Reducing tension in shoe trees (split-toe)

[ElPrincipe]

Forgive the repetition on this topic... but judging from my own searches (probably not exhaustive) and the nature of the query, I think it might be a bit of a new one...

Okay, so I already own like a dozen pairs of cedar shoe trees - they're the split-toe variety in a generic size L (they look like this)

Backstory
At some point the place where I get them from changed the design slightly, so that they are shorter overall, but the wood that makes up the forefoot was made a bit chunkier and wider. I figured that the pro of this design is that the length-ways tension is reduced, but is offset by the wider front (i.e., less overall tension required to push the toes apart for wider shoe spaces).

I own about half in the older longer version, and half in the newer shorter. Overall I'd say I prefer the newer version because of the reduced tension.

However, the old design - with the narrower wood - is still naturally better for narrower shoes. And guess what? I just bought some more shoes which are somewhat narrow.

The problem
Therefore, I want to reduce the tension in my older pairs so that there is less "pushback" against the heel of the shoe, which I feel is excessive. I can see that this is certainly doable in some way, as a simple screw on the side of the heel conveniently allows you to unfasten it, exposing the metal tube and allowing you to take out the spring.

I guess I'm wondering: should I saw down the metal tube, or alter/replace the spring inside to achieve this?

I brought this problem to my cobbler but he shot down the idea before I could fully explain it, saying that he doesn't do "joinery" (seriously). I might take it to another store, but thought I'd float the idea here first.

And finally... the never-ending shoe tree debate
Also, is there some kind of innate problem with split-toe shoe trees as opposed to other designs? Whilst visiting my cobbler, he also (rather inexplicably) denigrated my shoe trees by telling me to "get some proper shoe trees" as a solution, and brandished this type at me:

He said my type would "stretch shoes", but I pointed out that these also have tubes (two in fact) which also have springs, which therefore also have tension... to which he had no reply.

I must say, I have not tried every single type. At the very beginning, when I started investing in trees, I tried both the split-toe style and the "fuller" kind pictured above. I personally preferred the split-toe as they went in and out of my shoes easier and fully filled out the forefoot, preserving the shape of the shoe.

In my opinion, the primary purpose of shoe trees are to reduce unsightly creases and bends in the leather after each wear. And these occur primarily in the forefoot. Moisture absorption is secondary. So when people advise by simply saying "size down" when there is a question of fit, I would say no: make sure the forefoot is properly filled first and foremost! Agree?

Thanks

 

[ernestgraingergrace]

Hi, my experience with shoe trees have not been good, I am not sure we need any more of them.

A cautionary tale and a proposal for a more specific way of using of shoe trees...

I have always loved leather shoes, from when I was a small child and my pairs would only cost 50-100USD, to now when my pairs go higher than 1000USD. When I started buying these expensive shoes, I read about shoe trees and made sure to get wooden ones for each pair of shoes I had.

The trees sure kept the shape of my shoes, six years later and the creasing on the outer leather is minimal, certainly better looking than my last pair of Clark's Bostonians. But the insides of these shoes tell a very different story, almost 50% of my pairs have holes or scratches on the lining at the contact points of the wood and the leather. I first noticed lining damage on a pair of JM Westons, I thought this was because the lining was supple (too supple, maybe) and it couldn't take the roughing up of regular wear.

I have been out of the office for almost a year now and my shoes have been stored in their trees all this time, when I did a check this week, almost half of them had holes. The wooden trees probably made the lining too dry and the act of taking out the trees to try on the shoes further scratched and damaged the lining. I took a look at my cheap pair that had no shoe trees and they were fine.

I am very sad about this, now I am thinking that shoes shouldn't be stored for an extended amount of time with shoe trees inside them. Is it better to remove the shoe trees after one day of drying and afterward simply using the crumpled tissue/paper that came with the shoe box?

I also thought cheaper cedar (relatively) shoe trees from Woodlore were to blame. But lasted shoe trees from the shoe manufacturers themselves also damaged some of my pairs. Is it possible that plastic shoe trees may turn out to be better because it doesn't absorb any/excess moisture from the leather and simply maintains the shape of the shoe while it air dries?

In the future, I don't think I will buy anymore shoe trees, it will save me money and I can simply rotate the ones I have now and use them on freshly used shoes and then remove them a day (or even less time) later. It might be a better idea to only have one pair of trees because most men only wear one pair of shoes a day.

 

[dieworkwear]

I've found all shoe trees do this in some way. The only real option is to get lasted and hinge shoe trees where you can, although this mostly exists for bespoke. And to just not worry too much about it. You're dragging these things across the floor anyway, and shoes are meant to be worn. At the end of the day, no matter how expensive, they're just shoes.