Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Harrydog, Mar 11, 2012.
I wasn't aware of the Ecton EG model. Will do some further research, thanks.
That's the Ecton
The difference is a set of additional facings (underneath the lacings) which the Carter does have but not the Ecton.
The Ecton's are different to the RL Carters, here is a pic of a pair of Ecton's (not mine).
The Ecton's are basically a 3 eyelet version of the Dover, without the heel counter and with a single sole.
damn, some nice shoes rite there, thanks for posting
Like these too- they seem to work quite well without the heel counter.
Not bad wtihout the heel counter but I prefer them with . . .
EG E width is NOT equal to an American D. At least in EG's view, and from my experience also. How can you know for sure? There is only one width printed on the inside, but two lengths. It is true that for many, if not nearly all, British makers, an E does equal a US D. C&J is a good example.
All of my Greens are marked D, and that is my US width also.
Of course you should choose the fit you like. Green's philosophy is that shoes should fit snugly in width, like a slipper. Snugger than many Americans are used to.
It does come down to fit. I wear 8.5/9E which I find to be equivalent to a US D (almost). But it does come down to the last and how it fits you.
I believe that there are some posts here in this thread stating that EG shoe width sizing is the same in the UK and US. I take that to mean an EG shoe with the UK/US size labeled E at BB indicates a UK E. But if you require a UK D (narrow) then I see what you are driving at.
Others may care to comment or correct my interpretation.
But it would also indicate a US E, no?
Yes, the stormwelt/split reverse is quite different from goiserer and bentivegna. It's essentially just a normal welt with a lip running around the outside.
Funnily enough, if you look at Alden's storm welt, they have faux stitching on the top split lip, which makes it look like it's Bentivegna construction, when it's really just a normal welt with a lip (i.e. the stitching does not run through the upper to the insole). I think this is called "fudge" stitching.
I think the EG "E" width is much closer to a U.S. "D" width. Maybe a "D+" but certainly not an U.S. "E" and the EG "D" is narrower than a U.S. "D."
So the Brendon might actually be more of an Ecton boot than a Dover boot . . .
All EG's I have seen show both the UK and US length and a single width, e.g. 10.5/11B. Therefore, I would conclude that they do not have a width coding specifically for the US.
Comparing the picture of the 'Brendon' (which I've never seen before) to my four eyelets 'Halifax' (which is the boot version of the 'Dover'), I believe it is actually the same boot (same pattern) with just a different arrangement of the eyelets.
At one time, EG did offer the 'Halifax' with five eyelets. Again it was the identical pattern, just the eyelets were a bit closer spaced to get five pairs into that same space. Judging by the picture, the 'Brendon' might be the five eyelets 'Halifax' version with the bottom two let off. The eyelets look closer together than on my four eyelets version.
Here is the five and the four eyelet version of the ;Halifax:
Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
Actually my mistake, looking at the pictures again, there is a difference in the pattern between 'Brendon' and 'Halifax'. The bottom corner, where the lowest eyelet sits is cut off on the 'Brandon'.
I'm not sure about that. I would take the heel counter as being more definitive measure of the extrapolation of a shoe to a boot, rather than the number of eyelets. I think the number of eyelets from a shoe to boot conversion is always something that may change because the lacing and elongation up the ankle is one of the main components of the difference. I think it is safe to say, however, if anything, it is a mixture of both.
Separate names with a comma.