# Quality English footwear - but which brand and what to spend?



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Dear all,

I'm thinking of buying a pair or three of quality shoes from one of those redoubtable Northampton firms, but I'm somewhat at a loss as to which brand to opt for. I'm pretty much a novice to "proper" (for lack of a better word right here and now) shoes and I wonder if perhaps I can pick up some practical advice here. I do own two pairs of Allen Edmonds and a pair of Johnston & Murphy, all of which are of excellent quality as far as I can judge, but I really haven't owned and worn them long enough to draw any further conclusions.

Basically my prime question is what, if anything, I would gain by opting for going for Edward Green all the way, vs., for instance, Loake or Barker. I'm aware of differences such as colour corrected and non-colour corrected leather and I'm sure there are other differences too, but none of those necessarily concern me. What I really want to know is whether the more expensive brands will give me better comfort and the shoes greater longevity. Given the fact that the construction methods appear to be functionally identical between the brands, I find it hard to determine how there could be any significant differences in those two areas, so here's where I'm hoping you can assist me.

If you'll pardon the presumptuousness, I'm not particularly interested in anyone's expressions of brand loyalty, since those are rarely illuminating in any way, but only the cold, hard facts. If there are any such.

Thank you kindly in advance.


----------



## Francisco D'Anconia (Apr 18, 2007)

Fit doesn't depend on brand. It depends on your foot. Buy what fits you well, not the label stamped on the insole cover. 

Longevity between a shoe like AE and EG depends more on care than brand. Both are made well and will last a very long time if you care well for them -- rotate wearing days, shoe trees, cream and wax, etc. 

Though there are differences in workmanship and material quality, the principal difference between the shoes that get acclaim here -- AE, Alden, Northampton made, Berluti, Aubercy, St. Crispins, Vass -- is aesthetics. 

Buy what fits well, looks good to you, and is within your budget.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Thanks for the reply Francisco, that was kind of what I assumed to be the case.

I suppose part of the reason I posted in the first place was the fact that less expensive brands like Loake and Barker appears to often get less acclaim than snide remarks, both here and on similar sites. I've seen them called "cheap crap" and things in a similar vein a number of times, but having insufficient experience myself I'm unable to determine if there's anything to that attitude, or whether it's just a matter of snobs stroking their egos.

As far as fit goes, sadly I won't be able to try on shoes from any of the brands in question. However, they're all happy to have me send them tracings of my feet and advice on which models are the most suitable. It's not perfect, but I'm confident it'll work out ok. In terms of looks they all have a number of models I like a lot and as far as price goes I can get all Edward Greens or all Loakes without it mattering all that much.

However, I do care about value for money, whereas I don't care about branding and the perceived prestige which accompanies it, so if some Loake 1880s or Barker Professionals will realistically serve me just as well as the same number of Edward Greens, then I'll happily save some money.

Thanks again for the reply and if anybody else wants to chime in, in support or opposition, I'd greatly appreciate either.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

I agree with Mr. D'Anconia. Once you go past the AE level you reach the law of diminishing returns. EG's are great shoes, but at the same time a $700 shoe is not twice as good as an AE. That is not to say don't buy more expensive shoes, only don't expect twice the shoe for twice the money. If you do look at Loake be sure to go with the 1880 line, which is perhaps a tad beneath AE ,but better than your JM. Loake's less expensive lines are not up to those standards. I am not familiar with Barker, but once again the less expensive lines have compromises in the leather used.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Thanks a lot, I appreciate the input!

Regarding the "compromises in the leather used", I wonder if you have any thoughts on what consequences, if any, those compromises would have down the line? Presuming we're talking about calf leather that is, rather than split or "polished" leather, which I wouldn't consider buying anyway. I'm asking because I'm only aware of the difference between colour corrected and non-colour corrected calf leather, but no other functional or cosmetic "gradings". The presence or absence of colour correction would intuitively seem to have no bearing on functionality or durability whatsoever, but only on appearance. Would that assumption be correct? And are there any other gradings I ought to be aware of?


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

*Search*

You might try the search function as there have been several useful threads with expert commentary and helpful photographs.

I have shoes from two or three of the Northampton firms. As it happens the best fit for me is with Edward Green's 202 last in F width. The others are too tight in the toe area. If you can fit into them, some of the John Lobb styles are very nice and I observed their quality to be on a par with that of Edward Green.

If money is not an issue you might consider custom made/bespoke. I have been very pleased with the fit, finish and lightness of three pairs, so far, of Cleverleys, and with their customer service. Although the custom made shoes are palpably better than non-custom shoes, it is, indeed, an indulgence.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Thanks for the comments and suggestions Gurdon.

I've searched and read a lot both here and elsewhere, but more often than not more questions are raised than answered. Generally a number of people will declare that these brands are better than those brands, but usually without even trying to substantiate their claims. Very often I have the distinct impression that people are simply defending their own choices, without having anything like an adequate basis for comparison. But hey, that's the internet in a nutshell I guess.

Bespoke really isn't an option right now, both because it would entail foreign travel in order to arrange it, which I haven't got the time for, and because I want to be a little more clued in before I go down that route. It's certainly the plan for further on down the road though.


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

*English shoes*

Belfaborac,

From personal observation EG, Lobb, Churches, and Crockett and Jones are all very nice shoes.

