New 'top drawer' Church's range?

Tricker's Handgrade, anyone?

Here are two models from Chruch's new line built on the number 137 last along with their custom shoe trees.

Look elongated. Not my cup of tea.

As the name suggests, I have a fondness for the company. Not just because of the shoes, but because my family has resided in Northamptonshire for countless generations and because my Mum works for Church's. In March I got a tour of one of their finishing floors outside of Northampton. The people who make these shoes have a lot of pride wrt what they do. I was wearing a pair of RM Williams boots (quite proudly) and they started to make fun of how botched the stitching was on them. Guess I should have gotten some proper Chelsea boots instead.

I am supposed to get a tour of the actual factory in Northampton in August when I head back over the Pond and am new to the shoe game so I will try to find out answers to any questions I can if you have them. I doubt I can get my hands on any of these new shoes since my budget is limited to what I can score in the factory store. And no, I cannot proxy any at this point either. Who knows what the future has in store though.

Originally Posted by Nick V.

Click to expand...

Here are two models from Chruch's new line built on the number 137 last along with their custom shoe trees.

When will Church's buy the machine that is capable of making channeled soles? Perhaps after several hundred idiots spend £620 on these shoes...

Originally Posted by Nick V.

Click to expand...

Here are two models from Chruch's new line built on the number 137 last along with their custom shoe trees.

Nick, thank you so much for the pictures - now we can see what we are talking about. I like the full brogues very much indeed.

Whilst I do think at this price ( not sure what the trees are worth - say £100, so £630 -100 = £530) the sole stiching should be hidden I can shed some light on why Church's don't do it. It was in a conversation with Dean Girling that I found out the reason - Dean Girling said that back in the day when Church's concealed the stiching on many of their shoes they got so many complaints from uneducated customers ( shoewise!) about the flap lifting with wear that in the end they gave up concealing the channel stiching. Dean was telling me this because Gaziano and Girling are getting a lot of complaints in a similar way - customers seem to think when the flap lifts a little , as it often does at the toe, it is a manufacturing fault. Dean said he could quite understand why Church's just walked away from the whole business of concealing the sole stiching.

From the picture of the sole it looks like there is a mild bevel on the sole - a nice touch.

Originally Posted by Nick V.

Click to expand...

Here are two models from Chruch's new line built on the number 137 last along with their custom shoe trees.


Nick

It goes without saying that the utterances of old men such as Ichie cannot be taken seriously; nevertheless I have often wondered why Church's don't channel some of their soles for the sake of easy profits

Channelled soles are worth nothing from the functional point of view but they are seen by many high end customers as a quality indicator so it would seem good business to add it just for the sake of it. You said you had a contact in Church's, can you ask him/her what is the company's rationale for not providing this feature.

Tell him/her that hundreds of orders will follow once this issue is settled

oops

Seems like Leather man answered the question while I was typing my post

Originally Posted by rabiesinfrance

Click to expand...

Look elongated. Not my cup of tea.


The elongated last kinda reminds me of the new Cheaney Imperials.

Originally Posted by Leather man

Click to expand...

Nick, thank you so much for the pictures - now we can see what we are talking about. I like the full brogues very much indeed.

Whilst I do think at this price ( not sure what the trees are worth - say £100, so £630 -100 = £530) the sole stiching should be hidden I can shed some light on why Church's don't do it. It was in a conversation with Dean Girling that I found out the reason - Dean Girling said that back in the day when Church's concealed the stiching on many of their shoes they got so many complaints from uneducated customers ( shoewise!) about the flap lifting with wear that in the end they gave up concealing the channel stiching. Dean was telling me this because Gaziano and Girling are getting a lot of complaints in a similar way - customers seem to think when the flap lifts a little , as it often does at the toe, it is a manufacturing fault. Dean said he could quite understand why Church's just walked away from the whole business of concealing the sole stiching.

From the picture of the sole it looks like there is a mild bevel on the sole - a nice touch.

I must confess that despite being a 'semi-educated' customer I really hate it when the flap starts to come off the toe tips in some shoes after the first day of use

However this is not universal, so I assume that there are different ways to conceal the stitches; some of them being more amenable to wear and tear than others- maybe not

Originally Posted by Leather man

Click to expand...

...they got so many complaints from uneducated customers ( shoewise!) about the flap lifting with wear that in the end they gave up concealing the channel stiching. Dean was telling me this because Gaziano and Girling are getting a lot of complaints in a similar way - customers seem to think when the flap lifts a little , as it often does at the toe, it is a manufacturing fault. Dean said he could quite understand why Church's just walked away from the whole business of concealing the sole stiching.
That's very interesting. I remember when I first saw a shoe w/ a closed channel and thought they were glued and thus poorly constructed.

Originally Posted by countbaron

Click to expand...

...Channelled soles are worth nothing from the functional point of view but they are seen by many high end customers as a quality indicator so it would seem good business to add it just for the sake of it...
I thought it had been settled here by DWFII and other makers that a covered channel does something (perhaps minimal) to prevent water from wicking into the sole and thus helps to prevent rot, etc.

Originally Posted by Leather man

Click to expand...

Nick, thank you so much for the pictures - now we can see what we are talking about. I like the full brogues very much indeed.

Whilst I do think at this price ( not sure what the trees are worth - say £100, so £630 -100 = £530) the sole stiching should be hidden I can shed some light on why Church's don't do it. It was in a conversation with Dean Girling that I found out the reason - Dean Girling said that back in the day when Church's concealed the stiching on many of their shoes they got so many complaints from uneducated customers ( shoewise!) about the flap lifting with wear that in the end they gave up concealing the channel stiching. Dean was telling me this because Gaziano and Girling are getting a lot of complaints in a similar way - customers seem to think when the flap lifts a little , as it often does at the toe, it is a manufacturing fault. Dean said he could quite understand why Church's just walked away from the whole business of concealing the sole stiching.

From the picture of the sole it looks like there is a mild bevel on the sole - a nice touch.

Interesting!

Originally Posted by emptym

Click to expand...

I thought it had been settled here by DWFII and other makers that a covered channel does something (perhaps minimal) to prevent water from wicking into the sole and thus helps to prevent rot, etc.

honestly, i would like to see a picture of a rotted sole on a pair of shoes.

I am with you on this fritzl

Specially if one takes into account the fact that is many channelled shoes the stitches become exposed at the toe tip very quickly and the whole thing starts to peel away in a most unattractive fashion