suitforcourt
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Messages
- 8,242
- Reaction score
- 19,659
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.
Knock me over with a feather; shell cordovan John McHales. We need to keep our eyes open!!
They are not mine, From another thread. The verdict was they are shell. It looks that way to me. There was just the one decent photo, but you can see the coding a little in this one. There is no reason why they shouldn't be. Likely a custom order. I have searched the ads and McHale never advertized shell, but they never advertized a lot of things.You're certain it's shell, Jim? What is the model number?
They are not mine, From another thread. The verdict was they are shell. It looks that way to me. ... There is no reason why they shouldn't be. Likely a custom order. I have searched the ads and McHale never advertized shell, but they never advertized a lot of things.
Yes they would be post 1960. The custom shoe thing seems to have been a 1960 phenomenon. The little bit of discussion on the other thread suggested that someone else had another pair, and the Vintage Shoe Addict somewhere else posted a photo of a pair of plain toes that he said were shell. but it is not obvious as they are nearly mint and could be calf.It would certainly makes sense if post-International Shoe Company acquisition. So likely 1960 at the earliest (by the time it could have been put into production).