I have read on this forum that Shipton and Henage make good shoes. I am going to phone them at the beginning of next week to see if it would be worthwhile to try the fit of a pair of their Balmoral boots. They have the Blake/Littleway welt which is slightly smarter than the Goodyear welt, and if they fit it will be a less costly option than the EG Shannon, which, I had planned to order before becoming aware of this possibility. I may, however, order the former in black and the EG's in brown, as I really like the fit and will probably wear the brown ones more frequently than the black. Also, EG's leather is exceptionally nice, and the appearance of brown shoes improves with the passage of time and occasional polishing. Black shoes are..., black shoes.

Recently Trickers have gotten good reviews on Ask Andy. If what people are saying is true, their top end shoes are high quality and on a par with the other very high quality Northampton brands.

Graziano and Girling are spoken of very highly on this forum. If you like the fashion forward chisled toe look it might be worth your while to look into their semi bespoke line. Likewise, Cleverley has a factory line which, if they fit and are of a style you like, might be worth looking into.

There are continental makers, notably Vass, about which several people have spoken well. If this sounds interesting, a search will probably be worthwhile.

Hope this is helpful. I feel much less qualified to post on this topic than Medwards, Jcusey, and a couple of other forumites, all of whom are very knowledgable about good shoes.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## Geoff Gander (Apr 4, 2007)

FWIW, the last I heard Shipton and Heneage shoes are made by Alfred Sargent or Crockett and Jones. The staff at S&H are apparently very forthcoming as to who makes what.

Aside from that, I agree with a lot of the advice given here.


----------



## Anon 18th Cent. (Oct 27, 2008)

Belfaforac,
Hei paa deg. This is the order of quality for British shoes: bespoke Lobb St. James, bespoke Cleverly, Edward Green, Gaziano and Girling, Hermes Lobb, Crockett and Jones, and all the rest.

There can be some disagreement, but the guts of it hold.

How beautifully shoes are made often has little to say about durability and fit.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Thanks a lot for continuing to clue me in guys!

Edwin: Hei på deg du også. Står til? :icon_smile_big:

_"__ This is the order of quality for British shoes: bespoke Lobb St. James, bespoke Cleverly, Edward Green, Gaziano and Girling, Hermes Lobb, Crockett and Jones, and all the rest."_

Now, this is exactly the kind of thing which makes me struggle. While the ranking may well be more or less correct, given that most would seem to agree on it, no-one ever says why the ranking is as it is and what the practical differences are between the lower and higher ends of the list. Without that practical information the list is frankly worse than useless to me, given that it only engenders frustration.

What exactly is it that makes a pair of RTW Edward Greens better than a pair of Loake 1880s? Will they last longer and if so, why? Will they be more comfortable and if so, why? Will their finish stay nice longer, given the same maintenance regimen and if so, why?

That's the kind of concrete information I'm after.


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

Belfaborac said:


> Thanks a lot for continuing to clue me in guys!
> 
> Edwin: Hei på deg du også. Står til? :icon_smile_big:


I suppose you've looked into JP Myhre as you are in Norway.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Hi mrp,

To say I've looked into them is probably an overstatement. I've had a look at the website and the shoes are certainly nice and no doubt of excellent quality. However, I also happened across his introduction thread elsewhere (Styleforum.net probably) and saw the prices started at well over $2500 (can't recall the exact number), at which point I switched off.

While I could afford to buy a pair or two of his shoes now and again, I never, ever buy articles of clothing (or anything else, for that matter) that expensive without knowing exactly what the ultra-premium price gives me and, more importantly, having first determined if I think it's worth the expense. As far as shoes go, I'm nowhere close to being in possession of the required expertise.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

I'm not an expert on dress shoes by any stretch of the imagination but as someone mentioned before, aesthetics, build quality and fit will play a large part in price and longevity imo. Price is subjective and relative to what you're willing to pay. Some people love AE for the price alone while others scoff at the idea of spending less than $500 for a pair of quality dress shoes.

My question is, why are you investing your time and money in English shoe brands if you can't try them on? I can tell you right now that you'll be in for a big surprise if you spend $700-1000 on a pair of EG or G&G and they don't fit.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Hi gaseousclay,

It's very simple really (as well as a little sad) - there isn't a single place around here, that I'm aware of, which carries anything like a serious selection of quality shoes. I know of a few shops where I can find a (very) few Loakes and a (very) few Barkers and I'm sure I can hunt down a (very) few Church's as well, but that's basically as far as it goes.

As far as buying shoes on the 'net in general goes; well, that's what I usually do and it has always turned out perfectly well. It's just a matter of using shops or companies which are happy to offer decent customer service, such as having me send them tracings of the outlines of my feet to determine the best size and check whether the models I'm interested in will fit. It takes a little longer, but I'm rarely in any kind of hurry and like I said it has yet to yield anything but good results. It probably also helps that I appear to have feet which are pretty average in every way, with no peculiar outcroppings, kinks, bends or whatnot.


----------



## mrp (Mar 1, 2011)

Belfaborac said:


> Hi mrp,
> 
> To say I've looked into them is probably an overstatement. I've had a look at the website and the shoes are certainly nice and no doubt of excellent quality. However, I also happened across his introduction thread elsewhere (Styleforum.net probably) and saw the prices started at well over $2500 (can't recall the exact number), at which point I switched off.
> 
> While I could afford to buy a pair or two of his shoes now and again, I never, ever buy articles of clothing (or anything else, for that matter) that expensive without knowing exactly what the ultra-premium price gives me and, more importantly, having first determined if I think it's worth the expense. As far as shoes go, I'm nowhere close to being in possession of the required expertise.


