Shoes: Herring Premier vs. Cheaney (and other things...)

[Top Cat]

I know there are plenty of shoe enthusiasts on here and I was wondering whether any of you might be interested in offering some advice/opinions regarding a possible shoe purchase. I've spent some time looking at the various threads on here and although there's some overlap, I don't think any of them deal precisely with what I'm mulling over. That said, it's likely none of this is terribly new or dramatic for many of you, so apologies.

I'm in the market for a new pair of non-black shoes for semi-casual wear. Thus far I've tended to wear Barker's for work and they're nice enough, if not massively exciting. My budget isn't unlimited and there are various shoes from Cheaney (Cheaney of England range) and also from the Herring Premier range (which I understand is also made by Cheaney) that have taken my eye. I was wondering whether people have any opinion as to which would be the better option. I get the impression that the Herring Premier range perhaps gives a touch more bang for one's buck, but I'm not entirely sure.

If it helps, the shoes currently on my shortlist are:

Cheaney Welbeck
Cheaney Walbrooke
Herring Chamberlain
Herring Gladstone
Herring Churchill
Herring Fencote
Herring Henley

Probably worth adding some context here. I know there are many advocates of Crockett & Jones over both Cheaney and Herring, but I should note that the impression I get is that the vast majority of C&J shoes would be too narrow for me. I have quite broad feet and tend to take Barker's in an 8G. I've been informed bluntly by an experienced gents' outfitter that I would probably find it difficult to get anything by either C&J or Church's to fit comfortably. I haven't managed to track down any C&J G-fit shoes to try yet, but looking at their F-fit, his prognosis seems pretty plausible (would be delighted to learn differently...).

Anyway, that's the situation. If anyone's got any thoughts I'd be happy to hear them, be they regarding Cheaney vs. Herring, my assumptions regarding the viability of C&J with a broad foot or any experiences with the particular shoes I've currently got on my shortlist.

 

[Thanks SF (a new me)]

I have the Gladstone (Chestnut). Note that last 11028 (comparable to C&J 341 ) is a little sleek/rounded so be careful with sizing and the toe box area. IMO, its construction is just a tad below C&J benchgrade and C&J Peal offering from Brooks Brothers. Material wise, it has soft leather that takes shine very well. I think the main difference between Herrings Cheaney offerings vs CJ benchgrade is the consistency of leather tanning/coloring. It is definitely better made than AE and Loake 1880. I think most of Herring's regular line are made by Loake and Barker

 

[Top Cat]

Interesting stuff, thanks. I hear Herring are pretty good on comms, so I may drop them a line and see what their best guess is regarding fittings. From what you say, and from what I've read about the Cheaney 2003 last, it sounds like the low-risk option may be the Cheaney Walbrookes. But we'll see.

 

[Northampton Novice]

The Herring Premier range in the main, offers v.good value for money.

When Cheaney produce shoes for Herring, it's to Herrings spec and sometimes this can be a smidge higher than the comparable Cheaney shoe - Herring are Cheaneys biggest customer and so they are kept happy!

If it's a Cheaney shoe you are going for, few places are better than Herring in terms of price.

With Cheaney raising prices by 10-15% across the board now - Herring's is a good place to buy.

 

[Thanks SF (a new me)]



Interesting stuff, thanks. I hear Herring are pretty good on comms, so I may drop them a line and see what their best guess is regarding fittings. From what you say, and from what I've read about the Cheaney 2003 last, it sounds like the low-risk option may be the Cheaney Walbrookes. But we'll see.

a couple of threads that might be useful..
http://www.styleforum.net/t/123848/cheaney-2003-last-for-herring-shoes
http://www.styleforum.net/t/253163/cheaney-shoes-pics-and-discussion

 

[Needsmoreshoes]

Not sure who they're made by but I've got a pair of Herring's Shakespeare II double monks (Before I bring out the "Why not lowndes?" crew I'm a student and they were best VFM) and I really must say that I'm totally happy with the quality and would by from them again.

That said though - Cheaney do have more heritage so if I had the money I would choose them over Herring.

 

[SHS]

Thank you for the info in this thread. I am also considering a pair of Cheaney Walbrookes, so I would be interested in any experience with the fit etc.

 

[Champagnelifestylenomoney]

Don't discount Churchs in your quest - they do several models in a G and some in an H fitting - also plagued with hobbit width feet I never thought I'd find shoes that were too wide but managed to do so in the form of Churchs H width Chetwynd and Gerrard models (over 4 inches wide). The quality of materials imo seems superior to stock Barker and Cheaney products (but you pay a premium). Some wide pairs come up on ebay so have a look .

If you are willing to spend more then I've found EG's 'F' width fitting also caters for hobbit feet. - & you'll never look back.

