Leather or rubber soles?

[DWFII]



It doesn't hurt to revisit the fundamentals every now and then, to review our purchasing habits and boost our knowledge and understanding. I've certainly learnt more about shoes in the process, even if others feel the matter has been thrashed to death or don't think it's worthy of further discussion. Leather versus rubber is an issue that will not go away. I just ignore the parts that I think are irrelevant or boring and try to stay out of the nastiness that can erupt.

That's a big issue on every forum I post to. All the "old-timers" have long since thrashed most of these issues out...even if in the absence of real knowledge...come to a consensus and consider the matter closed. Newbies or people who weren't in on the original discussions are dismissed and/or subtly pressured to conform or go fish.

When some of these issue are raised by newcomers, if the old guard decide to join the conversation at all it is to tell everyone that the issue is boring, inconsequential, and disruptive. Worse these folks seldom actually follow a thread with the intent to contribute something meaningful. They simply kibitz and snipe. As I said, not "atypical"--meaning that this is the modus operandi of some folks here on this forum.

They are as much to blame for a thread going off topic as the people who are actively arguing.

Every person who asks me a legitimate question is ignorant...of some aspect of the issue. That's why they ask. I said in this thread (and many others) that there is no harm nor foul in being ignorant. We are all ignorant about something [which is why I so seldom post to any other topic...I am ignorant of those issues and I recognize that fact].

The onus comes from being confronted with information that comes from a relatively, but objectively, more experienced or reliable source and refusing to acknowledge or learn from it--choosing to remain ignorant, in fact.

It bears repeating: "willful ignorance is the surest path to stupidity."

And when a person is confronted with massively corroborating evidence from multiple sources (#post 95) and deliberately chooses to ignore every single point...to focus instead on one short, incidental paragraph/quotation addressing the universal frustration of dealing with people who choose to dismiss objective information (where ever it is to be found)...it seems suspiciously clear to me that the choice between ignorance/stupidity versus understanding has long since been made.

Most of what is quoted in the last post, is in fact, what I said. You can trace the increasing frustration in my responses--from post #44 onward--no doubt. What has been redacted is the snide, escalating disrespect and derision that I was responding to. And there is a history there that goes beyond this thread...this isn't a video game where you can anonymously take unlooked-for pot shots at people and live to start over.

So...no apologies. A great deal of what I said related to ignorance...not to beat a dead horse--lack of knowledge, lack of experience...and is simple fact. And I not only stand by most those remarks I reiterate them.

--

 

[DWFII]

And yes, it does matter who started it. Simply because my motto is that if you treat me with respect, I'll treat you with respect. Irrespective of what we do or know.

Most people start from there. Some deliberately...again it's a choice...choose to instigate. For no apparent reason or constructive gain. They are getting what they asked for.

 

[RogerP]

It doesn't hurt to revisit the fundamentals every now and then, to review our purchasing habits and boost our knowledge and understanding. I've certainly learnt more about shoes in the process, even if others feel the matter has been thrashed to death or don't think it's worthy of further discussion. Leather versus rubber is an issue that will not go away. I just ignore the parts that I think are irrelevant or boring and try to stay out of the nastiness that can erupt.

Agree completely. It's a shame that some feel they are entitled to dictate content to others and to proclaim on behalf of all what is or is not worthy of discussion. A shame, but not the least bit surprising. If you don't find a topic worthy of discussion, move on. Nobody is forcing you to participate. And if a topic is not in fact worthy of discussion - it will die a natural death quite quickly in any event.

 

[RogerP]

Edit - so not worth it.

 

[dbhdnhdbh]

Hoping to keep this thread alive by getting back to shoes.

I gather GY construction creates a space between the insole and the outsole that must be filled with something. It seems that cork, either a solid piece or a slurry of cork fragments, is the most common. DWF seemed to imply that filling the cavity with a solid piece of leather would be better. Did I understand correctly on this?

Cork compresses down, or moves away, to nothing. But isn't this what you want? When freshly made, the cork provides a bit of cushioning while the footbed gets imprinted with the wearer's feet. Once the sock liner and insole have adapted to those pressure points, the cork has done its job. Since it is so compressible, eventually wouldn't you reach the point that the insole was in contact with the outsole? From there, it could not conform more.

