# Katahdin Iron Works Engineer Boots from LL Bean



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

So my pair finally arrived, and I'm using casual friday to break them in.

First thoughts:

They're the sort of finish where they arrive pre-scuffed due to jostling around in the box. This is a good thing.

Sole is nice, although the heel makes you feel a bit taller. Also a good thing.

Laces are those grippy type that seem like they won't come undone. Naturally, a good thing.

The collar of the boots where it meets your lower leg is rather stiff. This is actually a bad thing, so breaking in these boots won't be fun. That being said, once they're broken in, these should be pretty comfortable.


----------



## Welton'82 (Mar 17, 2008)

Good choice of footgear. I've had a pair of these for 15 years or so, and they're one of my favorites. I found the same problem with the collar as you're discovering. I just never lace them to the top, which solves the discomfort problem.


----------



## paper clip (May 15, 2006)

A very good looking boot at a pretty good price and a great guarantee. I already own a pair of Bean leather field boots I use in the fall and Bean Boots for the winter, I can't really justify the purchase of another boot, given how infrequently I wear them, but if I did get another pair of boots, the Katahdins would be them.


----------



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

Welton'82 said:


> Good choice of footgear. I've had a pair of these for 15 years or so, and they're one of my favorites. I found the same problem with the collar as you're discovering. I just never lace them to the top, which solves the discomfort problem.


Tried that.... things started to rub. 

So I'm just going to have to be patient and slowly break them in. Still, they look cool


----------



## tinytim (Jun 13, 2008)

gar1013 said:


> Tried that.... things started to rub.
> 
> So I'm just going to have to be patient and slowly break them in. Still, they look cool


The photo in the catalog makes them look beat to sh*t. The boots really look like they were used hard. How do they look in person?


----------



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

tinytim said:


> The photo in the catalog makes them look beat to sh*t. The boots really look like they were used hard. How do they look in person?


The only clue that they are new is the lack of creases in the leather and the sole is in perfect condition. Otherwise they look like you've owned them for a while but have taken reasonable care of them. My toe box was pre-scruffed!


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

I once saw a photo of a Bean shoe posted with a remark concerning its outstanding quality, and thought the remarks were intended as sarcasm. I then realized they weren't, and that many here hold them in high regard. I've been an L.L. Bean customer for roughly 40 years, and have purchased plenty of footwear duing that time. Their rubber/leather boots and shoes excepted, I don't understand this enthusiasm. It is junk compared to what they were selling as recently as five or six years ago, and doesn't stand comparison to any better quality footwear. I can only conjecture that Bean's image must cast a halo over what people think they're buying.


----------



## MoosicPa (Jan 30, 2008)

I bought a pair last Fall and they're great boots. They look classic, which is what attracted me to them in the first place. I wore them last Winter and had no problems. Can't wait to break them out again this Fall.....I miss them.


----------



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

Flanderian said:


> It is junk compared to what they were selling as recently as five or six years ago, and doesn't stand comparison to any better quality footwear. I can only conjecture that Bean's image must cast a halo over what people think they're buying.


The one trend I notice (here) is that apparently EVERYWHERE is selling junk that doesn't meet the standards they had 5 years ago, a decade ago, or twenty years ago.

Might quality have gone down? Perhaps somewhat. Have prices gone down (with respect to TRUE inflation adjusted prices)? Probably as well. Has the ratio of price/quality stayed more or less the same. In all likelihood.

Is it possible that people have very selected memory? I think that answer is pretty clear to most.

Now, these boots in question AREN'T EVEN MADE BY LL BEAN. They're made by another company. Which makes your point completely irrelevant to the discussion of these particular boots.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

gar1013 said:


> The one trend I notice (here) is that apparently EVERYWHERE is selling junk that doesn't meet the standards they had 5 years ago, a decade ago, or twenty years ago.
> 
> Might quality have gone down? Perhaps somewhat. Have prices gone down (with respect to TRUE inflation adjusted prices)? Probably as well. Has the ratio of price/quality stayed more or less the same. In all likelihood.
> 
> ...


"AREN'T EVEN MADE BY LL BEAN"

Yes, that's probably because LL Bean has *never* made anything. They are pure retailers and have never manufactured any product they have sold. Just like Landsend and many others. But they do chose what they sell. They brand it and are responsible for the quality of the merchandise they sell. And the footwear they are chosing to sell is largely junk.

Next argument, everybodys selling junk. I agree, but what does that change? Either it's junk, or it's not.