Good to hear, just wanted to make sure that you were aware of him, it could simplify the process for you as you would know that the shoes fit you when they are done and you would get what you want.
I suppose I'm fortunate that I can either buy my size in AE's and Aldens if they are stocked or make a special order to get them made.


----------



## philip in china (Aug 4, 2011)

Are Grenson still in business?


----------



## Anon 18th Cent. (Oct 27, 2008)

Norwegians always want to cut through the baloney (bull s--t). What makes a shoe better? I am no expert, but do own many pairs of expensive shoes. Nothing bespoke for me, but lots of EG, Hermes Lobb, C&J, and Alden. 

These are things people consider: Quality and type of leather: calf, shell cordovan, exotic skins like alligator. Stitching. Soles: channeled or not, finish, fiddleback waist. How refined the shape of the last is.

Again, none of this affects fit and durability, with the exception that type of leather does affect longevity. All the rest are purely aesthetics.

If you don't see the beauty in the details, they are not worth paying for.


----------



## Marcellionheart (Mar 10, 2010)

Roughly, and somewhat controversially, the lay of the land looks like this:

Entry-level Tier:

Loake 1880 (anything else is sub tiers)
Barker
Sanders

Here you are getting decent style (lasts, imo, better looking than AE for the most part, but inferior leather to AE). Cost is under £200.

Second-Tier

Grenson
Cheaney
Church's
Trickers
Crockett And Jones
Alfred Sargent

Here you are getting leathers that are far superior to AE and in some cases to Alden. The styling is usually much better, the construction noticeably superior to Loake and Barker. Be careful with Church's who sometimes use Cor-Grain

Top Tier:

Edward Green
G&G
John Lobb
Cleverly

Here you are getting the best of everything; style, last, leather quality, and construction. These brands often offer bespoke fitting services as well.


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

Belfaborac,

Marcellionhart seems to have covered your questions. 

I do, however, wish Medwards and Jcuesy would chime in as they have lots of photos and specific examples.

Something to consider is the effects on shoe uppers of wear. I am hard on shoes, and we have many stone and concerte stairways. My shoes get scuffed. Over time with regular care they acquire a veriegated finish. This might not appeal to you. In that case EG's might be overkill, as a rich surface is part of their visual appeal. I will say, nonetheless, that EG's leather seems to me to be very durable and also quite light for its strength. It seems closer in quality, although not as wonderfully light, to the leather that Cleverly uses on their bespoke shoes, than it does to the leather used by other Northampton companies. 

If one wants to maintain a uniform finish Safir polish seems much denser than Meltonian and covers scuffs well. I use the former on shoes, such as Aldens or AE's, lacking patina or not having that potential, and Meltonian when I want a semitransparent enrichment of the leather. 

Long ago, when I took a break from university, Jai er Norske sjoman, working a few months as maskingut. Unfortunately from a linguistic perspective, the crew was of mixed nationality and everybody spoke a sort of English so I didn't get to learn much Norwegian. My shipmates found the slogan "devilish good drink" on an orange juice sign in San Francisco quite amusing, as you and those posting Norwegian phrases will appreciate.

Good luck in your shoe quest.

Gurdon

PS: FWIW I have given away most of my non EG shoes; John Lobbs, Crockett and Jones, Church, Aldens, as their fit was not nearly as good as that of the EG's, and their quality, except for the Lobbs, not, it appeared to me, up to EG standards.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Thanks a lot for your continued efforts gents, I really do appreciate the work you put in! Not to mention your impressive command of Norwegian. :icon_smile_big:

Edwin: in general I'd say that I certainly see the beauty in details (very much so, in fact), but my experience is that a certain level of experience is necessary before one is able to do so. Experience I just don't have yet in this case.

Marcellionheart: thanks for the run-down and for taking the time. Once again though, I fear that to me it raises further questions.

You say, about tier two, that "the construction is noticeably superior to Loake and Barker". I don't doubt that that's correct, but I'd really, really like to know in exactly what way(s) it is superior. Sorry to harp on about boring facts, but statements without substantiation just doesn't do much for me.

Styling....well, that's surely mainly a question of individual taste. I certainly see a number of models from all brands, "cheap" and expensive alike, which I find very appealing.

As for Church's; well, I probably wouldn't get those in any case. Not because I have anything against the brand, but simply because it's the one brand that every aspiring traditional shoe fetishist appear to know and lust after. Which is a massive a turn-off for me. Conclusive evidence, I fear, that a pernicous sliver of snobbishness exists deep within.

Gurdon: thanks for your thoughts regarding Saphir and Meltonian, that's very useful indeed and I'll keep it firmly in mind. I fear I've yet to grow out of good old Kiwi, but when I next find myself in need of shoe cream and/or polish, I'll pick up some of both.

Thanks too for the good wishes. I'm sure it'll all turn out just fine in the end. Right now I'm of a mind to either play it safe with all Crockett & Jones (middle of the range, I guess one could say), or get a pair of Loake or Barker, a pair of C&J and a pair of EG or Lobb in order to see any differences for myself.

Time will show.