If you used a piece of solid leather, would you have less cushioning at first, and a more limited ability to conform the footbed? The leather would provide more resistance,and the insole could never go as far as to touch the outsole? The leather would be a lot tougher than the cork, but is this desirable?

Obviously, I am making this up, but can someone explain the differences in how shoes would wear using cork vs solid leather in this gap? Is one better than the other? Neither approach would appear to be particularly challenging to do, or expensive. I suppose painting in the cork slurry might be the easiest and fastest maneuver, but not by much. When resoling shoes, could one just ask the cobbler to use leather rather than cork? Would this make any sense?

With handwelted, is there no space at all? Or just a narrower gap between insole and outsole than with GY?

For either handwelted or GY, does the inside of the outsole conform in any way to the wearer's foot, or is the leather too inflexible for that?

Thanks

 

[Patek]

That was a lot of reading.

Everyone is right. I'm thinking of the story of the blind men and the elephant. It is about perspective.

 

[DWFII]



Hoping to keep this thread alive by getting back to shoes.

I gather GY construction creates a space between the insole and the outsole that must be filled with something. It seems that cork, either a solid piece or a slurry of cork fragments, is the most common. DWF seemed to imply that filling the cavity with a solid piece of leather would be better. Did I understand correctly on this?
....[snip]...
Thanks

^+*****

Thank you.

Cork not only moves away, it fragments and disappears. Nor does it stay compressed to any significant degree. If the insole is leather or paperboard, you're probably right or close enough as makes no difference. Because leatherboard and esp. paperboard don't compress at all and the only footbed...if any...you're going to get is depressions where the cork had fled.

But with a veg tanned leather insole of any significant thickness the leather does compress. It may even expand or puff up to some small degree where there is no pressure. It doesn't make any difference what's under there, with the moisture and heat the foot creates, a footbed is going to be formed.

Each filler has its advantages and disadvantages. Cork is fugitive. Leather can, if the maker is not careful, "creak" (that is the technical term). Felt will retain some moisture between the insole and the outsole although traditionally felt was tarred.

Handwelted shoes will have more or less space between the insole and the outsole--it depends on the skill of the maker as well as the substance of the upper materials being used. There's photo here somewhere on the forum that shows how little space is actually necessary...even with heavier leathers--3 ounce upper, 2+ ounce liner. Maybe I'll post it again. (see below)

GY will always have a significant gap between the insole and outsole and once the cork has fled, the potential for creaking again exists. But just as importantly there is then no cushion and no real footbed. But cork is inexpensive and requires no sharp knives or skill to apply.

I go back and forth between leather and felt--a very high grade all natural fiber felt. Leather is actually cheaper in all circumstances (simply because it is scrap) but it's heavy in the thicknesses needed to fill GY cavities and needs to be cemented in and skived level with a very sharp knife. I would like to use only felt but I've yet to come up with a solution or product that would allow me apply a natural pine pitch coating and have it dry, not hard but firm. Again a sharp knife is needed--something that a manufacturer cannot entrust to an unskilled worker.

Let's see...oh! No, the outsole doesn't really conform to the foot much. At least not visibly,. there might be some slight compression going on...we usually wear through right where we are putting the most pressure. And less so with high quality outsoles which have already been compressed by much greater forces than our own weight can bring to bear.

This is before the insole filler has been applied (click to enlarge)

--

 

[nh10222]



^+*****

Thank you.

Cork not only moves away, it fragments and disappears. Nor does it stay compressed to any significant degree. If the insole is leather or paperboard, you're probably right or close enough as makes no difference. Because leatherboard and esp. paperboard don't compress at all and the only footbed...if any...you're going to get is depressions where the cork had fled.

But with a veg tanned leather insole of any significant thickness the leather does compress. It may even expand or puff up to some small degree where there is no pressure. It doesn't make any difference what's under there, with the moisture and heat the foot creates, a footbed is going to be formed.

Each filler has its advantages and disadvantages. Cork is fugitive. Leather can, if the maker is not careful, "creak" (that is the technical term). Felt will retain some moisture between the insole and the outsole although traditionally felt was tarred.

What exactly is creaking?

 

[bengal-stripe]



What exactly is creaking?

Squeaking! --- The shoes make funny (or sometimes obscene) noises with every step.

 

[dbhdnhdbh]

So would it make sense to ask a cobbler to use leather rather than cork when resoling? Assuming of course you believed your cobbler could do it. Does it have to be a perfect fit around the edges?