Last argument, it may not be as costly as it once was compared to its quality. OK, you win one. It's *cheap *junk.

Merchants are responsible for the quality of the merchandise they sell. They have choices, and they have chosen to largely sell footwear that is junk. They must assume that those who buy it won't know any better. Do they?


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

Would somebody please post a photo of their boots in action? I'd like to see the real thing, not the catalog photo.


----------



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

Flanderian said:


> And the footwear they are chosing to sell is largely junk.


So what you're saying is that:

Danner
Ecco
HS Trask
Irish Setter
Keen
Lacrosse
Merrell
Milon
New Balance
Rockport
Salomon
Sorrel
Sperry
Teva
North Face
and Vasque

are mostly junk?


----------



## Bradford (Dec 10, 2004)

Flanderian said:


> "AREN'T EVEN MADE BY LL BEAN"
> 
> Yes, that's probably because LL Bean has *never* made anything. They are pure retailers and have never manufactured any product they have sold. Just like Landsend and many others. But they do chose what they sell. They brand it and are responsible for the quality of the merchandise they sell. And the footwear they are chosing to sell is largely junk.


Not true - read _L.L. Bean: The Making of an American Icon_ by Leon Gorman and learn about the real history of the company. https://www.amazon.com/L-L-Bean-Mak...d_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217103328&sr=8-1


----------



## cvac (Aug 6, 2006)

If anyone has owned the waterproof version of this boot and cares to comment on it, I'd like to hear it. I'm thinking about a boot for winter that will keep my feet dry in the light snow and rain where I live but I'd rather not go with something like the traditional rubber bottom hunting boot. Basically I'd like a boot that will look good with a pair of khakis or cords...I don't need a real tech performance/mountain type boot.

Anything other suggestions under $175-200 would be appreciated as well.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Bradford said:


> Not true - read _L.L. Bean: The Making of an American Icon_ by Leon Gorman and learn about the real history of the company. https://www.amazon.com/L-L-Bean-Mak...d_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217103328&sr=8-1


What's not true? That they never actually manufactured anything? You'll need to be a little more specific. It's possible I may have been misinformed, though I've read that information in three or four different sources over the last 40 years. They may have in the distant past, and it's even possible they may have resumed the production of some items since I last read that. But I suspect the substance of my remark is correct, they are a retailer, not a manufacturer.

Thanks for the suggested reading, but I'm back logged, and will take your word for it.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

gar1013 said:


> So what you're saying is that:
> 
> Danner
> Ecco
> ...


In terms of style, absolutely. And while some items from some brands might be entirely suitable to their intended function, in terms of traditional American shoes and boots, yes, mostly junk.

I should elaborate, as it's unfair to make such remarks and not explain. There was once an American shoe industry. It *made *shoes. They were largely traditional shoes and boots manufactured of traditional materials in traditional styles. Some of it was junk. But there were also manufactures that could, and some that did make quite fine shoes and boots. It has mostly been destroyed. And irrespective of what the brand is, it's almost exclusively OSJ. (Off Shore Junk)

Example: I have a pair of tan kiltie slip-ons with tassels purchased at a Dexter outlet store perhaps 10 years ago. They were discounted, because it was an outlet store, and because the model was being discontinued they were discounted again. Full retail was about $80. I paid $29.

Are they the best shoes every made? Hardly! They're cowhide. But all things considered these shoes couldn't be replaced today for anything less than close to $300. They're built on an elegantly shaped compound last that frankly would rival some of the best English shoes. They were made in Maine. They cost $29.


----------



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

Flanderian said:


> Example: I have a pair of tan kiltie slip-ons with tassels purchased at a Dexter outlet store perhaps 10 years ago. They were discounted, because it was an outlet store, and because the model was being discontinued they were discounted again. Full retail was about $80. I paid $29.
> 
> Are they the best shoes every made? Hardly! They're cowhide. But all things considered these shoes couldn't be replaced today for anything less than close to $300. They're built on an elegantly shaped compound last that frankly would rival some of the best English shoes. They were made in Maine. They cost $29.


And they no longer exist because you, and everyone else didn't want them at $80. Manufacturers stop making things that people aren't willing to buy. You wanted to buy a $29 shoe, and that's what you got -- the problem is that everyone else did the same and it got to the point where you can't make a shoe in the USA without charging a SIGNIFICANT premium because the volume can't make up for the lost margin due to higher labor costs.

