Vintage Dress shoe appreciation, tips, maintenance and advice

[suitforcourt]

I color coordinated my laces with my tie (and wore a light yellow linen dress shirt because 175% humidity in NYC). I looked like a walking Easter egg.

These are my Hy-Test steel-toe safety LWB’s, made for Wolverine by our friends at Hanover (complete with Hanover style arch support). The union stamp indicates these were made at the PA factory. They are surprisingly comfortable for all-day wear, running around NYC. Plus, if you find yourself in a mosh pit, you’re all set.

What a great pair.

 

[Strider52]

My local Value Village occasionally gets its hands on some lovely pairs of shoes. On a browse earlier this week, I came across this pair of Hartt's handsewn derbies, crafted with water bison leather. The brand, I've come to understand, is an older, now-defunct Canadian shoemaker given to excellent quality; the hand-made construction and five-nailed waists look to keep this pair going for a long time.

Here they are after two rounds of Bick 4 conditioner and some brushing. I must say I'm still new to shoe care as a whole; thoughts on how they're looking, and if they could benefit from any additional work?

Much appreciated!

 

[stook1]

These look like they would clean up pretty well... another pair of old ostendo branded macneils in a 9.5C with pretty minimal wear. As usual, not mine --- just hunting and finding interesting things in the wrong size.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Allen-Edmo...285866?hash=item4b632aa32a:g:AzsAAOSw2hhctS1Q

 

[tcbinnc]

I know many of you already know this, but for those new to the thread: anything ~74 to 2006 has a date code that is structured as follows: day of week, week of year, last digit of year. So, a pair made on December 14, 1981 would have a code of 1511, usually printed to the right of the style and sizing info, as seen in these 81 Boulevards:

This date code, in combo with the published catalogs and generally understood era specific branding and construction details, allows for accurate dating between ~73 and 2006 (they phased out the codes sometime in 2007-2008), even with only a single digit for the year.

This also allows for identifying stuff on either side of those dates, though we start relying more on construction and branding details (for example, sole shape, welt details, branding, colors).

Ya know, last night in hopes of cracking this case wide open, I channeled my inner "Monk" and really scrutinized the catalog pics ('64 vs. '07) confident I would find some difference in the "perf" pattern among the respective toes, and could only conclude they are exactly the same.

Drat! But also amazing how even that kind of detail remained constant for some four-plus decades, and beyond through now. Traditionalists couldn't ask for more.

 

[Paul902]

My local Value Village occasionally gets its hands on some lovely pairs of shoes. On a browse earlier this week, I came across this pair of Hartt's handsewn derbies, crafted with water bison leather. The brand, I've come to understand, is an older, now-defunct Canadian shoemaker given to excellent quality; the hand-made construction and five-nailed waists look to keep this pair going for a long time.

Here they are after two rounds of Bick 4 conditioner and some brushing. I must say I'm still new to shoe care as a whole; thoughts on how they're looking, and if they could benefit from any additional work?

Much appreciated!

Nice find! Those would have been made in Fredericton, New Brunswick, and I'd say by the logo style and script below it that they are pretty vintage. We have a Canadian shoe thread that you might post in and glean some more info about Hartt from. The thread is mainly vintage stuff since we had so many top-notch makes in the past.

 

[smfdoc]

My local Value Village occasionally gets its hands on some lovely pairs of shoes. On a browse earlier this week, I came across this pair of Hartt's handsewn derbies, crafted with water bison leather. The brand, I've come to understand, is an older, now-defunct Canadian shoemaker given to excellent quality; the hand-made construction and five-nailed waists look to keep this pair going for a long time.

Here they are after two rounds of Bick 4 conditioner and some brushing. I must say I'm still new to shoe care as a whole; thoughts on how they're looking, and if they could benefit from any additional work?

Much appreciated!

Welcome to the thread with your Dacks. You have come to the right place.

 

[actionjbone]

My local Value Village occasionally gets its hands on some lovely pairs of shoes. On a browse earlier this week, I came across this pair of Hartt's handsewn derbies, crafted with water bison leather. The brand, I've come to understand, is an older, now-defunct Canadian shoemaker given to excellent quality; the hand-made construction and five-nailed waists look to keep this pair going for a long time.

Here they are after two rounds of Bick 4 conditioner and some brushing. I must say I'm still new to shoe care as a whole; thoughts on how they're looking, and if they could benefit from any additional work?

Much appreciated!

Those are absolutely gorgeous.

For a pair like that, you probably don't need anything other than Bick 4 and an occasional brushing. If there are any nicks or abrasions, you can touch them up with some medium brown VSC, just rubbing it in real well with your fingertip.

Other than that, some people might use either neutral cream polish or neutral VSC on a brown pair like that, for extra protection and shine. But that's just a matter of preference.

I personally like using black VSC on my black bison shoes, it gives them a nice sheen.

 

[Strider52]

Thanks for the advice! That's good to know.

