Edward Green Appreciation: Pictures, Info, and Where to Buy

[S K M]

These are Chelsea? Did you have any tearing?

Chelseas yes, and not any tearing that I thought of. But it might have been worse than I thought. Also, they didn't charge extra for it.

 

[jischwar]

Chelseas yes, and not any tearing that I thought of. But it might have been worse than I thought. Also, they didn't charge extra for it.

Possible it was something they had to fix on their side whilst removing the original soles or something.

 

[shoefan57]

View attachment 2226129
View attachment 2226131

Just got these back from refurbishment, very nice job and ready for another ten years of service. However, notice the patches in front of the laces. Haven't seen that before, guess they were added due to creasing leather, though I wasn't asked about it. It's extremely neatly done though, also considering the colouring of the skin. In fact, it took me a couple of days to notice 😅

Excellent work and very neatly done. I’d assume that EG saw cracking which needed strengthening- it’s the only reason I know that patch shoes . It may only have been obvious from the inside. Dean Girling once told me that shoe leather cracks from the inside first. Nonetheless they’ve done a great job of it.

 

[jischwar]

Forgot how comfortable these were

 

[tuna roll]

View attachment 2226129
View attachment 2226131

Just got these back from refurbishment, very nice job and ready for another ten years of service. However, notice the patches in front of the laces. Haven't seen that before, guess they were added due to creasing leather, though I wasn't asked about it. It's extremely neatly done though, also considering the colouring of the skin. In fact, it took me a couple of days to notice 😅

Interesting repair and seems very very neatly done. Took me a while to even notice.

I imagine they recolor the whole upper, so the patches match the rest?

 

[mrs25962]

Interesting repair indeed. If you didn't expect it, I would certainly inquire. Perhaps it's just me, but I wouldn't
say it's "not" noticeable and in my opinion it takes away from the aesthetic of the EG Chelsea.

 

[symphvaria]

Forgot how comfortable these were
View attachment 2226205

What last are these?

 

[jischwar]

What last are these?

72

 

[symphvaria]

72

The shape is just perfect. Makes me wonder if I made a mistake doing my MTO Galways in 82. I know EG are still doing 82 Galway makeups, but the slim almond toe just feels like a relic of 2010s menswear at this point.

 

[DorianGreen]

The shape is just perfect. Makes me wonder if I made a mistake doing my MTO Galways in 82. I know EG are still doing 82 Galway makeups, but the slim almond toe just feels like a relic of 2010s menswear at this point.

Not a fan of the 82 last, too pointy for my taste, especially for boots like the Galways. I have them on the 64 last and they look just perfect with that rugged, military vibe.

 

[jischwar]

The shape is just perfect. Makes me wonder if I made a mistake doing my MTO Galways in 82. I know EG are still doing 82 Galway makeups, but the slim almond toe just feels like a relic of 2010s menswear at this point.

Depends how you intend to wear them. I really only wear these with tweeds and cords whereas my 82 DOAK I wear with gabardines and other lighter wools

 

[symphvaria]

Depends how you intend to wear them. I really only wear these with tweeds and cords whereas my 82 DOAK I wear with gabardines and other lighter wools

I ended up with a boot that’s kinda neither fish nor fowl because they’re cordovan and also almond toed, much like the regular cordovan Galways EG does for RTW. I find that I wear my boots with more rugged clothing (jeans, cords, tweeds, etc. etc.), and the makeup is inherently kind of casual, so I end up sort of ogling the mismatch between the silhouette of my shoes and the rest of my outfits more often than not. Makes me wonder if I should try for a relast, though I also don’t know if I’d go for 64, 72, or maybe even 303.

 

[jischwar]

I ended up with a boot that’s kinda neither fish nor fowl because they’re cordovan and also almond toed, much like the regular cordovan Galways EG does for RTW. I find that I wear my boots with more rugged clothing (jeans, cords, tweeds, etc. etc.), and the makeup is inherently kind of casual, so I end up sort of ogling the mismatch between the silhouette of my shoes and the rest of my outfits more often than not. Makes me wonder if I should try for a relast, though I also don’t know if I’d go for 64, 72, or maybe even 303.

Yeah, that's a tough call and I totally see where you are coming from. May be worth reaching out, not sure how easy to relast to the first 2, but could see 202 being a possibility

 

[BlueSteel]

I ended up with a boot that’s kinda neither fish nor fowl because they’re cordovan and also almond toed, much like the regular cordovan Galways EG does for RTW. I find that I wear my boots with more rugged clothing (jeans, cords, tweeds, etc. etc.), and the makeup is inherently kind of casual, so I end up sort of ogling the mismatch between the silhouette of my shoes and the rest of my outfits more often than not. Makes me wonder if I should try for a relast, though I also don’t know if I’d go for 64, 72, or maybe even 303.

Your call of course, but I looked at some online photos of Galways on 82 and I don't mind the look at all. I'd wear it with jeans, cords, tweeds for sure. Definitely not a work boot, but a nice style of boot to elevate a casual or business-casual outfit!

 

[jellyroller]

I’m surprised to see the criticism of 82. I don’t have anything on 82 but have always admired the sleekness of it on Galways and oxfords.