----------



## hellomarty (May 9, 2009)

I have to agree with some other members, don't buy a pair of shoes until you try them. I would never have bought John Lobbs shoes without trying them out first, several times actually.

I bought JL because there was a store nearby in Southern California (where I used to live). I didn't know any other stores that had English shoes in wide to try on.

I have many pairs of AE and I can offer my ownership experience. My AEs are on 10.5EEE the 5 lasts, US size. My JLs are 7000 and 8000 lasts, 10.5EE UK size

JL looks way better than any AE out there. I think it's because it's more tapered. 

JL is more comfortable. I'm a fat guy, so it's softer on the foot when just standing for a long time, and the leather is super soft.

I would run in AE but not in JL. 

Both are re-craftable, but I put TOPY and heel taps on all my shoes. I'd pay to re-craft my AE, but I probably wouldn't roughly $600 to re-craft my JL. That's a bit too high for me.

For some reason, my JL Vale isn't holding up too well, stitches are coming loose, foot liner piece is peeling off on the right shoe.

AE, recently finishing quality should be reviewed. I've returned 5 pairs of AE Strand because either the leather pieces were bad, mismatched, or heel already coming apart. And of course, their black leather is super stiff, while the browns are soft and I really like the burnishing.

That's my report, hope it helps.


----------



## Marcellionheart (Mar 10, 2010)

The construction of the shoe means the type of welts that are used are usually superior. You will find, for example, storm-welt options on Trickers boots that are unavailable on Loake boots. This means better waterproofing. You will often have a wider variety of higher quality soles (both leather and rubber) in the higher tiers as well. I have yet to see a Loake shoe, for example with a Dainite Ridgeway or Medway sole or a commando sole. 

The leather itself is also of better quality. It creases less noticeably and less easily. It is usually more comfortable to wear. It holds a better shine and develops a better patina over time. The insole is stronger.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Marcellionheart: thanks a lot for taking the time to elaborate!

When you say that "the type of welts that are used are usually superior", does that mean that there can be a difference between the Goodyear welts of one company and those of another?

Obviously, I'm not considering cemented shoes at all, just so that's said. If I did, I'd have stayed with the Eccos I've (mainly) been using for the last several years (in fact I still have a pair of City Walkers which are going on 8 years old, have seen a LOT of use and still look no more than a month old).

As you say, Stormwelts are unavailable on Loakes, but Barker have several stormwelted models on offer.

The differences in leather quality I certainly get and I absolutely agree that a variety of soles and sole materials is a big plus. This place can get pretty damn wet and I wouldn't want to be without at least two pairs of rubber soled shoes.

hellomarty: excellent practical perspectives there my man, thanks muchly!

You're wearing size 10.5 UK *and* US? I thought US sizes were +1 in relation to UK sizes? At least I'm a UK 10.5 or 11, all depending, whereas I'm generally an 11.5 US.

As far as the softness of the shoe is concerned, surely that also depends on the model and not just the make? At least my AE Waltons are quite stiff, whereas my AE Delrays are very soft.

To be honest, if it wasn't for the fact that I'm a congenital Anglophile, I would just keep on keeping on with the Allen Edmonds. I love the pairs I've got and their range and possible (non-bespoke) customisations appears to be unsurpassed.


----------



## Geoff Gander (Apr 4, 2007)

I'll chime in again, from my own experience.

I've wear AE, C&J, Loake, Cheaney, Trickers, Grenson, and EG. While aesthetics and construction are important, price, durability, and comfort are the most important criteria to me. That means, at a minimum, goodyear-welted shoes that can be recrafted for less than a third of the price of a new pair (or if recrafting is expensive, they can hold up for several years before recrafting is needed.

Here is how they stack up (note, all shoes are treed after every wearing, are not worn two days in a row, and are polished regularly):

*Allen Edmonds Fairfax in chestnut* (size 9.5D, bought new, 4 years old): Regularly worn in summer and fall. No toe taps. The heels have now worn through the first layer of rubber and are getting through the second. The soles are worn at the toes (but not all the way through). Sole is still hard. These will need full resoling ($99) before next summer. Although they were seconds (I paid $140 for them), at full retail they would have been around $325. So a $100 recraft is a worthwhile investment.

*Loake 200B Oxford in black* (size 9G, bought new, 5 years old): I bought these before I knew better, but once I broke them in I figured I'd just keep them. They're corrected grain monsters, but they're goodyear-welted and take an amazing beating. They're worn regularly. The rubber heels are worn at the back, but not all the way through, and they have no toe taps. The soles are getting soft in the middle, and they're now thin enough that I can feel small rocks underfoot - so that means they will need a resole soon. Recrafting from Loake would run almost $100 all in, but given that I paid about $120 for them (regular price), I decided it's not worth it to me. I'll probably dump these soon. I discovered that a G-width from Loake is too wide for my foot.

*C&J Canterbury in black* (size 9G, bought new, 3 years old): I needed brogues, and I bought these off EBay (not seconds). Although they and the Loakes are 9Gs, the C&Js aren't as wide, and much narrower at the toes. This goes to show you that last shape means more than size. They have a combination rubber/leather heel (which I discovered I really like), and although worn regularly with the Loakes, the heels are barely worn down. They have toe taps. Since they're calf, they're more comfortable than the Loakes, too. I imagine I could wear these for at least another three years before I need to consider recrafting. I hear C&J recrafts are pricy, but if I can go 6-7 years between them that's not bad, IMO.

