loake 1880 are entirely made in Northampton whereas other lines are not. However this only concerns manufacturing, base materials can be from anywhere.
 

Burton

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
1,695
Reaction score
228
Originally Posted by rabiesinfrance
I've actually just bought a pair of Cheaney Pennine IIR boots. I'm going to return them because they are a tad too small, but overall I think the quality is excellent. The stitching and the finishing is superb, they are nicely burnished, and the Itshide sole unit is good. I'm no expert on leather quality, but it looks and feels excellent.

Price range is a dodgy call: in 2007 a C&J Coniston boot was £285, now it's £350. The Cheaney boot is £270. They are placing their shoes below C&J and stealing a march on Grenson and Alfred Sargent. There's no point pitching against the big boys. Below that, of course, you have Loake, Barker (who make some nice shoes), etc.

I've owned the Coniston and I'd say that it is a slightly better quality boot, though not by much in fact. Photo finish. If you want a dress boot look at C&J, a robust boot look at Cheaney. The boot is miles better than AS's Culford, which I've also owned.

The Cheaney boot is a bit like an old fashioned British ammo boot. It's a bastard to put on and is a very close fit (it would probably be better with ski hooks), but still.

There's genuine pride at Cheaney - the website is not just bullshit marketing spin. I believe this comes through in the product which feels fresh and lively, and there's real attention to detail. When you've handled lots of shoes you can pick it up at once.


This is a really silly discussion. For the money, the Cheaney shoes are not bad. They are, however, no where near the quality of true "hand grade" shoes, e.g. Edward Green, Alfred Sargent, G+G or C&J. I don't want to seem to be bashing them. I am not. I just get really torqued when people who admittedly know nothing about leather quality of shoe construction start comparing products. Do you really believe that the price differential between C&J and Cheaney is all marketing??? Really??? Stop the silliness.
 

Burton

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
1,695
Reaction score
228
Originally Posted by entrero
Does Cheaney make shoes for toddlers, I didn't know. Where's your source, if any?
AFAIK Cheaney doesn't have a lower end line like Loake, Grenson etc. There's an article somewhere about Loake outsourcing to India. The issue was, manufacturers outsource to 3rd world countries and ship it back for finishing and still be able say "made in England". If I remember correctly, Loake 1880 are entirely made in Northampton whereas other lines are not. However this only concerns manufacturing, base materials can be from anywhere.


Exactly. +1
 

Last Year's Man

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
103
Reaction score
1
oops, I feel I've got into something a bit outside of my mandate. Seeing as I only paid $30 for my Cheaney's I'm not sure if I'm qualified to comment, however IMO they make some nice looking shoes on some nice lasts.
 

Verrihappy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
339
Reaction score
136
Only the Cheaney Imperial Collection is 100% made in England, the rest have their leather uppers imported from India, hence the lousy burnishing (same when you compare Grenson Rushton shoes to their Rose ones).
 

Burton

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
1,695
Reaction score
228
Originally Posted by Last Year's Man
oops, I feel I've got into something a bit outside of my mandate. Seeing as I only paid $30 for my Cheaney's I'm not sure if I'm qualified to comment, however IMO they make some nice looking shoes on some nice lasts.

I would buy a pair for $30 myself that just doesn't make them C&J.
 

rabiesinfrance

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
373
Reaction score
15
Originally Posted by Burton
This is a really silly discussion. For the money, the Cheaney shoes are not bad. They are, however, no where near the quality of true "hand grade" shoes, e.g. Edward Green, Alfred Sargent, G+G or C&J. I don't want to seem to be bashing them. I am not. I just get really torqued when people who admittedly know nothing about leather quality of shoe construction start comparing products. Do you really believe that the price differential between C&J and Cheaney is all marketing??? Really??? Stop the silliness.
C&J "Handgrade" - agree, this is a different ball game entirely. Construction - top notch (on the Pennine IIR no. of stitches per inch, fine double lines of stitching, veldtshoen construction, and general attention to detail and finishing). I could post pictures, but I had not planned to do so. Leather quality - who really knows for sure? We are not in the trade. Well, I'm not anyway. My impression, and that is what it is, is based upon owning the C&J Coniston, AS Culford, and the EG Galway (in country grain). I'd add that if you want a 'proper' field boot C&J make the Snowdon. This is made in oak wax hide, is light and robust and has a good sole unit. It also has a full bellows tongue, which is essential in very wet conditions. A very nice boot. The finest dress boot is undoubtably the Galway. Marketing - you've missed the point here. I'm a bit of a boot man!
 

