How vintage are these Edward Green shoes?

[bengal-stripe]

Originally Posted by well-kept

Hikari,
That is so very kind of you. Thanks for the translation.

+1

 

[talkhot]

That translation is great!
So the shoes with the Made by.. seems to be pre 80's

That makes them really vintage.

I also contacted EG about the shoes. Dumb is I was I forgot to ask about the age...

I've ask them about the last they used and which shoe trees I could best use for them.

EG wrote:
"The shoes are a 9.5F on the 69 last which we do not use anymore but we still have archived. Most of our lasts are based on the 202 so especially at the key areas where the shoe tree needs to fill the shoe so this will be the best tree to get."

 

[hikari013]

The text also mentions something of the shoes with the "made by" mark on them being the type or pattern from the old factory. I don't know anything about Edward Green history however, so maybe someone else can chime in on that.

 

[The Gooch]

Originally Posted by bengal-stripe

Here is a guide to help with dating EG shoes (from the Japanese magazine LAST):

Here's a quick translation of the picture captions. Hope it helps make sense of the pictures.

1. Sockliner

Until the 1980s the stamp on the insole said "made by ..." so if it has that, its definitely an older shoe. <--- So it would seem that your shoe is from before the 80s!

From the 80s through the first half of the 90s, the 'made by' text was removed and the brand name is written in capital letters.

Through the mid 90s this signature logo was used.

Until 2004, the square type logo that was used through the first half of the 90s returned.

From 2004, the logo in the bottom image has been used.

2. Outsole

Through the mid-80s there was a really small embossed logo with capital letters.

Then, through the beginning of the 90s, the size of the lettering was increased.

From the early 90s to today, the style was changed to script lettering.

3. Lining window (Is this what it's called?)

Until the mid-90s, there was no window (cut-out) and the text was directly on the lining.

After the mid-90s, there has been a cutout in the lining with the text inside.

This will help tremendously in my search as I understand each Edward Green shoe produced it better than the last. Something I can really get behind.

Thanks!!!!

 

[clee1982]

awesome thread

 

[Geezer]

Fascinating shoe-nerd thread.

69 has definitely been used recently as a loafer last (I have a 10-year old pair of EG for WS Foster loafers hanging off my toes as I type), and I saw 69-last loafers in Foster's sale this January.

Are we sure the number in the oval is a clear guide to production date? Because a quick rummage through the shoe racks gives me:

mid 90s EGs: 11000 range
mid/late 90s EG for WS Foster: 34000 range
2010 EG for Fosters: 70000 range
2010/2011 EGs: 67000 and 71000 range

So it does correlate: the newer, the higher the number. But a big jump in the 90s. Did EG suddenly expand in the mid/late 90s? Or did they sell me an ancient pair of NOS shoes in the mid 90s (still on their original soles: I must wear them more often). BUt they can't be NOS aas they have the oval cut-out.

Until the mid/late 90s, EG shoes whether EG branded, or for Fosters (I have about a dozen pairs) or Wildsmith (1 left, 1 died a few years ago) did not have the oval. I first saw the oval in the mid-90s, on EG branded EGs. My confusion is that the numerically earliest pair listed above do have the oval cut-out, dating them clearly to the mid-90s. Which, again, suggests a sudden surge in production in the mid/late 90s (RL contract?).


All of which would suggest that a pair of EGs without the oval but numbered 24350 date to 1994 (+ or - 2 years)? And a period of overlap between cut-out and non-cut-out production?