Sole Welting

[Zapasman]

Some questions with regard BR Vs. GYW shoes:

First, I wonder if in a Blake Rapid shoe construction, is there a way to hand last the upper before gluing/stiching the midsole to the insole?. If yes, how they do it?. Do they use little staples to fix the upper to the insole while hand lasting?. If so, the staples will remain there forever like in the GYW shoes.

Second, do you see any advantages in the use of a welt (GYW) when resoling your shoes?. I mean, resoling a Blake Rapid shoe is possible (with the MK machine) but I wonder if the midsole has his own disadvantages ( ex. more exposure to damage and the need to replace it) in comparison to the use of a welt. This issue is very important to me.

Third, I believe BR does not use shank, cok/paste filler and a heel rand (there is no hollow... no need to) so is a intrinsically a lighter construcction. How this affect to the structure and comfort of the shoe in comparison to a welted shoe with all those components/materials?.

Finally, do you think the use of a welt is a much better solution to keep dust and water away or both constructions offer equivalent protection to the shoe?

Thanks for your inputs.

 

[DWFII]



Some questions with regard BR Vs. GYW shoes:

First, I wonder if in a Blake Rapid shoe construction, is there a way to hand last the upper  before gluing/stiching the midsole to the insole?. If yes, how they do it?.  

I dunno. I would suspect staples. If so, they can and probably will be removed.

Second, do you see any advantages in the use of a welt ... the midsole has his own disadvantages ( ex. more exposure to damage and the need to replace it) in comparison to the use of a  welt.

Again,perhaps one of the reasons that GY is favoured above BR despite GYs inherent weaknesses--theoretically the welt can be replaced in sections as needed.

Third, I believe BR does not use shank, cok/paste filler and a heel rand (there is no hollow... no need to) so is a intrinsically a lighter construcction. How this affect to the structure and comfort of the shoe in comparison to a welted shoe with all those components/materials?.

Not necessarily true. Blake or Blake Rapid will have some slight need for a filler. And in any case a "hollow" is not necessary for the use of a shank...Which itself is necessary for any shoe with a heel at half an inch or more..

 

[Fred G. Unn]



And in any case a "hollow" is not necessary for the use of a shank...Which itself is necessary for any shoe with a heel at half an inch or more..

I know you don't like to comment on specific brands/makers, but it is well known that Allen Edmonds does not use a shank in their shoes. As the heel is > .5", they should use shanks in your opinion? What are some of the pitfalls of shank-less construction?

 

[DWFII]



I know you don't like to comment on specific brands/makers, but it is well known that Allen Edmonds does not use a shank in their shoes. As the heel is > .5", they should use shanks in your opinion? What are some of the pitfalls of shank-less construction?

Any shoe that has a heel above .5" needs a shank of some kind. Some companies use another piece of hard leather (outsoling); some use a piece of wood. Metal is more common above 1 inch.

Theoretically, if the construction is tight and very deliberate, a leather shank....even in shoes with heels above one inch...is possible. I have heard this called "box beam " construction.

But there is a company making work and loggers boots in the PNW, and I have seen their box beam boots at inch and a quarter. After a moderate amount of wear the shank/waist of the boot starts to break down and the arch of the foot is left unsupported.

To some extent this applies at any heel height. The foot was not designed to be elevated at the back of the foot for any length of time. Prolonged bearing of weight without proper support will cause the bones and ligaments to shift and real damage can be done. The Tarsus Seven group is particularly vulnerable I'm told.

Having said all that..."I'm a shoemaker, Jim, not a podiatrist." I've attended seminars and talked to podiatrists but really, all I know is what I've learned by making mistakes while fitting feet and making shoes/boots for over 40 years.

It's "straight from the bench."

--
edited for punctuation and clarity

 

[Zapasman]

Not necessarily true. Blake or Blake Rapid will have some slight need for a filler.

Sorry , but I do not see that any hollow space (depression?) in a BR shoe. You just have a plain leather surface (the surface of the midsole) stiched to the insole, so I do not understand how some BR manufacturers can build the shoes with shanks and fillers?.

What do you think about dust and water construction protection of BR (4th question)?

Many thanks.

 

[Zapasman]

Any shoe that has a heel above .5" needs a shank of some kind. Some companies use another piece of hard leather (outsoling); some use a piece of wood. Metal is more common above 1 inch.

and..do not forget plastic shanks in GYW.

 

[DWFII]



Sorry , but I do not see that any hollow space (depression?) in a BR shoe.  You just have a plain leather surface (the surface of the midsole) stiched to the insole, so I do not understand how some BR manufacturers can build the shoes with shanks and fillers?.

What do you think about dust and water construction protection of BR (4th question)?

Many thanks.

I don't know what you're seeing but I've done this work (albeit by hand--channel stitching) fairly regularly. The upper has to be attached to the insole, in some way. This generally means that it is lasted and "overlaid" on the bottom of the insole. At which point, it is usually just cemented...I stitch the upper to the insole (see photo below). Either way creates a margin of extra thickness around the periphery of the insole--the upper doesn't extend from one side to the other. IOW, there will invariably be a discrepancy between the level of the insole and the thickness of the upper and the upper lining, not to mention any stiffeners--toe and heel and even perhaps midliners. That's your "hollow" and it does need to be filled.

