1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Edward Green Lace-up Lasts v. Loafer Lasts

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by Bic Pentameter, May 16, 2006.

  1. Bic Pentameter

    Bic Pentameter Senior member

    Messages:
    796
    Joined:
    May 1, 2002
    Location:
    Seattle
    I have a good idea of my size and fitting in Green's 888 and 606 lasts. Could anyone comment on how the 101, 148 and 65 relate to these lasts?

    The Green catalogue compares the 888, 202, 606, and 82 with each other, and also compares the loafer lasts with each other. Unfortunately, it offers no comparison across the two categories. It would be wonderful if someone could say that the 888 UK 8F will fit the same as the 101 in the same size and fitting.

    I realize that trying the shoes on is the best way to be certain of fit, but unfortunately, that isn't an option.


    Bic
     
  2. bengal-stripe

    bengal-stripe Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    4,441
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    Location:
    London, UK
    I don't think there is a great deal of difference between Edward Green's loafer and regular lasts. I only have two EG loafers, one on 184 and the other one on 65. Definitely the same size as on 202, although the 65 is slightly shorter than 184 (but I think that"˜s typical of all the 'old' lasts like 32). The loafer lasts will be a bit higher in the instep, as you must be able to slide in without the benefit of undoing the laces. (You couldn't get into a lace-up shoe with the laces tightened already.)

    That said, if someone has a particular high or a particular shallow instep it might be worth contacting the factory, as they can compare your personal measurements against the measurements of the last.
     
  3. medwards

    medwards Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    635
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Like Bengal-Stripe, I have loafers constructed on both the 65 and 184 lasts. They are different from each other and from the lasts for shoes that lace. In fit -- if not in look -- the 65 is rather akin to the 606 last (at least on my feet). The 184 is indeed a bit longer but may be a tad tighter in width across the widest part of the foot. While Bengal-Stripe is quite right that such casual lasts have to be constructed in such a way as to allow one to slide into the shoe, it also has to be shaped to keep your foot secure once the shoe is on. As Hilary Freeman says, you do not want a slip-on to be a slip-off. [​IMG]
     
  4. gefinzi

    gefinzi Senior member

    Messages:
    223
    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    This is in no way scientific, just my personal experience.
    My lace ups on the 202 last in 8D/8.5D fits perfectly.
    My lace ups on the 606 last in 8D/8.5D are snug, a bit more than would be ideal, but very acceptable and don't hurt my feet (after the first 2 days).
    I tried a pair of loafers on the 65 last in 8D/8.5D and they were much too tight. Had to be returned.
    I have a pair of loafers on the 184 last in 8E/8.5E that fit well.
    So in my limited experience the loafers have been a somewhat tighter than the 202 or 606 lace-ups.
     
  5. medwards

    medwards Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    635
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Part of the reason for that is they have no laces for support and security and so must compensate in "snugness."
     
  6. thinman

    thinman Senior member

    Messages:
    4,926
    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Location:
    USA
    So if I normally size down 1/2 size in loafers, that would be unnecessary for EG loafers? In other words, if the 202 last fits well in UK 11E, then you would guess that 184 lasted shoes should also fit well in UK 11E?
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by