How to identify Lobb Prestige & St Crepin?

[Jangofett]

After searching the archives, cant seem to find the answer.

So how do one identify a JL RTW piece from their Prestige line?

Does it mean all Prestiges come with full bevelled waist on their soles? Do any Prestiges come with normal soles?

What about their St Crepin range? Does it also comes with full bevelled waist and the year on the inside of the shoes?

Any illuminating info from experts would be much appreciated. Cheers!

 

[LS7]



So how do one identify a JL RTW piece from their Prestige line?
Does it mean all Prestiges come with full bevelled waist on their soles?

This. The Prestige line has a full bevelled waist, the Classic line is only slightly curved. The waist is also stamped with the JL insignia on Prestige shoes.

Can't comment on St. Crepin's as I haven't seen those in person.

 

[tj100]



After searching the archives, cant seem to find the answer.
So how do one identify a JL RTW piece from their Prestige line?
Does it mean all Prestiges come with full bevelled waist on their soles? Do any Prestiges come with normal soles?
What about their St Crepin range? Does it also comes with full bevelled waist and the year on the inside of the shoes?
Any illuminating info from experts would be much appreciated. Cheers!

Prestige always have a beveled waist and come with lasted trees included.

The St. Crepin is not a "range" per se, but a limited release shoe in the Prestige range. In the past, these shoes have been identified only by their model year ("John Lobb 2009") and were released on Saint Crispin's Day (October 25).

 

[Jangofett]



Prestige always have a beveled waist and come with lasted trees included.
The St. Crepin is not a "range" per se, but a limited release shoe in the Prestige range. In the past, these shoes have been identified only by their model year ("John Lobb 2009") and were released on Saint Crispin's Day (October 25).

So applying what we learnt, did the unfortunately named Sausages got it wrong by declaring the Houghton as Prestiges?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/John-Lobb-H...er-Formal-Lace-Up-Shoes-UK-11-E-/360401434849

And if my JL says John Lobb 2003 at the sides, does that make it a St Crepin?

 

[tj100]



So applying what we learnt, did the unfortunately named Sausages got it wrong by declaring the Houghton as Prestiges?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/John-Lobb-H...er-Formal-Lace-Up-Shoes-UK-11-E-/360401434849

Yes; oddly enough, I can't find any retailers of the Houghton (and I've never heard of the model). It may be production for SS2012 that the factory prematurely sold the 2nds of, but that's my only explanation. These are not prestige shoes; they also will not retail for $1650; more like $1100-1200. I will say that Lobbs are very commonly misrepresented by sellers on eBay (and sometimes on B&S, but they're often corrected here).

And if my JL says John Lobb 2003 at the sides, does that make it a St Crepin?

Hmm. Interesting question. I believe they only started calling them "St. Crepin" in 2009. A John Lobb 2003 is thus not technically a "St. Crepin" model, but it's effectively the same thing.

 

[Jangofett]

[ATTACHMENT=1310]$(KGrHqNHJBkE63VtjCZJBOzlmWcl4Q~~60_3.jpg (87k. jpg file)[/ATTACHMENT]

Here's something to muddy the waters a bit.

This is described as '2004' on the inside but the soles are definitely not bedevelled as you can see the stitches at the sides and the stylings is more of Lobbs RTW range.

So Prestige?

 

[tj100]

That is a hideous resole (and other maintenance) of the Vintage 2004. See what it's supposed to look like:

http://www.styleforum.net/t/263070/john-lobb-vintage-2004-in-chestnut-8000-last-size-10e-uk-11e-us

As I said above, a lot of sellers misrepresent what they've got. IMHO, this is more due to their lack of knowledge than anything else. There's just not a lot of info out there about the brand, and you can't go to your local Nordstroms to compare.

 

[bengal-stripe]



[ATTACHMENT=1310]$(KGrHqNHJBkE63VtjCZJBOzlmWcl4Q~~60_3.jpg (87k. jpg file)[/ATTACHMENT]
Here's something to muddy the waters a bit.
This is described as '2004' on the inside but the soles are definitely not bedevelled as you can see the stitches at the sides and the stylings is more of Lobbs RTW range.
So Prestige?

Those shoes have been butchered.

They had a half sole applied, stitched crudely with huge stitches. By the size of the stitching. I presume they were run through a Blake machine and have now an additional row of stitches all over the insole.

Stay well clear.

 

[tj100]



Those shoes have been butchered.

