Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by david3558, Feb 24, 2011.
Searched a few pages hoping to find the answer but no luck. Anyone familiar with what model this could be? Looks like a Coniston with different eyelets and sole.
Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
Probably a special make up for a retailer, it's similar to the coniston but differ for eyelets, last (240 usually used by peal&co) and for the flat welt and double leather sole.
It's really nice.
I have the 348, which I find a bit narrow in a 7.5UK and the 363 boot last, which I find to be nearly perfect in an 8UK. But, with boots, due to the ankle lacing, there's much less chance of heel slippage, which was the problem with the 348 in size 8.
I'm an 8.5US on the brannock. I have narrow heels, so heel slippage is common, but I have flat feet that spread out, so a narrow shoe doesn't fit on the ball, even though it's perfect on the heel.
How does the 325 last fit compared with the 337? My Belgraves are a little tight at the ball of the foot and there is no way I could go narrower.
Looks alot like the C&J for BB Black Fleece boot I have. Mine are dark brown grain calf.
Sorry for the late reply, busy day!
At first they were so tight i was going to sell them (picked them up at B&S) but i just put them on during evening when i watched TV and after 2-3 of those sessions they were ok. When i started to walk in them they stretched more and after maybe 3-4 times they got really comfy. Now i can wear them all day but when i got them maybe 2h. I´m happy i didn´t sell them and took a UK7.5 instead.
This is tricky. I always try 0.5 size under what i think is best just for reference so i always feel confident i took the best size. After one year of use i have several shoes that i think i could have gone with the 0.5 smaller size (they fit fine but lost that snug fit) but i know i´ve tried that size and they were too small. So i´ve came to the conclusion that i´m UK 7.25 in most shoes...
thanks for all the replies, guys.
kw - i would love bespoke, but my wallet wont let me. [read - wallet and wife]
frank - thanks for answering my follow up, much appreciated.
The variations always intrigued me. Theoretically, the girth of the shoes from each respective line (HG, BG) should be fairly similar except length and toe shape (since C&J has a set of trees for each line). However, this does not seem the case. Today: Somerville with matching uppers and shaft in brown calf
I have the wholecut weymouth in 337 and the Chukka boot Chepstow in 325 so its not really the best comparison, but
I'd say the 325 is roomier in every way.
I dont think you will have any problem with it being too narrow.
I hope I'm not spamming the thread, but would C&J be considered superior in quality to Alden? I'm specifically trying to compare Alden boots (shell or calf) with say C&J boots.
Just my experience with both brands, I find (when) you get better finishing with Alden shell and obviously more variety but C&J hands down has better construction, quality, and consistency. Alden does casual better than C&J and vice versa for sleekness.
I have yet to have any quality issues with any of my Alden's but I have read a number threads were people have had. I don't remember reading any threads were people have had quality issues with C&J, but imagine there may be some who have. Not sure if this has to do with more Alden's being purchased or C&J doing a better job of quality control, but I do get the feeling C&J does a better job in regards to quality control.
The one thing Alden tends to get right and better than most if not all others is the luster of their shell.
For me however the choice has more to do with design than questions of quality because so far my experience has been equally great in regards to quality.
There are several threads and many posts which discuss quality issues of many manufacturers including C&J actually.
However I feel I agree with earlier post regarding Crockett's superior construction.
that day will come...
Separate names with a comma.