More shoe dissections by piedencap

[slt]

Not sure if this is already old news; but anyway, there are 3 more shoe dissections to be seen at the piedencap forum: an AE, a Lobb and a C&J

 

[voxsartoria]

The comments about the leather used in the AE upper are interesting.

The comparison is to Bookbinder.


- B

 

[itsstillmatt]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

The comments about the leather used in the AE upper are interesting.

The comparison is to Bookbinder.


- B
You really have a thing for A&E. Why the hell are people cutting their shoes apart?

 

[Eccentric]

 

[DocHolliday]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

The comments about the leather used in the AE upper are interesting.

The comparison is to Bookbinder.

Those do look like CG, at least from the flash photos. AE does use some CG, doesn't it? Or has in the past, anyway.

 

[DocHolliday]

Originally Posted by iammatt

Why the hell are people cutting their shoes apart?

How would you know how durable the shoe would have been if you didn't destroy it?

 

[slt]

Originally Posted by iammatt

Why the hell are people cutting their shoes apart?

I suspect they want to use the leather for making a custom gun holster.

 

[edmorel]

Originally Posted by iammatt

Why the hell are people cutting their shoes apart?

that's some crazy sh*t.

 

[voxsartoria]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

Those do look like CG, at least from the flash photos. AE does use some CG, doesn't it? Or has in the past, anyway.

I mention it because if so, it wouldn't be representative of AE production in general. That Lobb Barros, for example, looks like one of the old C&J contracted ones...can't tell for sure.

I'm not sure why it is surprising that there would be synthetic or secondary manufactured components...none of the three makers make claims to the contrary.

- B

 

[voxsartoria]

Originally Posted by iammatt

You really have a thing for A&E.

I just a couple pairs of G&G, mostly so that you can hate on them for their effeminate sole.

Originally Posted by iammatt

Why the hell are people cutting their shoes apart?

What's going to get disassembled next?

I vote for pocket squares. I want to know what's really hidden in those things.


- B

 

[mr monty]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

How would you know how durable the shoe would have been if you didn't destroy it?


You wear the shoes, that's tells if the shoes are durable.

Anything else is just wishful expectations.

 

[itsstillmatt]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

I just a couple pairs of G&G, mostly so that you can hate on them for their effeminate sole.


- B

The soles are fine. It is the last shapes that are ugly.

 

[voxsartoria]

Originally Posted by iammatt

The soles are fine. It is the last shapes that are ugly.

Booooooo!

- B

 

[itsstillmatt]

Originally Posted by voxsartoria

Booooooo!

- B
Well, that was fun

.

 

[bengal-stripe]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

How would you know how durable the shoe would have been if you didn't destroy it?

It’s not likely to give you any information.

There are no mechanical tests which could give an indication about how long the sole or the stitching is likely to last. All they can come up with is the material of toe box and heel counter. In the case of most ready-to-wear shoes this is usually a thermoplastic material that takes on the form of the last. Whether or not this is superior or inferior is highly debatable (I know that even some bespoke firms prefer it, while others think it is the devil’s work It’s just a question of prejudice.) Whether one uses heel shanks of metal, wood, hammered leather or none at all (like AE) is a matter of individual preference; after all, it doesn’t matter as long as the waist does not collapse (which I have never seen to happen, maybe it‘s just an urban myth).

Equally the absurd suggestion that John Lobb ought not to use metal (half) eyelets as reinforcement. It is certainly not absolute necessary (and many bespoke shoes do without) but it is considered by the general public as a sign of quality. So, why should they leave them out, when many shoppers would consider this a construction fault.

In none of the “reviews”, I could find any factual information, for example. the number of stitches per cm/inch for uppers or welt,, or the narrowness and quality of the welt cutting.

Who are these people carrying out the “dissections”? It appears, judging by the looks of the messy and disorganised workshops, they are the average repair-job cobblers, apparently without any industrial experience. Only an experienced production manager or some store’s buyer, could voice an opinion whether a particular pair of shoes, offers good value at it’s particular price point.

Shoemakers and hairdressers are notorious to bad-mouth their competitors. They both like to put themselves on a pedestal and telling you (for commercial reasons) that nobody is as good and knows more about shoemaking/hairdressing than they.

So, why give them space in a forum?