*EG Chelseas in navy and wine* (size 9E, bought new, 2 years old): A splurge (on sale), but oh, so worth it. I discovered that the 202 last fits my foot like a glove, and these babies are incredibly elegant-looking on me (IMO, of course). I feel like a million bucks when I wear them. Double-leather, channeled soles with a combination heel. I'm wearing these more, but it's too early to say how they'll work out. Sole wear seems minimal. Comfort-wise they beat everything else I've profiled here, but I attribute that to the last.

My conclusions (so far):

- Last is sometimes a better determinant of fit than size (9G =/= 9G, sometimes)
- Combination heels look like they take more abuse than solid rubber heels
- AE seconds offer tremendous value for money, and if cared for and properly fitted will last you a good 4-5 years between recraftings
- Assuming a minimum recraft price of $100, you're probably better off replacing shoes that cost less than $300 at full price, than recrafting them.
- Comfort is king. EG is my favourite only because I discovered that the 202 fits me best. I could easily discover a cheaper shoe on another last that fits me even better.


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

*Recrafting, EG's 202 last, medwards/jcusey thread*

My experience with wear is similar to Geoff Gander's.

I have sent shoes to EG for recrafting and been very satisfied with the results. All things considered, the expense was worth it. I have also sent English shoes, John Lobbs and EG's, to Nick Valenti in New York for recrafting with equally satisfactory results at a nominaly lower price, although price wasn't a primary consideration. When they are ready for recrafting I will send my Cleverleys to the folks who made them. (I have to ration my wearing of the Cleverleys. It is a pleasure to wear shoes which fit as well as they do.)

I am also especially fond of the EG 202 last in F, a somewhat wide fitting. I got my first pair, Chelsies, on sale, and have been buying EG's ever since, and giving away almost everything else. (I do miss the elegance of a pair of John Lobbs that went away. I do not miss the pinched toes when I had to walk a few blocks in them.) That being said, I did hold on to a pair of Loake suede Derbys that have held up well. I gave the black Loake oxfords to one of my sons with even wider feet than mine.

I am glad the Medwards/Jcusey thread on readymade shoes has appeared. As one can tell from a quick scroll through it, there are forumites who really know a great deal about shoes, consummate shoe hobbyists.

You mentioned wet weather. In the rainy season, winter in California, I apply a light coat of wax after polishing with shoe cream. Saphir neutral wax seems to me to be superior to Kiwi's neutral. Haven't a clue as to whether it really is, or if it makes a difference. The Saphir smells better.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## Starting Late (Apr 26, 2010)

I am a frugal buyer and look at price as well as quality. So, I do not own any English shoes right now. And I am a little afraid to buy a pair of EGs or Lobbs, etc., because they look so nice (slimmer and more elegant than the AEs and Aldens) and I've read that the leather is of better quality and the workmanship shows through in the details. I'll get used to that very quickly and then my current shoes (which I love) won't measure up. That type of thing will end up costing me a lot of money for things that won't mean much in terms of how others perceive my appearance.


----------



## Pliny (Oct 26, 2009)

Belfaborac said:


> Dear all,
> 
> I'm thinking of buying a pair or three of quality shoes from one of those redoubtable Northampton firms, but I'm somewhat at a loss as to which brand to opt for. I'm pretty much a novice to "proper" (for lack of a better word right here and now) shoes and I wonder if perhaps I can pick up some practical advice here. I do own two pairs of Allen Edmonds and a pair of Johnston & Murphy, all of which are of excellent quality as far as I can judge, but I really haven't owned and worn them long enough to draw any further conclusions.
> 
> ...


*No, absolutely not* - not to put too fine a point on it. If what u care about is comfort and longevity - as opposed to the history, the aura, the look, and the sheer sumptuous desirability of the big names that moves me - then there's just no reason to go EG, Lobb Paris, Alfred Sargent Hand-grade, or G&G, because they're not going to wear significantly longer, if at all, and because comfort is a function of the *last and fit*, *not the brand*. You're just as likely to find something that fits you well at the lower end of bench-grade as you are towards the top. Construction is much of a much-ness once you have your basic bench-made Goodyear welt. Remember, almost all of the Northhampton makers machine last, machine welt, and use glue. Even EG are gemmed. You have to go bespoke or to Europe to get a hand made product.

I recommend Cheaney. They're bench-made and Goodyear welted and the Cheaney of England range is stronger and more robust than just about any shoe in the high-end marques. And you will get around 3 pairs for one EG, and 4 for one JL Paris. https://www.brogueshoes.co.uk/Cheaney-of-England.html
Plal sells them even cheaper. Trickers are good too.

I have some Cheaneys, and I like them very much. They're solid and robust and don't look half bad and will probably last into my dotage. But I don't put them in the same class as a pair of Dovers (EG) in dark oak willow calf with the hand stitched upper, or the Alfred Sargent hand-grades with fiddle back sole and flawless leather.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Once again gents, thank you for sharing your experience and thoughts.

Geoff G.: thanks you very much for that very detailed run-down! Your experiences with the Loake 200Bs are especially interesting - not because I'm in the market for shoes from that line, but because it would seem to confirm what I thought was probably the case: that cheaper shoes are often rubbished on forums such as this one for no other reason than that they're cheap. Personally I think getting 5 years of wear from a $120 pair of shoes (which I see can now be had for $99) is pretty good and evidence of quality in construction. After all, you could easily buy a pair of "modern shoes" (by which I mean shoes not traditionally constructed) at twice the price and find after two years or less that they're fit only for adorning the inside of a garbage truck.