Many members of my family worked in the textile industry in NC. The jobs that were lost there were because people wanted less expensive goods and companies gave them EXACTLY what they wanted.

And here's the kicker: you came in on a thread to slam LL Bean when the product in question is made in America, at a relatively reasonable price for a pair of well made boots.


----------



## tinytim (Jun 13, 2008)

gar1013 said:


> The only clue that they are new is the lack of creases in the leather and the sole is in perfect condition. Otherwise they look like you've owned them for a while but have taken reasonable care of them. My toe box was pre-scruffed!


Thanks, you've answered my question. Personally, I like to do the breaking in on shoes and clothes. When I open the box on something I want it to look new.

Tim


----------



## chatsworth osborne jr. (Feb 2, 2008)

*Am I too pedantic...or wrong?*

I don't understand why they are called engineer boots when they look more like the entirely different style of a logger boot.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

gar1013 said:


> And they no longer exist because you, and everyone else didn't want them at $80. Manufacturers stop making things that people aren't willing to buy. You wanted to buy a $29 shoe, and that's what you got -- the problem is that everyone else did the same and it got to the point where you can't make a shoe in the USA without charging a SIGNIFICANT premium because the volume can't make up for the lost margin due to higher labor costs.
> 
> Many members of my family worked in the textile industry in NC. The jobs that were lost there were because people wanted less expensive goods and companies gave them EXACTLY what they wanted.
> 
> And here's the kicker: you came in on a thread to slam LL Bean when the product in question is made in America, at a relatively reasonable price for a pair of well made boots.


You don't seem to know much about Dexter's history, and less about the footwear they made, but that's OK. You seem to want to frame a discussion about the style and quality of a particular line of footwear as either an economic or political issue when it isn't either. An item is either junk, or it isn't. There will be issues that pertain to why they are one or the other, but they do not affect the central question.

If someone enjoys McDonald's hamburgers, I'm glad they do. But if you visit a gourmet discussion board and start raving about the delicious _Chateau Briande _you're enjoying, someone might wonder about your standards. 

I hope the OP enjoys his boots, and that they exceed all his expectations. The point of my original comment is that Bean's entire line of footwear is not only far less than it once was, but is maybe a 3 or 4 on a best possible scale of 10 for fine *traditional* footwear. If this justifies adoration, so be it.


----------



## gnatty8 (Nov 7, 2006)

Patrick06790 said:


> Would somebody please post a photo of their boots in action? I'd like to see the real thing, not the catalog photo.


Not quite action, but not quite a catalog shot either. Bought these at the Freeport store, but haven't worn them yet:


----------



## Patrick06790 (Apr 10, 2005)

^ Ahh, thank you. That's helpful.


----------



## Green3 (Apr 8, 2008)

tinytim said:


> Thanks, you've answered my question. Personally, I like to do the breaking in on shoes and clothes. When I open the box on something I want it to look new.
> 
> Tim


I agree - it seems like J Crew gets lots of grief for their broken-in khakis and oxfords.


----------



## videocrew (Jun 25, 2007)

I like the way the catalog showed what their Red Wing Rugged Classics would look like eventually:


Without feeling the need to do it for you in advance:


----------



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

gnatty8 said:


> Not quite action, but not quite a catalog shot either. Bought these at the Freeport store, but haven't worn them yet:


That's essentially what they look like new.

I think a lot of people missed my point: basically the finish of these boots is such that they'll never look new straight out of the box. By the same token, they'll probably only look different after breaking in as a result of creases.


----------



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

Flanderian said:


> You don't seem to know much about Dexter's history, and less about the footwear they made, but that's OK. You seem to want to frame a discussion about the style and quality of a particular line of footwear as either an economic or political issue when it isn't either. An item is either junk, or it isn't. There will be issues that pertain to why they are one or the other, but they do not affect the central question.


So why are you weighing in on a product you don't know anything about and commenting that all LL Bean's product are "offshore junk" when the product in question is made in the USA by a company that actually has a good reputation (read the product description and you'll see what the company actually is)?

All you seemed to want to do is trot on in and take a cheap shot at LL Bean, which is no more or less deserving than ANY retailer of pot shots.

How about before offering criticism on a product aside from looks, base it on what you actually know of the product itself?

Instead all you are giving the appearance of is someone who just hates LL Bean in an irrational manner, and is CONVINCED that the Bean of <INSERT TIME FRAME HERE> is somehow better.