I'm looking into getting some neutral cream polish for that exact reason; I have a couple pairs of variously coloured brown shoes that could probably benefit from a slight shine, but I don't feel the need to apply too much product or colour.

 

[eTrojan]

Thanks for the advice! That's good to know.

I'm looking into getting some neutral cream polish for that exact reason; I have a couple pairs of variously coloured brown shoes that could probably benefit from a slight shine, but I don't feel the need to apply too much product or colour.

Majority of my care involves the following:

Lexol Neatsfoot Oil
Bick 4
VSC (neutral)
Collonil 1909 (neutral)

The Lexol and VSC are used almost exclusively for shell. Collonil adds a nice gloss to everything else.

I rarely need color for anything, but I have an assortment of creams in various colors when I do. For the most part, some conditioner and a few minutes with a horsehair brush does everything I need.

 

[eTrojan]

Ya know, last night in hopes of cracking this case wide open, I channeled my inner "Monk" and really scrutinized the catalog pics ('64 vs. '07) confident I would find some difference in the "perf" pattern among the respective toes, and could only conclude they are exactly the same.

Drat! But also amazing how even that kind of detail remained constant for some four-plus decades, and beyond through now. Traditionalists couldn't ask for more.

There was one primary design change midstream. The eyelet leather comes all the way to the long wing on versions made after the mid-90s. @wasmisterfu, @AEShoeMan or @thomascrown could probably quote the exact year.

Here is a 1992 MacNeil (#8 shell) with the original spacing, and a 1998 MacNeil (black shell) with the tighter configuration. (And, yes, my #8s are in need of some TLC).

 

[Strider52]

When it comes to reinvigorating vintage/thrifted shoes, one thing I'm still unsure about is exactly how many rounds of conditioner to use; perhaps more precisely, how can I tell when the leather has been sufficiently conditioned and nourished? I understand that less can be more, and that continued conditioning when none is required is to be avoided.

On my above pair, two coats of Bick 4 seem to have produced a nice result; the leather has acquired a mild shine, and has become noticeably more supple to the point where an initially stiff tongue now flexes nicely. Would you say that I'm ok to stop here, or would another coat or two make a difference? On shoes in general, are there any real visible indications as to when conditioning might be needed?

 

[Oshare]

The pair of 93605s I bought from @stook1 arrived earlier today. These are much nicer than the pair of 97626s I bought previously (right hand pair) -- which are too small for me anyway, so I'll be selling them off shortly.

The 93605s have had very little polish applied to them over their life, and the raw uncolored orange fringes are still visible. Overall the leather seems to be in good shape, but I applied a coat of Bick 4 for good measure. After brushing and buffing, this is how they are looking.

I'll let them rest a bit, then hit them with another coat of Bick 4 and see how the leather feels. Definitely going slower this time, since I don't want to turn them into a sticky mess. After that I'll try them on to see how they fit, but going by my other Florsheims and lining them up against the 97626s, I'm pretty confident that these will fit much better.

 

[wasmisterfu]

Ya know, last night in hopes of cracking this case wide open, I channeled my inner "Monk" and really scrutinized the catalog pics ('64 vs. '07) confident I would find some difference in the "perf" pattern among the respective toes, and could only conclude they are exactly the same.

Drat! But also amazing how even that kind of detail remained constant for some four-plus decades, and beyond through now. Traditionalists couldn't ask for more.

There are big differences, starting with the placement of wing line, which was raised in 1999 to the current position where it meets the eyelet tabs (there’s no longer a gap between the tabs and the wing post 99). There are also outsole and upper stitching density changes, sole channel for the outsole stitch (which started around 2000) , different heel stack, different sole and insole branding, and other details that are easy to spot.

They are built on the same last and basic construction is the same, but there are ton of details that changed (the biggest ones being the visible redesign in 99). These are not from 2007, there is no case to crack open.

 

[Reiver]

I have a pair of vintage Tecnic Veldtschoen boots which probably aren’t eligible for this thread as it’s vintage dress shoes. However I enjoy reading this thread from time to time and seeing all the great vintage shoes.

I thought this would be a good place to ask advice on odour neutralisation. The boots are unworn but were stored on a farm for years and have picked up an oily workshop type smell which I’d like to minimise if possible.

Does anyone have any good tips?

I have already been recommended cat litter inside tights stuffed into the boots which I think might work but sounds potentially messy.

Thanks

 

[wasmisterfu]

What a great pair.

Why thank you sir. I think I paid 20 bucks for these as NOS. I had to remove some weird waterproofing sealer. They are made of some kinda strange hide... leather yes, calf... not so sure.

Whenever you see vintage ads of serious executives standing at a serious construction site, in serious suits with serious hard hats on, holding serious architectural drafts, with serious faces, seriously discussing serious matters regarding the serious building they are seriously building... these were the serious shoes they’d be seriously wearing.