At the point of this last photo, the outsole can be mounted for Blake or a midsole mounted for Blake-Rapid.

4th question: Done well, the water and dirt resistance is good. Maybe not as good as HW but good.

--

 

[Zapasman]

I don't know what you're seeing but I've done this work (albeit by hand--channel stitching) fairly regularly. The upper has to be attached to the insole, in some way. This generally means that it is lasted and laid down on top of the bottom of the insole. At which point, it is sometimes just cemented. I stitch the upper to the insole (see photo below). Either way creates a margin of extra thickness around the periphery of the insole--the upper doesn't extend from one side to the other. There will invariably be a discrepancy between the level of the insole and the thickness of the upper and the upper lining, not to mention any stiffeners--toe and heel and even perhaps midliners.



Done well, the water and dirt resistance is good. Maybe not as good as HW but good.

OK DW, I think I know just a little bit of your outstanding HW construction but when I was thinking about this issue, I was not really taking into account HW shoes (by the way, you forgot to post the pic with the felt and paste that I like the most). And yes, it can be done with those thiny components I suppose.

In fact I was thinking about factory producction BR Vs GYW. I doubt many makers are going to use thiny shanks and felt fillers like yours in BR, but maybe I am wrong.

Thanks again.

 

[DWFII]



OK DW, I think I know just a little bit of your outstanding HW construction but when I was thinking about this issue, I was not really taking into account HW shoes (by the way, you forgot to post the pic with the felt and paste that I like the most). And yes, it can be done with  those thiny components I suppose.

In fact I was thinking about factory producction BR Vs GYW.  I doubt many makers are going to use thiny shanks and felt fillers like yours in BR, but maybe I am wrong.  

Thanks again.

Just for clarification the above photos are not of HW construction.

They are the handsewn equivalent...and precursor...to Blake/BR construction. Except for the whip stitching of the upper to the insole, what you are seeing is what you would see, in one form or another, in any Blake or Blake-Rapid shoe.

PS: I also edited that post...swapped out photos to make the point better and added some explanations...maybe worth looking at?

 

[MoneyWellSpent]

OK DW, I think I know just a little bit of your outstanding HW construction but when I was thinking about this issue, I was not really taking into account HW shoes (by the way, you forgot to post the pic with the felt and paste that I like the most). And yes, it can be done with those thiny components I suppose.

In fact I was thinking about factory producction BR Vs GYW. I doubt many makers are going to use thiny shanks and felt fillers like yours in BR, but maybe I am wrong.

Thanks again.

Factory made Blake-Rapid shoes do have a shank of sorts, though they may have to take extra care to make sure it's thinner. In the factory made versions I've seen, they generally have foam fillers underneath the insole.

Here is one of the best diagrams I've come across (click to enlarge):

 

[DWFII]



Factory made Blake-Rapid shoes do have a shank of sorts, though they may have to take extra care to make sure it's thinner.  In the factory made versions I've seen, they generally have foam fillers underneath the insole. 

Here is one of the best diagrams I've come across (click to enlarge):

Money,

That is a good diagram (and fairly representative of good quality BR) although some labels are either misleading or wrong. "Antibacterial middle sole transpirant" ??? What the hell is that if not a foam forepart filler?

 

[MoneyWellSpent]

Money,

That is a good diagram (and fairly representative of good quality BR) although some labels are either misleading or wrong. "Antibacterial middle sole transpirant" ???

What the hell is that if not a foam forepart filler?

Quite correct! I have no idea why some companies use this marketing scheme. Perhaps they do some sort of pre-treatment to the foam beforehand so that they can make this claim, whether or not it remains effective for any length of time?

I've heard some old GY-welting manufacturers call their cork filler "antiseptic cork" as well. Again, no idea.

 

[DWFII]



Quite correct!  I have no idea why some companies use this marketing scheme.  Perhaps they do some sort of pre-treatment to the foam beforehand so that they can make this claim, whether or not it remains effective for any length of time?

I've heard some old GY-welting manufacturers call their cork filler "antiseptic cork" as well.  Again, no idea.

It is, as you said, marketing. And meant to obfusticate and mislead. Same same as the numerous examples you provided some time ago in this very thread of companies claiming that GY was the strongest and best and most traditional way of making a shoe.

It's like "genuine faux leather."

Parenthetically, for those less familiar with shoe construction, in the above illustration the "spot" marking the insole is out of place--it's pointing to another layer of fill over the shank (the "metal sheet"). The "special toe puff" is another obfuscation --it's celastic (does that make it "special?"), and the "comfort padding anti-shock" is simply a foam heel pad under a leather half sock.

Some of this may be a poor translation but it's still illustrative of why stuff posted on the 'net has to always be viewed with some skepticism.

 

[Zapasman]

Any shoe that has a heel above .5" needs a shank of some kind. Some companies use another piece of hard leather (outsoling); some use a piece of wood. Metal is more common above 1 inch.


--
edited for punctuation and clarity

So, as FGU asked, what are some of the pitfalls of sank-less construction?. How this affects to your feet?

 

[patrickBOOTH]