Loake Last Comparison (026, Capital, 3625)

[Sander]

As the title says: how do these lasts compare in terms of:

- size (e.g. size x in last y means -0.5 in last z etc.)
- shape (e.g. suitable for high instep, roomy toebox etc.)
- look (sleekness, chisel or rounded toe etc.)

I found the following related threads, but they didn't contain all the information I wanted:
Loake 3635 last
Loake capital last (thread #1)
Loake Capital last (thread #2)

Here are pictures of the lasts:

026:

Capital:

3625:

 

[Wes Bourne]

I have experience with the 026 and capital lasts, both in UK8F. For reference, my feet measure US9D with slightly low insteps.

026:
-traditional round toe design
-short length
-good for average to high insteps

Capital:
-soft square toe
-longer than the 026 (iirc, I don't have my 026 last shoes anymore)
-good for average to high insteps
-roomy toebox

The 026 was unwearably tight in 8F and I'm quite convinced an 8.5F would have resulted in a poor fit. The Capital fits me fine with felt tongue pads and slim 3/4 orthotics.

*edit: fwiw, both shoes were bals/oxfords.

 

[Sander]

Thanks, that's valuable information. Sounds like the Capital last would fit me rather well.

Now, anyone with experience with the 3625?

 

[Slewfoot]

Would you guys describe the Capital last as being on the narrow, snug side in terms of width or are they a pretty standard medium width like Peal for Brooks Brothers and most others?

 

[Wes Bourne]

Originally Posted by Slewfoot

Would you guys describe the Capital last as being on the narrow, snug side in terms of width or are they a pretty standard medium width like Peal for Brooks Brothers and most others?

I find my Capital last shoes (UK8F) roomier (all over) than my US9D BB Peals (AS 87 and 99 lasts and C&J 240 last).

 

[Slewfoot]

Originally Posted by Wes Bourne

I find my Capital last shoes (UK8F) roomier (all over) than my US9D BB Peals (AS 87 and 99 lasts and C&J 240 last).

Good to know - thanks! I'm a US 10.5 C width so if I were to ever do these I'd likely need a tongue pad and insole (like a bunch of my shoes have anyway) in a Loake size 9.5 F.

 

[Wes Bourne]

Originally Posted by Slewfoot

Good to know - thanks! I'm a US 10.5 C width so if I were to ever do these I'd likely need a tongue pad and insole (like a bunch of my shoes have anyway) in a Loake size 9.5 F.

Moar EGs instead!

 

[Slewfoot]

Originally Posted by Wes Bourne

Moar EGs instead!

Ha! That's always ideal! The one pair I like from Loake are the Blackfriars double monks which are similar to the JL Chapel.

 

[killercadi]

I have a pair on the capital last. I like they are roomier than my C&J on the 348 last.

 

[Smudge]

In my experience, Monkstraps on the 026 last run a little bigger than Balmorals on the same last so I would size down 1/2 a size (or go one narrower). I have 3 pairs of Loake Balmorals (brogue and semi brogues) all of which fit perfectly in 10F. I ordered a pair of Monkstraps on the 026 last (10F again) and have had to put insoles in.

 

[Sander]

Now anyone with experience on the 3625 last?

 

[Sander]

Decided to take the risk and bought these:

They fit me better than the 026 last; will post pics and more details later.

 

[aj_del]

^^ Those look great, look forward to photos. Also could you post a link to the shoes.

 

[Sander]

I can only compare it to the 026, I don't have shoes on the capital last.
The 3625 fits me (high instep, long toes, overall small feet, esp. small heel) better than the 026. I have chukkas on the 026 in 10 and 10.5 and neither fits really well. 3625 in 10 on the other hand fits me relatively well. There's still the problem with the instep (slight V is formed when laced), but it isn't as bad.
Especially the toebox is roomier on the 3625.

The look: the 3625 is chiseled and a little elongated, a very nice and sleek looking last imho.

Quality: this model is the "Herring Reading", a line to the standards of Loake's "Shoemakers" (if I'm not wrong), one step under the 1880 line. I wouldn't have bought non-suede shoes, the normal leather of the 1880 range already isn't great.
I see nothing wrong with them at first glance (though I can't look inside the shoe, where the reason for the price most likely lies). One noticeable sign of cheapness: you can see the thread where the quarters are sewn together, on all my other oxfords, this is covered with a tiny leather flap.
A big disadvantage so far is the tongue: it isn't curved at the end, but rectangular; it pricks at the ankle in a really, really unpleasant way. It's almost unwearable this way. But I guess it isn't that bad, either it will soften up or I will cut it curved. Will report later.

The pics (I also included a few pics of a chukka on the 026 to compare):

 

[hossoso]

****, I'm going to have to take another look at Loake. This is the same as Tyrwhitt, no?