There are enough people around here who do the exact same thing as you've done, so it's not like you're the only one doing it, but it really doesn't come off well.

The average American hasn't been able to afford quality goods made in the USA in a long time, and we did it to ourselves between the effects of government borrowing putting us at an exchange rate disadvantage, people wanting to buy new products on a regular basis, inflationary money policies that make it harder and harder for the vast majority to make ends meet, and the general "I don't give a damn" attitude towards quality that seemed to somehow erupt in the USA DECADES ago and didn't stop until it was too late. The car industry is a great example. No matter how high quality American cars are these days, they'll never live down what the 70's, 80's and in some respects the 90's did to their reputation. The result is that people hold cars that weren't particularly good (the cars of the 1960's) up as these icons of the best we had to offer, when they were far inferior to the modern car of today.

So try to get off your LL Bean went to hell 5 years ago soapbox and move away from the label of the retailer of the product in question. What you might find is an actually suitable product for what it is meant to be, at a fair price point, with quality suitable to said price point. And made in the USA no less.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

The last pair of shoes I purchased from Bean had the color from the leather come off when cleaned with a damp cloth. They were funny looking, had an ungainly last, and my wife commented that they looked like "orthopedic shoes." After wearing them about 6 times, the laces broke. When I examined the laces I found that they consisted of a thin sheath of knit fabric that had been stuffed with compressed *tissue *paper. These were OSJ.
 
I never stated that all of the shoes and boots Bean sells now are OSJ. I said many are. If the present average standard for the footwear that Bean sells pleases those who purchase it, I am delighted. I consider that average level of quality to be junk. That there are economic policies and business practice issues that underlie why this is, I heartily agree with! But to suggest that Bean did not have *among *the footwear it offered in the past items of quality superior to what it offers now is wrong. I know this because I purchased and wore them. In fact, I am *still *wearing some of them!

To quote gar1013, "The average American hasn't been able to afford quality goods made in the USA in a long time, and we did it to ourselves" I couldn't agree more. But we can all chose whether we wish to *keep *doing it to ourselves.

And frankly, while I might prefer that a greater portion of quality goods being sold be made in the USA, that is not the issue either. The issue is the quality of the merchandise irrespective of whether it is made in the U.S., U.K. or elsewhere.

It is up to each American to choose how they wish to spend there money. And my choice is that if I can only afford to purchase one pair of quality footwear rather than two or three that I consider junk, that is my choice. I understand that others may choose differently. But please understand the choice that is being made.


----------



## Sartre (Mar 25, 2008)

...<<Yawn>>...


----------



## Welton'82 (Mar 17, 2008)

chatsworth osborne jr. said:


> I don't understand why they are called engineer boots when they look more like the entirely different style of a logger boot.


My understanding is that these boots were intended for men who needed to go from office to construction site and back. They wanted something that could work in both an office and field environment.


----------



## gar1013 (Sep 24, 2007)

Flanderian said:


> It is up to each American to choose how they wish to spend there money. And my choice is that if I can only afford to purchase one pair of quality footwear rather than two or three that I consider junk, that is my choice. I understand that others may choose differently. But please understand the choice that is being made.


Granted, and how does that relate to these boots? How did you determine that they were junk, and that it was best to weigh in with the attitude of LLB sells junk?

So far, the boots are actually pretty nice. Only issue I'm having is how stiff the collar is, but I usually tend to have problems breaking in shoes -- I can't remember the last time I've had shoes break in without causing some sort of pain and/or blisters.

My point is that your whole anti-bean footwear argument doesn't really apply if you don't have any experience with the product, and might be more welcome if it was following negative experiences with the product in question. Instead you have people who are interested in the product, and some who have the product and are quite happy with it, but are only offering up "LLB sells junk" as a counterpoint. Not incredibly productive, helpful, or even relevant. If you had stated that you felt that LLB sells junk, but that based on the reviews you might be interested in the product, that would've been far more relevant to the discussion at hand. Instead you're implying that everyone who likes the product can't possibly like the product on its own merits, but because they worship at the Shrine of Bean.

Is LL Bean perfect? Nope. Do they generally sell quality products? From my experience with their products, I'd venture a yes. Is their quality in line with their prices? ABSOLUTELY. And that's what counts.

At the end of the day, you're letting the fact that this product is sold by Bean weigh more than anything else. The fact that LL Bean sells it shouldn't matter except to the extent that they influenced how the product should look and their customer service in terms of if you have an issue with the product... and Bean's customer service is very good.


----------