 

[bengal-stripe]



So would it make sense to ask a cobbler to use leather rather than cork when resoling?

No, one of the main causes of squeaking/creaking is leather rubbing over leather.

Leather can, if the maker is not careful, "creak" (that is the technical term)........ and needs to be cemented in.........

 

[DWFII]



So would it make sense to ask a cobbler to use leather rather than cork when resoling? Assuming of course you believed your cobbler could do it. Does it have to be a perfect fit around the edges?

Contemporary cobblers (shoe repairmen) seldom deal with glue (AKA "paste")...glue being natural starch or protein based adhesives as opposed to cement which is rubber or neoprene based. Glue requires pressing, cement is contact adhesive (among which is "All Purpose cement or AP).

Leather could be substituted for cork ...and it would be right up a cobbler's alley so to speak. But if the shoes are GY you're gonna get some thickness ...and weight... underfoot. If it is hand welted, that's another story--over forty years I've never had a creak in my boots or shoes but I've always been careful to use cement.

As was mentioned creaks result from leather rubbing against leather so the filler has to be solidly cemented in.

Traditionally...before cements were invented...glues were used and how this problem was addressed short of using tarred felt I really can't say. I suspect that tarring and tarred felt were the solutions and still creaking was not uncommon.

Here's an excerpt from a posting by a good friend of mine and one of the world's leading shoe historians as well as the Head of the Shoemaking Department at Colonial Williamsburg--Al Saguto:

But, before AP cements, or for those who prefer to use paste: Rees (1813) says too much paste can lead to squeaking--no explanation, but I imagine as the paste broke down in wear, it left voids and "loose" bits that would rub. I have a pair of mine (paste not AP) that squeak a little in the heel when they haven't been worn for a while, because they've dried out.

I guess just be sure all layers, lifts, and whatnot are well rasped/roughed to begin with. Another old-fashioned solution for squeaking soles was merely to knock in a few wood pegs in across the sole to keep the layers from plying against one another. Cork and tarred felt bottom fill also were well known and employed in part because they prevent squeaking. It's one of those cases where "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure".

 

[nh10222]

Squeaking! --- The shoes make funny (or sometimes obscene) noises with every step.

Oooooooh of course.... like floorboards... Silly me. I've even heard wet boots making that sound. Maybe not as bad as those with leather filler, though.

Contemporary cobblers (shoe repairmen) seldom deal with glue (AKA "paste")...glue being natural starch or protein based adhesives as opposed to cement which is rubber or neoprene based. Glue requires pressing, cement is contact adhesive (among which is "All Purpose cement or AP).

Leather could be substituted for cork ...and it would be right up a cobbler's alley so to speak. But if the shoes are GY you're gonna get some thickness ...and weight... underfoot. If it is hand welted, that's another story--over forty years I've never had a creak in my boots or shoes but I've always been careful to use cement.

As was mentioned creaks result from leather rubbing against leather so the filler has to be solidly cemented in.

Traditionally...before cements were invented...glues were used and how this problem was addressed short of using tarred felt I really can't say. I suspect that tarring and tarred felt were the solutions and still creaking was not uncommon.

I imagine the there is also potential for the thorough cement job for leather filling to obstruct moisture wicking. Until it broke down, that is.

 

[DWFII]



I imagine the there is also potential for the thorough cement job for leather filling to obstruct moisture wicking. Until it broke down, that is.

Neoprene cement is a long time breaking down to the point of permeability. Pretty much the reason I have been slowly moving more and more towards felt. One of these days...I'll figure something out. I guess if I had a hot pot of pitch I could just dab some on the insole and push the felt into it but for now I use HirschKleber--a hide (?) glue of some sort.

BTW, the English had a saying: "Creaking shoes are unpaid shoes".

And, FWIW, from master Saguto again:

"we do have one 18thc ref. to a customer who specifically asked for shoes that "creaked", so go figure. Maybe some liked it? I've always appreciated a tiny bit of a creek in tall boots--reminds me of the nice saddle you wear under them"

 

[chogall]

Rubber sole for anyone lives in inclement weather conditions and needs to walk outdoors on a daily basis.

Goodyear, hand sewn, or whatever construction with either single, double or triple sole will be soaked through and through up to the leather upper.

I would much prefer dry feet instead of wet feet in leather soles. But its just me.