I absolutely agree that last shapes are of prime importance if one wants to find the ideal shoe in terms of comfort. That realisation is of course the reason why I only buy shoes from manufacturers and/or shops which are happy to take the time to receive my traced outlines and check them against the models I'm interested in. No doubt it's also the reason why I've never had a bad experience since I begun to follow this practice.

Gurdon: thanks for the tip on wet weather care. I do the same, only with inferior icon_smile_big Kiwi products. Kiwi has always served me well, but as I'm scaling up in terms of shoe quality, I'll do the same in terms of cream and wax as well, if only for the sake of the feel-good factor.

Jcusey's thread on TRW Shoemakers I have, of course, read. However, although very interesting and an introduction to a large number of brands I was completely unaware of, it was as usual too light on the sort of concrete facts for which I have shamelessly badgered you fine folks in this thread.

Starting Late: I certainly see your point, although thankfully my own mind don't work in quite the same manner. I'm happily using "cheap" and less refined shoes (and all manner of other goods) alongside expensive ones, without yet having felt an urge to throw or give the cheap stuff away. As long as the less expensive stuff is of adequate quality, which in many cases doesn't take all that much, and does it's allotted job well, then that's all it takes for me to sleep soundly at night. Allen Edmonds, if that's what you wear, is certainly well above mere adequacy as far as I can determine and were I not sorely afflicted with Anglophilia I'd be perfectly happy to wear nothing else.

Pliny: would that be the Elder or the Younger? Whichever you happen to be, thank you for reinforcing what I had begun to assume to be the case. That being said, I can't in all honesty say that I care not a whit for the trimmings - the history, tradition, aura and all those other intangibles. Were that the case, this thread would not exist, since I would still be content with wearing Eccos (which I still feel are excellent shoes and supremely comfortable, but of course entirely devoid of intangibles). Nor would I have long-standing love affairs with Harris Tweed, fine watches, Single Malt and old Madeiras, nor indeed a love for history in general.

I do, however, wage a constant battle to to prevent my instinctive love of trimmings and intangibles from overcoming my sense of pragmatism and practicality. Were the latter to emerge victorious, excessive vanity and snobbery would be the result, both of which are vices I find deplorable and do my best to curtail.

Thank you for mentioning Cheaney and for pointing out their strong points. I've already had a look at them and like all the Northampton firms they have a number of models I find very appealing. I'm very much a fan of the more traditional shapes by the way, over the sleeker modern designs with square and chisel toes. Likely that preference mirrors my staid and unadventurous personality. :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Finian McLonergan (Sep 23, 2009)

Marcellionheart said:


> The construction of the shoe means the type of welts that are used are usually superior. You will find, for example, storm-welt options on Trickers boots that are unavailable on Loake boots. This means better waterproofing. You will often have a wider variety of higher quality soles (both leather and rubber) in the higher tiers as well. I have yet to see a Loake shoe, for example with a Dainite Ridgeway or Medway sole or a commando sole.


The Loake Bedale, Thirsk, Shilton and Shilton II boots are storm welted, as is the Loake Chester brogued shoe. The Loake Epsom TW shoe has a commando sole. There is no difference between the Dainite sole used by Loake and any other manufacturer.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Thanks a lot for pointing this out Finian. I'd missed it myself, likely because I've focused more on the middle brands.


----------



## Marcellionheart (Mar 10, 2010)

Finian McLonergan said:


> The Loake Bedale, Thirsk, Shilton and Shilton II boots are storm welted, as is the Loake Chester brogued shoe. The Loake Epsom TW shoe has a commando sole. There is no difference between the Dainite sole used by Loake and any other manufacturer.


I own the Loake Bedale. I'm fairly certain it's not storm welted. It has a 360 degree, yes, but it is not storm welted. Don't know about the other ones you listed, though.


----------



## Pliny (Oct 26, 2009)

:smile:


Belfaborac said:


> Once again gents, thank you for sharing your experience and thoughts.
> 
> Pliny: would that be the Elder or the Younger? Whichever you happen to be, thank you for reinforcing what I had begun to assume to be the case. That being said, I can't in all honesty say that I care not a whit for the trimmings - the history, tradition, aura and all those other intangibles. Were that the case, this thread would not exist, since I would still be content with wearing Eccos (which I still feel are excellent shoes and supremely comfortable, but of course entirely devoid of intangibles). Nor would I have long-standing love affairs with Harris Tweed, fine watches, Single Malt and old Madeiras, nor indeed a love for history in general.
> 
> ...


Younger - great letters.

so not the G&G deco's then? if so I'm with you on that. too pointy for my taste :smile:








look good in the collection, just not on the foot.

The Cheaney burnishing is very nice IMO


----------



## Geoff Gander (Apr 4, 2007)

Belfaborac said:


> Geoff G.: thanks you very much for that very detailed run-down! Your experiences with the Loake 200Bs are especially interesting - not because I'm in the market for shoes from that line, but because it would seem to confirm what I thought was probably the case: that cheaper shoes are often rubbished on forums such as this one for no other reason than that they're cheap. Personally I think getting 5 years of wear from a $120 pair of shoes (which I see can now be had for $99) is pretty good and evidence of quality in construction. After all, you could easily buy a pair of "modern shoes" (by which I mean shoes not traditionally constructed) at twice the price and find after two years or less that they're fit only for adorning the inside of a garbage truck.