I am curious what condition those shoes were in (and how they got there) that made the resole + polish job an improvement. They must have been in a terrible industrial accident or something.

 

[Jangofett]



That is a hideous resole (and other maintenance) of the Vintage 2004. See what it's supposed to look like:
http://www.styleforum.net/t/263070/john-lobb-vintage-2004-in-chestnut-8000-last-size-10e-uk-11e-us
As I said above, a lot of sellers misrepresent what they've got. IMHO, this is more due to their lack of knowledge than anything else. There's just not a lot of info out there about the brand, and you can't go to your local Nordstroms to compare.

No kidding! Thats really a Prestige! With the stylings I thought this was one of those Lobb country shoes JL makes for HRH to wear during one of those fox hunts while they are busy traipsing over others' private properties.

I am impressed. You should get a job with JL.

I didnt want to ask in the first post cos I didnt want to press my luck but do you know how to distinguish between the MTO and RTW of JLP, I mean JL Paris and St James then?

 

[Jangofett]



They had a half sole applied, stitched crudely with huge stitches.

Stay well clear.

Ehm you mean the Blake stitching cant be remediated? The owner probably couldnt find a good shoe guy near him.
If those were mine, I would have replaced the damn soles with some nice Reidenbach ones totally.
Probably cheaper by half or more than getting JL to resole them again.

 

[tj100]



I didnt want to ask in the first post cos I didnt want to press my luck but do you know how to distinguish between the MTO and RTW of JLP, I mean JL Paris and St James then?

You're confusing a few things here. There are a few different categories:

JLP RTW
JLP MTO
JLP Bespoke
JLSJ (Bespoke)

All John Lobb St. James are bespoke. They are easy to tell from JLP simply by the branding in them. The John Lobb logo is sort of a signature on the insole, and the royal warrants are present. It's quite easy to tell a JLSJ shoe from a JLP shoe. The lasts are also quite different (in my opinion, the JLSJ shoes are not handsome).

The three JLP categories can be more difficult to tell. I've never seen a pair of JLP Bespoke in person. I believe the only marking on the inside is the John Lobb signature (similar to JLSJ), but no royal warrants.

JPL RTW and MTO are indistinguishable unless you really know your JLP history. You'd have to know that a particular model was never made in the color/last/sole for RTW. The shoes are basically indistinguishable, but an obvious tip-off would be different sizes on the left and right shoes (a common MTO request), or a really odd color.

 

[bengal-stripe]



I am curious what condition those shoes were in (and how they got there) that made the resole + polish job an improvement. They must have been in a terrible industrial accident or something.

Initially I thought it was a re-sole job. But the JL heel top-lift is totally undamaged. (An cobbler wouldn't be able to get hold of that piece. He would have just replaced it with any old top-lift).

So I presume the new sole (maybe 3mm (1/8") or less, would have been added as "protection". There is a thriving market for "Schutzsohlen" in Germany, fuelled by irresponsible cobblers who want to earn a crust.. They will ruin a brand-new and perfect shoe with their crude applied "protection".

The original sole applied byJohn Lobb is likely to be of a far higher quality than the additional one.

 

[tj100]



Ehm you mean the Blake stitching cant be remediated? The owner probably couldnt find a good shoe guy near him.
If those were mine, I would have replaced the damn soles with some nice Reidenbach ones totally.
Probably cheaper by half or more than getting JL to resole them again.

If they were cheap enough, I might buy them and send them straight to B. Nelson for a full recraft.

I don't particularly like the style, but if it was something I did like, I'd pay <$100 plus another ~$100 to B. Nelson, and have a pretty solid shoe for $200+.

Unfortunately, somebody on eBay is probably going to pay $400 for those monstrosities.

 

[Jangofett]



Initially I thought it was a re-sole job. But the JL heel top-lift is totally undamaged. (An cobbler wouldn't be able to get hold of that piece. He would have just replaced it with any old top-lift).
So I presume the new sole (maybe 3mm (1/8") or less, would have been added as "protection". There is a thriving market for "Schutzsohlen" in Germany, fuelled by irresponsible cobblers who want to earn a crust.. They will ruin a brand-new and perfect shoe with their crude applied "protection".
The original sole applied byJohn Lobb is likely to be of a far higher quality than the additional one.

Heh! Maybe the owner wanted the cobbler to do that cos he wanted the Lobb heel top-lift to be retained?