Clark

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
299
Reaction score
26
Ich_Dien;4299345 said:
TBH I've got a lot of time for Cheaney, the oldest pair of shoes still in my rotation are by them and they're holding up great. Refurbished at the Cheaney factory once. Five years old now?

Those are beautiful!


Originally Posted by Verrihappy
Only the Cheaney Imperial Collection is 100% made in England, the rest have their leather uppers imported from India, hence the lousy burnishing (same when you compare Grenson Rushton shoes to their Rose ones).

According to their homepage:

"Although some manufacturers outsource this crucial operation, chiefly to the Far East, at Cheaney we still cut and close all our uppers in the factory in Desborough, Northamptonshire, just as we have done since 1886."

Of course, this doesn't mean that their leather isn't sourced from outside but they do cut and close the uppers in England on all their shoes.

/C
 

Trifon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
What do you guys exactly mean by 'leather sourced outside England'? I thought all good makers use other than "English leathers" or hides, say from France or the US, but the shoe is made in the UK.
 

Gent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
90
Reaction score
1
I don't understand this "sourced from India" crap either. Even with workmanship this argument is used very poorly around here, but now we're talking about raw materials. What difference does the source of the material make? Absolutely none, it's the quality that counts. I'm also baffled by some industry experts who can identify the birthplace of any given cow just by looking at a pair of shoes. Many companies keep their sourcing business confidential (you know, a business secret) so I doubt there's really much knowledge floating around regarding the real sources of Cheaney leathers, for example.

I have one pair of Cheaney shoes. The Warwich, on a fairly elongated last. A bit pointy for me, but the shoe is well-made and the leather is sound, and has performed well. Absolutely comparable to AS, Church's or C&J leather, from which I also have experience. There are differences, of course, but nothing drastic. Comparable doesn't mean of equal quality: I feel Cheaney may be superior to some of these but inferior to others. However, based on one pair alone I won't make that judgement public. Down the scale I've only one pair of Loakes I can compare these to. And frankly, they just don't compare; Cheaney is in a whole different league to Loake. So I seriously wouldn't fault the leather, whatever the source. They're solid shoes and worth their price - much more so than many other brands.

I'm also most interested in the Imperial Collection. Haven't yet had the time to buy a pair, but they do look gorgeous and would seem to indicate that Cheaney is moving up-market, not down. I'm guessing their long-term goal is to challenge the bigger names (Church, CJ etc.) rather than Grenson, Loake et al.
 

rabiesinfrance

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
373
Reaction score
15
Originally Posted by Ich_Dien
TBH I've got a lot of time for Cheaney, the oldest pair of shoes still in my rotation are by them and they're holding up great. Refurbished at the Cheaney factory once. Five years old now?



A proper shoe that!
 

patrickBOOTH

Stylish Dinosaur
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
37,977
Reaction score
12,457
Originally Posted by Northampton Novice
Lodger footwear has also followed suit as such and stopped using AS and are using Cheaney for all their shoes from now onwards.

Are you sure about this? I had a conversation with Nathan over bourbon about six months ago and they were still using AS. He said it took a while to get the product that he was going for, but they are turning it out amazing now.
 

patrickBOOTH

Stylish Dinosaur
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
37,977
Reaction score
12,457
Originally Posted by Gent
I don't understand this "sourced from India" crap either. Even with workmanship this argument is used very poorly around here, but now we're talking about raw materials. What difference does the source of the material make? Absolutely none, it's the quality that counts.

I don't know if I agree with this. With natural products the source of the material does affect quality.
 

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by

Featured Sponsor

Summer Loafers: With or Without Socks?

  • With socks

  • No socks


Results are only viewable after voting.

Related Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
459,921
Messages
9,979,066
Members
207,811
Latest member
munrekhabneha
Top