Glad to be of help!

I would add, to my initial assessment, that a major reason why I would not recommend the Loake L1 range (unless one is on a tight budget), is that the uppers, being corrected grain, were extremely stiff when new, and uncomfortable to break in. Right now, there are the beginnings of cracks in the uppers where I flex my foot. So, even if I did resole my Loakes, chances are the uppers would blow out before the new soles wore down.

Having said that, you are right that $120 amortised over 5 years *is* excellent value for money. But when I look at my calf leather AEs, purchased at a similar price point only a year later, with less sole wear and no cracks in the uppers, for me there is no comparison: AE seconds are probably the best value for money proposition out there, shoe-wise.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

I thought it might be good manners to return to this thread and inform you what I ended up with after pondering your your sage advice. Hopefully it won't be viewed as distasteful thread necrophilia....

Anyway, since last time I've bought the following clodhoppers:

Barker Waltham in Rosewood Calf, from the 'Handcrafted' line -

Very nice and very (in my eyes) elegant shoes, which to my untrained eyes and feet seem to be of equal quality to my Allen Edmonds.

Loake Aldwych in Black, from the '1880' line -

I got these to replace my Ecco City Walkers in the same Cap Toe style, which are singing on their last refrain after many years of regular use. Lovely shoes, very comfortable and again seemingly of a quality equal to my Allen Edmonds.

Paraboot Chelsea in Black, from the 'Official' line -

Quite similar to my Allen Edmonds Delray, only with rubber soles and even softer and thinner leather. I'll be interested to see how these wear over time, but the quality appears immaculate and they are very, very comfortable. Paraboot didn't really figure on my list of brands, but I happened across them in a sale, liked them and after some quick research, bought them at a great price. Glad I did.

There'll be no more shoe shopping for a few months now, as we've entered boots-only climatic conditions, but I still intend to pick up two or three pairs of rubber-soled or double-soled shoes before I call it a day (for a while). When I get around to doing so I think I will go for Crockett & Jones, both because I find their shoes the most appealing and to see what, if anything, the extra money buys me in terms of quality and comfort.


----------



## Joe Frances (Sep 1, 2004)

*Style Winners*

First of all, EGs, AS and C&J are excellent choices for shoes that combine style, quality construction and comfort. If comfort and durability are all that matter than you can look elsewhere, but this is a style forum not a place to settle solely for utility alone. John Lobb and Cleverly and G&G are fabulous, but they are over the top in price-- and that's the the deep end of the pool where most need not go. Greens, Sargents and Crokett & Jones give the best of both worlds. Churches make good clunky shoes that fit a certain mold, but a number of their options have little or no style in the sense of the deeper meaning of that word, which should resonate here. Many Aldens are in the same boat, although they are not the subject of this thread, but the point is made. If Alden's made shoes that were generally as stylist as they are ultra-traditional and utilitarian, the Aldens would win hands down. But they don't. Of the three makers that I believe strike a supurb balance, Crokett & Jones are the best. They have the durability and therefore the longevity that the value shopper demands and the style that the dresser wants. I think they provide great value for money. EG's are truly, truly superb but the added cost (often around 33% over C&J) place them outside the value-buyer's circle. It's not all about rugged construction, it is about the architecture of the shoe and the fine chiseled look of the toe; and the sumptuous color of the leather. As an example, Crokett's vintage/antique chestnut is so beautiful in its complex brown and reddish hues it is a true stunner, not outdone by anything by Edw. Green.

Lest one think I am merely a C&J admirer, I would add that for years I only bought Grenson's from Paul Stuart, and considered top-end Grensons to be the best English shoes, but Stuart's for better or worse is carrying fewer and fewer of them and has diluted the quality of they models they carry by brining in Italian lines of dubious provenance (although for some reason PS now has a few G&G models that they've brought in). Therefore the Grenson monopoly is over, and I no longer buy from them. Based on quality, value and style I giving my custom pretty much to Crokett & Jones on West 56th.

All the shoes discussed here have their merits, but if you are looking for the midpoint where compromises are few and quality is high, in my opinion the clear English-made winner is Crokett & Jones.


----------



## Angeland (Aug 24, 2011)

Dear Balfurdoc

For heaven's sake, man, buy one pair at a time so you can get to know the new shoe and see where it fits into your fashion lifestyle and subsequently decide what needs remain.

I think Lobb and Green are a different conversation. Of the brands you probably have in mind, my Tricker's, Church's, and Crockett and Jones shoes are all comparably excellent and comparably priced. The others are "the others" for different reasons. 

Alfred Sargents have a high end that his VERY high end, and then everything else varies, so I would stay away from them unless you were physically in front of the shoe and examining it. Same with Loake, minus the high end. Barker and Cheaney I don't know about. Grenson has started making many shoes in India. I don't know about Sanders. S&H and Herring buy their shoes from other makers and brand them so be sure you know what you are buying.

Of the three on my short list, I think you can't go wrong. What others say about fit is key, yes, but I would add that these three makers have a wide range of styles but all adhere to the basic strengths of the maker, which I would describe this way: Tricker's: heavy country; Church's: urban and bold; C&J: conservative and understated.


