G & G vs. Corthay

[DWFII]



[COLOR=0000FF]Cardboard or crushed up leather and glue?
it all very very bad[/COLOR].

No question, but I don't see leatherboard (that's the Trade name for ground up leather with a binder) in that shoe, either.

[COLOR=0000FF]Even St Crispin use broken up cork filler.
Some cork filler move under insole to outside,
and many shoe still have cork filler stay in same place after many year.
If cork filler is put in good it might stay in place for long term or does it always lead to problem?
What you think of using felt as filler?[/COLOR]

I use some felt as a filler, sometimes. I've been experimenting with it of late. Not because it is better than the leather I have been using for years but simply because if leather is not cemented in...as opposed to glued in (cement being a solvent based material, glue being natural)...leather can creak. Felt will not do that. I use a natural glue (HirschKleber) to affix the felt and I know that if the leather sole rubs against it, it will not complain.

Most cork strips, such as used in the video you cite are crumbs held together with a rubberized, or neoprene binder.

Some cork pastes are held together with pine tar or something like it.

None of them are ideal. But they are cheap and they do fill the cavity.

All are fugitive but the paste maybe less so than the strips...depending on the binder.

[COLOR=0000FF]solid strip or strip glue together?[/COLOR]

Sorry, that's cork crumbs in a neoprene binder.

If you've ever seen real, raw cork it doesn't look anywhere near as homogenous as the cork used in the video. Real, raw cork...not granulated or ground...looks like tree bark. It is corrugated, deeply fissured and and varies between the caramel colour we associate with cork and a deep brown.

A piece as thin as the maker is using in the video would have many holes in it.

 

[Son Of Saphir]



but I don't see leatherboard (that's the Trade name for ground up leather with a binder) in that shoe, either.

Look!
lt look rubbish.
It not good.
It cheap!
lt look puffy.

 

[DWFII]

but I don't see leatherboard (that's the Trade name for ground up leather with a binder) in that shoe, either.

Look!
lt look rubbish.
It not good.
It cheap!
lt look puffy.

All that may be true. But it still doesn't look like leatherboard to me.

Of course, I cannot be certain without handling it, but it just looks like flanky leather to me.

Cheap, yes. Poor quality, to be sure. But still solid leather. And if you look at the other photo which shows where that piece came from, it looks even more like authentic veg tanned leather

 

[fritzl]



Yes it true.
Me be more careful now.

well, i have to say from my experience through the years on sf that bs is a grandmaster of hatchet jobs. no offense.

i have to admit that the report about these corthays is not inspiring. actually it's not a hidden secret that rtw producers are cutting corners. a majority of people buy their footwear for the looks and not the durability. so they cater to their clientele.

imo, it's the sum of experiences from people who actually own and wear shoes of the various brands that are more important then one dissection, though. as dwfII pointed out, you don't need to understand german to understand that there are some issues. how big this issues are irl, can only be confirmed by a person who has first hand experience like e.g. patrick booth.

 

[patrickBOOTH]



Thank you for your detailed answer, patrickBOOTH!
I have a few GGs and the Arca model that I have in mind (one in black with some red details on the edges of the leather) is not readily available from GG mto. I could perhaps go with the uppgingham or one of the Deco models with a two eyelet design but they are not really like the Arca and it would be nice to try Corthay as well but perhaps i should not expect quality in parity with GG if I read you correctly.
Thats good information regarding the sizing. I looked on this site: http://www.upper-shoes.com/chaussures-luxe-hommes-corthay/191,25-arca.html
and they seems to have a similar opionion regarding sizing

I mean, I don't think you should read my small review of Corthay's as them being poor quality. I just don't think the money justifies the materials in comparison to other shoe manufactuerers that make more robust shoes. If you like Corthay's by all means get them. It is not like you are getting garbage. I have shoes from a lot of different makers and I can tell that the leathers used for the uppers is very, very nice and on par with others in the price range. It just seems very, very thin (which some see as desireable) and the patterns on the shoes are very streamlined. I am hard on my shoes, I walk a lot in the city and I just find them too delicate feeling for my needs. I also needed a resole in under a year, despite them being in a medium sized rotation, (thinner soles, too?). If quality is what you are going for in RTW get Rider, Vass, or St. Crispins. If you like the arca and are happy with the shortcomings of goodyear welting by all means get the arca.

As for sizing, both Corthay's 001 last and G&G's TG73 hurt my feet in the exact same spots, so my sizing proportions between the two are probably pretty accurate.

What about current MTO waiting time? Is there any time difference on Corthay vs GG?

I've never ordered any G&G MTO but I hear their wait time is usually months (4-6 months). When I ordered my Corthay shoes the wait time was about 6 weeks

I got my Corthay's in 4 weeks. G&G I have waited 7 months.