 

[SHS]

Thank you for the advice. I really like the Walbrookes though. I will probably try them first.

 

[SHS]

I have tried the Walbrookes. Firstly in 9.5 F, which was too tight. Then I tried in 9.5 G, but it was still a little tight, so perhaps I should size up to a 10 G. I'm just a little tired of sending shoes back and forth, and I am also looking at some Carmina captoe oxfords in their Forest last. But I will put my purchases on hold for now. I think my taste in shoes is changing all the time at the moment, even though I am only looking at oxfords

 

[Champagnelifestylenomoney]



I have tried the Walbrookes. Firstly in 9.5 F, which was too tight. Then I tried in 9.5 G, but it was still a little tight, so perhaps I should size up to a 10 G. I'm just a little tired of sending shoes back and forth, and I am also looking at some Carmina captoe oxfords in their Forest last. But I will put my purchases on hold for now. I think my taste in shoes is changing all the time at the moment, even though I am only looking at oxfords

I managed to wreck a lovely pair of Carmina loafers by trying to stretch them to hobbit width, they really are for the more slender footed imo.

 

[SHS]



I managed to wreck a lovely pair of Carmina loafers by trying to stretch them to hobbit width, they really are for the more slender footed imo.

What last were they on? They have some lasts with a wider fitting.

 

[Snedley]

I know there are plenty of shoe enthusiasts on here and I was wondering whether any of you might be interested in offering some advice/opinions regarding a possible shoe purchase. I've spent some time looking at the various threads on here and although there's some overlap, I don't think any of them deal precisely with what I'm mulling over. That said, it's likely none of this is terribly new or dramatic for many of you, so apologies.

I'm in the market for a new pair of non-black shoes for semi-casual wear. Thus far I've tended to wear Barker's for work and they're nice enough, if not massively exciting. My budget isn't unlimited and there are various shoes from Cheaney (Cheaney of England range) and also from the Herring Premier range (which I understand is also made by Cheaney) that have taken my eye. I was wondering whether people have any opinion as to which would be the better option. I get the impression that the Herring Premier range perhaps gives a touch more bang for one's buck, but I'm not entirely sure.

If it helps, the shoes currently on my shortlist are:

Cheaney Welbeck
Cheaney Walbrooke
Herring Chamberlain
Herring Gladstone
Herring Churchill
Herring Fencote
Herring Henley

Probably worth adding some context here. I know there are many advocates of Crockett & Jones over both Cheaney and Herring, but I should note that the impression I get is that the vast majority of C&J shoes would be too narrow for me. I have quite broad feet and tend to take Barker's in an 8G. I've been informed bluntly by an experienced gents' outfitter that I would probably find it difficult to get anything by either C&J or Church's to fit comfortably. I haven't managed to track down any C&J G-fit shoes to try yet, but looking at their F-fit, his prognosis seems pretty plausible (would be delighted to learn differently...).

Anyway, that's the situation. If anyone's got any thoughts I'd be happy to hear them, be they regarding Cheaney vs. Herring, my assumptions regarding the viability of C&J with a broad foot or any experiences with the particular shoes I've currently got on my shortlist.

C&J are generally an English E (US C) although they do make wider and narrower on some models. Cheaney are made in UK F (D) and UK G (US E)If you want the C&J look on their website and go through the shoes and see if you can find models made in wider widths. Check the bo at the bottom for wide and see what they have.
http://www.crockettandjones.com/Collections/US/Mens

 

[SuitedDx]



C&J are generally an English E (US  C) although they do make wider and narrower on some models. Cheaney are made in UK F (D) and UK G (US  E)If you want the C&J look on their website and go through the shoes and see if you can find models made in wider widths. Check the bo at the bottom for wide and see what they have.
http://www.crockettandjones.com/Collections/US/Mens

It is important to keep in mind that various manufacturer's have different 'standard' widths. For example, although brands like Alfred Sargent, Church's, and Grenson use F as the standard width, C&J instead uses E as their standard width. To clarify, for C&J, their E will be closest to a standard US D, C&J G to US E, etc.

 

[Snedley]

It is important to keep in mind that various manufacturer's have different 'standard' widths. For example, although brands like Alfred Sargent, Church's, and Grenson use F as the standard width, C&J instead uses E as their standard width. To clarify, for C&J, their E will be closest to a standard US D, C&J G to US E, etc.

It will not. The English fittings sizes used to be numbers 4..5..6..7..
When they converted to the letter system they made fitting 6 an F.Now, why would C&J label their fitting 6 an E? To confuse customers?lol
C&J generally make an E which is a little narrower than average and a G which is a little wider than average. They also make some English B 's and D's for narrower feet and perhap some G's (US E) for wide feet. Anthing wider than that and you have to go to some place that makes shoes for the widebodies.