Shoe refurbishing

[johnnynorman3]

I recall reading a post where you could get Ed Greens totally refurbished for $300; J & M will give a full factory refurbish for $185 or something like that for the Aristocrat line; Allen Edmonds I believe is in the $100s range as well. So, I was wondering: Is shoe refurbishment even worth it nowadays, what with Bluefly, outlet stores, Ebay, etc. in our midst? I mean, is it worth it to refurbish EGs for $300 when you could get a brand new pair for 4 - $500? I'm ignorant as to the answer to this question, which is why I ask it.

 

[RIDER]

yes

 

[Joe G]

If you have your own shoes refurbished, you're not wearing someone else's used shoes....

Peace,

JG

 

[brescd01]

I had CJ's refurbished by AE for 60 dollars. I was quite satisfied: they used Redenbach soles at my request and though stitching was "aloft" I thought it was a nice refurbishment.

 

[johnnynorman3]

yes

So, Rider, you hold the following assumption: "A new pair of EGs is not worth $200 more than a refurbished pair of EGs." Is this assumption a no-brainer for you? I know that a refurbished pair will have a patina, etc., but is there any value added to a new pair that a refurbished pair simply couldn't have in terms of the uppers?

 

[RIDER]

But why spend more when quite a few factories now refurbish shoes with the original materials? You have broken the shoe in, so to speak, and as you say, the uppers have taken on a nice patina if cared for properly. Even if you get a nice discount, why toss a perfectly good pair of shoes out that have much life left in them?

 

[Alias]

I dunno, given the price discounts we seem to find it's sometimes hard to justify paying wads of dough to refurbish shoes instead of just getting new ones.

Still, if you're really into your shoes aging and developing a character of their own, I suppose refurbishing would be the way to go. Especially if the maker doesn't carry your model anymore.

 

[jcusey]

I dunno, given the price discounts we seem to find it's sometimes hard to justify paying wads of dough to refurbish shoes instead of just getting new ones.

But if I have shoes that I've worn for a while and like, why would I want to get rid of them? Besides, good shoes get better with age, both in terms of appearance and fit. I like getting new shoes as much as the next guy, but I wouldn't trade some old favorites for them.

 

[kabert]

Let's also not forget (.), that the "refurbishing" you're talking about is the creme de la creme. The middle (or lower) road is also an option -- that is, one's local corner cobbler; perhaps even the guy at the dry cleaners, who'll put on a new sole and/or heel for much less than the above prices quoted.

 

[HRHAndrew]

I think without question that I prefer to have my shoes refurbished rather than new. On better shoes, I find that the leather becomes more supple after wear, and they are molded to my feet. I think when dealing with Eg's for example, a factory refurbished shoe that was taken care of by its owner looks better than a new one.

 

[clarinetplayer]

For years, I have sent my AE shoes back to the factory for restoration. It is well worth the money. They do an excellent job.

 

[marc237]

I think the other advantage of refurbishing is that it allows you to retain a style that the company may no longer be producing.

 

[Lomezz]

I've been pondering this very question for a while now. I have an email from C&J informing me about their refurb service at 80 GBP plus shipping. They also have a cobbler in London who will do just the sole for 60 GBP.

Now, I'm wondering if spending almost $200 (80 GBP at about X1.80 against the US dollar plus shipping) is justified in the case of my handgrades which I paid $260 for and, after two years of service, will soon be ready for a sole replacement. I would hesitate to have it serviced by a local cobbler, though, as I can't be sure of their applying the proper methods and materials. For example, the original C&J rubber heel 'plug' is only halfway ground after two years of twice weekly wearings, and the oak bark sole has held extremely well compared with other shoes bought at the same time.

I have a rather good cobbler in my office building, but when I asked what type of sole are they using, the only thing the owner could tell me was that it's "premium". the term "oak bark" didn't ring a bell with him. I didn't even try "chanelled" and "stitched aloft" for fear I might get beaten up...

I'm seriously considering the Allen Edmonds option mentioned by the Doc. I know one thing - I will NOT throw those shoes away as I want to be able to show them to my son when he's ten (or eighteen) and say - "see those? I bought them the week you were born"

 

[HRHAndrew]

I really would spend the cash to have C&J redo them. Nothing like getting them back as new. Seems kinda like having Ford work on your Jaguar because they are really both Ford's.

 

[faustian bargain]

i'd much rather take my jag in to a local specialist. jaguar makes you pay through the nose for their service and parts. (unless you're under warranty.) besides, the newer jags apparently really are much more like the fords, under the hood. (i don't know this for certain, as mine is a '94 4L straight 6.) if you're going to compromise by buying a jaguar that's not really a jaguar, you may as well take it to ford for service. also the jags of recent years are just butt-ugly IMO. anyway, that's neither here nor there. it just muddies up the analogy. /andrew - not much help at all...

**edit: that 'andrew' is self-directed...it's just the way i sign postings. not addressed to YRH.. (please don't have me thrown in the dungeon&#33