----------



## sclemmons (Mar 4, 2006)

Buy whatever fits and stick with it. I have had Johnston & Murphy, Alden, Brooks, Polo, Crockett and Jones, Testoni, Edward Green, JM Weston, and Lobb. Plus a great private label brand from Jay Koz from a few years ago. I have been tempted at Leffot. Of all of them, the most consistent fit for me is Lobb. I can call around in season or on sale, and order by phone. I have never sent a pair back or worn a pair out. I know the price is prohibitive, but these are my shoes until further notice.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Thank you for your thoughts gentlemen. Like I said, Crockett & Jones will likely be my next port of call, although Alfred Sargent's top of the line are also tempting. Lobb is out of the question because I really don't like their styling. The same goes for most things Italian.



Angeland said:


> For heaven's sake, man, buy one pair at a time so you can get to know the new shoe and see where it fits into your fashion lifestyle and subsequently decide what needs remain.


I have no fashion lifestyle, so that's not really a concern. Hence I also have no defined needs, only loosely defined desires. In fact, I'm the only one I know (locally) who wears clothes which the snobbier members of this forum wouldn't immediately turn their noses up at and I can't truthfully remember when I last saw a man in a suit, nor a sport coat, nor a pair of trousers with a crease. I am, in effect, something of an aberration around here.


----------



## fiddler (Apr 19, 2010)

Belfaborac said:


> Hi gaseousclay,
> 
> It's very simple really (as well as a little sad) - there isn't a single place around here, that I'm aware of, which carries anything like a serious selection of quality shoes. I know of a few shops where I can find a (very) few Loakes and a (very) few Barkers and I'm sure I can hunt down a (very) few Church's as well, but that's basically as far as it goes.


Jeg vet ikke riktig hvor i Norge du bor, men vil uansett anbefale deg en tur til Skomaker Dagestad.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

[Norwegian]
Takker for tipset, jeg er klar over at Dagestad skal være en av de bedre butikkene i landet. Imidlertid ser jeg sjelden noen grunn til å handle her på berget, når alt er tilgjengelig fra utlandet til halv pris eller under. Snapper opp en og annen ting en ytterst sjelden gang, men stort sett holder jeg meg unna norske butikker.
[/Norwegian]


----------



## dwebber18 (Jun 5, 2008)

Glad you found something you are proud of, it's a good feeling. To anyone else reading this thread I'd recommend checking out afinepairofshoes.com Their holiday sale is still going on until Sunday and they have some really good deals right now. I bought 3 pairs of Sargents and let me tell you they are fantastic. I got a pair of NST, wholecuts with a medallion, and chukka boots and they are really nice. I find the leather, fit and construction to far exceed the Allen Edmonds shoes I have and right now they are a great price if you can find your size.


----------



## DG123 (Sep 16, 2011)

If you want the benefits of wearing a quality shoe, then fit is everything.
If you can't try on some shoes for test purposes, I say forget it.



Belfaborac said:


> As far as fit goes, sadly I won't be able to try on shoes from any of the brands in question. However, they're all happy to have me send them tracings of my feet and advice on which models are the most suitable. It's not perfect, but I'm confident it'll work out ok. .


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

To each his own I guess. I buy pretty much all my clothes and shoes online and have yet to have a disaster befall me. I know what size I am, in every respect, and if I am in doubt I send a mail and ask. As far as my latest shoes go, all three pairs fit me very well.

Although I agree that it would indeed have been better if I could have gone to Northampton, London or wherever and tried them on prior to buying, that simply wasn't feasible. And as it turned out, I fail to see how the result could have been much, or any, better had I done so.


----------



## fiddler (Apr 19, 2010)

Belfaborac said:


> [Norwegian]
> Takker for tipset, jeg er klar over at Dagestad skal være en av de bedre butikkene i landet. Imidlertid ser jeg sjelden noen grunn til å handle her på berget, når alt er tilgjengelig fra utlandet til halv pris eller under. Snapper opp en og annen ting en ytterst sjelden gang, men stort sett holder jeg meg unna norske butikker.
> [/Norwegian]


Dagestad er verdt turen selv om det kun blir med praten, han har tross alt mesterbrev som skomaker og langt bedre kunnskaper om skokvalitet enn forummedlemene her.

Blir ting virkelig så mye dyrere i Norge, etter frakt, toll, moms og andre avgifter fraktselskapene måtte finne på, er lagt på prisen? Synes vel heller det er utvalget det skranter på her. Uansett vil jeg mye heller støtte opp om de sjeldne, gode butikkene her i landet, enn å se at H&M, og andre billigbutikker tar over alle gatehjørner.


----------



## Belfaborac (Aug 20, 2011)

Error, kindly ignore.

fiddler: reply sent as PM.


----------



## Angeland (Aug 24, 2011)

"I'm the only one I know (locally) who wears clothes which the snobbier members of this forum wouldn't immediately turn their noses up.[/QUOTE]

And that's just why you should buy expensive shoes one pair at a time lol. It's all about a man and his clothes, and shoes are special. I have regretted every time I bought two or more pairs at more or less the same time. That's all I'll say on that.

But, anyway, Crockett and Jones, you say? An excellent choice! If you posted a new thread asking about experiences with C&J lasts you will probably get some great advice on the fit that's right for you.

I myself want to be buried in my C&J Pembrokes. They are that awesome!


----------

